Non debilitating corporal punishment should be in modern use

May 24, 2015, 8:08 pm

Agree4 Disagree8


The debate "Non debilitating corporal punishment should be in modern use" was started by jonatron5 on May 24, 2015, 8:08 pm. 4 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side. People are starting to choose their side. It looks like most people are against to this statement.

Sosocratese posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.

jonatron5, Sosocratese, sdiop and 1 visitor agree.
PsychDave, soullesschicken, toughgamerjerry, jedty, DanielleR123 and 3 visitors disagree.

In all honesty, if it were something like 1 lash for every 6 months, I'd take the lashes. And that is simply because I'm in the US where minimum sentencing laws are extremely strict, even for 1st time offenders. Getting a 5 year sentence is pretty common for first time offenders here, so, I'd definitely take 10 lashes over wasting 5 years of my life on the inside.

I get where you're coming from as far as the rehabilitation goes. That would be optimal. However, we can't even find the money to implement jobs training programs in the community much less prison. Prisons, here in the states, are mostly privately owned. Their stocks rise and fall depending on the occupancy rate. They have very little vested interest in keeping people on the outside. So it would mean a complete overhaul of our justice system.

What I'm proposing is a voluntary option for people convicted of nonviolent crimes to choose flogging instead of prison time. I don't believe flogging should be a given sentence. It should be an alternative to prison in its current form which the convicted may opt for.

5 years ago

I can't honestly say for sure which I would chose because, for a first offense, nonviolent crime, I would likely be going to a minimum security prison, which means those around me committed similarly nonviolent crimes, reducing the fights and violence. When my time is served, it is done and while finding a job could be difficult, it would not be impossible. Flogging on the other hand would leave permanent, visible proof on my body that I had committed a crime. Any time I took off my shirt, everyone would know at a glance that I was a criminal. Taking my daughter to the beach would be uncomfortable at best, and it would never get better.

I see the push for corporal punishment as a bad thing for the justice system because it is gearing it even more towards punishment and less towards rehabilitation.

What if prisoners had the option of learning a trade and helping do real work instead of sitting in a cell. The businesses they work for get inexpensive workers, the government gets income from the business, and the workers get an income that they can save for when they are released or send to their families. It could be stipulated that the businesses were responsible for the employment of the workers upon their release, as long as their work was satisfactory, meaning they have a guaranteed job on release if they do well, solving that problem too. When they are released, they would still make less that someone of equal experience, since part of it would be going to repaying the government for the education that they would otherwise have had to pay for, but they would have a livable income.

If you had the choice of flogging, sitting in a cell, or learning a trade, which would you choose?

5 years ago

Reformation itself is a huge illusion in the modern prison system. The reason we have so many repeat offenders shows us that prisons aren't working as a tool for rehabilitation. So that argument can be used to critique both systems.

The use of flogging and the like to punish small, nonviolent offenses would have a much better outcome at a much cheaper cost. Giving people the option to choose flogging or prison would also eliminate our natural revulsion to this method of punishment since we gave the person the choice.

Flogging would allow people to stay in their current jobs, allow them to stay with their families, would eliminate the issues of being sentenced for a violent crime while in prison (this happens fairly frequently as fights are still criminal acts in prison).

While I agree that more emphasis should be placed on rehabilitation, the nature of our society is that not much emphasis is given to such programs. Cost is obviously a huge factor, and while your solution would me more ideal, it is also much less realistic. Flogging would alleviate cost, reduce the joblessness of nonviolent criminals, and help keep families together.

I ask you, what would you choose if you were convicted of a drug crime, and given the option 5 years in jail, or 10 lashes? If you'd choose the lashes, then what does that say about our prison system as a whole? Isn't it more barbaric than flogging?

5 years ago

Research has shown that corporal punishment is not effective at changing behavior, so it would be cruelty without benefit.

A better idea (in my opinion) would be to overhaul the penal system so that it had less emphasis on punishment and more on rehabilitation so that, when small time criminals are released, they are more likely to be productive members of society and less likely to come out more violent and criminally inclined than when they went in.

5 years ago

I'm all for it. Flogging should be an option for non-violent offenders.

5 years ago
Discuss "Non debilitating corporal punishment should be in modern use" philosophy
Add an argument!
Use the arrow keys to navigate between statements. Press "A" to agree and press "D" to disagree.