English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

1. It is cheaper than prison.

2. It is clearly punitive. Many repeat offenders don't mind a spell in prison (the ex cons I've spoken to say prison wasn't so bad.)

3. It avoids the problem of separating mothers from their children

4. It is easier to compensate after false convictions (you can't replace the years lost in prison)

Of course it is not suitable in all cases but it could be compbined with incarceration.

2006-10-30 02:32:34 · 7 answers · asked by Terence 1 in Politics & Government Politics

7 answers

Quite right too, but lets not forget the prisoners human rights, god forbid you should upset the scumbags.

It would never be allowed on women in this country, lets face it, most of them get away with murder, blaming thier hormones. Its seen as immoral to incarcerate women. thats why there is about 90% male populating our prisons.

Should we use it for all crimes, or just the more violent and sickening. I wonder if we could take our turns having a go, Id like to flog all the benefit cheats 1st, and work my way up to the real sickos

2006-10-30 11:08:35 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

All excellent points - and the simple truth is that people **DO** afford criminals more rights than victims. It isn't politically correct to do otherwise.

However in the US, a very interesting project has been set up. In short although people cannot be FORCED to submit to corporal punishment - some criminals can VOLUNTEER to be treated in that way under some conditions - and perhaps get reduced jail time in return.

Lots of details here http://www.okplus.com/fedup/index.html

Very interestingly, they presently have a ZERO recidivism level for people that have been through their system.

Do not be thrown by the site, the program is still running BUT the website is badly in need of some updating (or was when I last looked)

I think one hangup people have about corporal punishment, is the perceived severity of it. The old UK / USA way of flogging across the back in fact left little more than "shaving nicks" - if it cut at all.

Anyone who has seen too many "Mutiny on the bounty" style films and wishes to disagree should try to remember that the make-up department tends to get more than a little carried away.

Wet rope is not sharp enough or dense enough to "lay a mans back open to the bone" Something does not need to cut to be felt ;)

The scheme mentioned above in fact uses low-voltage cable as a cheap disposable lash material. Like the rope, little or no cutting at all - but apparently the welts are quite tender at the time.

I just wish we had a system like this in the UK too, I think it could be a valuable tool to help people stay out of prison and to reduce the prison population. Nanny-state in the UK though at the moment so not much chance for a while yet.

2006-10-31 19:43:03 · answer #2 · answered by Mark T 6 · 1 0

well, first off.. what is humane anyway.. you can put you dog to sleep when it's in pain and it's the "Humane" thing to do.. do that with a human and you'll probably end up in jail. next.. flogging is positive punishment (you are giving a negative stimulus) and jail is negative punishment (you are taking away a positive stimulus) .. in today's world most of the minds that be don't support positive punishment as a viable option.. they just don't feel it is as effective as other means of behavioral modification. so flogging someone wouldn't work as well at deterring future negative behavior. that's not my opinion.. that's the science of it.. also, the people who say they liked prison .. that's either because they are blocking out that they really didn't have a good time.. or their lives are truly so horrible and unstable that prison seems like a blessing.. that doesn't make prison fun.. just better than what they had.

2006-10-30 10:40:44 · answer #3 · answered by pip 7 · 0 1

I am with you on this one. When someoone gets sentenced in this country they usually get a soft lenient period of incarceration and the victims gets no sort of redress.

We should make it a public spectacle so that victims of crime should can see justice being done. Potential criminals will have a real reminder of what will happen to them should they cross the line.

No doubt the weak lefties will be slagging this off incase it upsets the poor murderers and rapists human rights.

2006-10-30 11:25:06 · answer #4 · answered by Rattler M 2 · 1 1

Proper punishment equals no more offending - as most of this bent Government are lawyers I leave it to you to work out why the soft option is taken.

2006-11-02 11:27:37 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0 0

Yeah, and how about sticking people in the stocks and throwing gone off fruit and veg at them? Or stoning? Or cutting a few fingers off the hands of thieves, castration for rapists?

All of those are cheap and instant!

Hey, and how about deportation! Let's send all the scum to America and Australia like we did in the old days, then nuke them!

2006-10-30 10:51:39 · answer #6 · answered by airmonkey1001 4 · 0 2

I flogg every morning in the shower. Oh!! Not that kind of flogging..........what was the question?

2006-10-30 10:36:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers