Under existing punishment-based systems, an innocent person is occasionally sent to prison or even executed. If the error is later brought to light, then the life of a wrongly executed individual cannot be restored. Nor can the years lost by a wrongly incarcerated person be compensated monetarily without burdening taxpayers and thereby creating new victims of aggression. Because human beings are not infallible, similar miscarriages of justice would be possible even in a restitution-based system. Such errors could be corrected far more readily, however, because the idea of restitution does not require the destruction of values, as does punishment. This drawback of punishment systems is most obvious in the instance of capital crimes, where punishment entails the destruction of a human life, but it can also be observed in other cases. If, for instance, a wrongly convicted person were required to labor in a work camp to pay her supposed debt under a restitution system, then the product of that labor could later be applied toward the end of compensating her for the years taken for her. If that same person had served time in prison under a punishment system, in contrast, it is far less likely that any significant positive value would have been produced, since such systems are primarily oriented toward the infliction of penalties and hardships rather than the production of values.