Incarceration vs. Corporal Punishment

[Alcyon]

I was just reading Ted Conover's excellent non-fiction book, Newjack, about being a prison guard at Sing Sing, and he has some chapters about the early days of flogging. These guys were pretty over the top (and flogging isn't exactly the most humane way of inflicting pain), but it got me thinking. I wrote a paper for sociology this year about how California badly needs to reduce it's incarceration rate; the statistics say that being in prison without the re-socialization programs that have been cut by low budgets actually promotes recidivism, and that it damages familial relationships (driving kids to crime) not to mention how much tax money goes towards feeding and clothing and sheltering convicted felons. What if we dispensed some kind of embarrassing, painful, short-term punishment that left no lasting damage, like maybe a mild electric shock or being put in some modern equivalent of the stocks? I think there is an argument that it would be much more effective in the case of petty theft or something like that than throwing someone in prison, and while serving a term may seem badass for gang members, I bet that being publicly humiliated in front of other gangs would leave a lasting impression.

Thoughts?

[CrispyDelicious]

Public removal of the genitals? I can't think of anything more humiliating.

[Phalex]

They should put them all on a trans-oceanic flight, but first they fill the plane with snakes. I bet the ones who survive wouldn't want to risk that again.

[elpezpr]

[Alcyon]

Not what I had expected, but exactly what I SHOULD have expected from TB OT

[baba]

Great book!

[bassteban]

That's what I give this thread.

[Asa Samuel]

Sounds like a very good idea, it would be effective. But then you'd get all the hippies talking about torture and human rights.

[kanonfodr]

Or we could just go Juddge Dredd style and eliminate a lot of excess tax burdens.

Peace,
Greg

[Mark Latimour]

Originally Posted by Asa Samuel

Sounds like a very good idea, it would be effective. But then you'd get all the hippies talking about torture and human rights.

Yeah, cos only hippies have a problem with torture

[mike_v_s]

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Yeah, cos only hippies have a problem with torture

and deodorant.

Mike

[Asa Samuel]

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Yeah, cos only hippies have a problem with torture

Exactly! Bloody hippies!

Seriously, I only meant it as a joke. It wouldn't just be the hippies complaining but I'm sure they would participate.

[sarcastro83]

I'm extremely pro capital punishment. But then, I also think our justice system and criminal code need some serious overhauling... this being from the limited experiences of a man who'se never made any serious legal transgressions... I'd like to think my parents steered me in a pretty good direction on that front.

[MadMan118]

Throw them in prison AND beat them senseless.

[Mark Latimour]

FWIW if you accept that prison is intended to serve the three classic purposes:

Punitive (for the criminal)
Rehabilitative (for the criminal)
Protective (for society)

then the idea of corporal punishment really only serves the first, punitive, without really addressing the two other concerns. I think society is generally less concerned with rehabilitation, but it wants protection. That's not gonna happen with a corporal sentence with no incarceration.

[MakiSupaStar]

[NJL]

Originally Posted by MakiSupaStar

[Alcyon]

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

FWIW if you accept that prison is intended to serve the three classic purposes:

Punitive (for the criminal)
Rehabilitative (for the criminal)
Protective (for society)

then the idea of corporal punishment really only serves the first, punitive, without really addressing the two other concerns. I think society is generally less concerned with rehabilitation, but it wants protection. That's not gonna happen with a corporal sentence with no incarceration.

Rehabilitation capability in modern prisons is essentially laughable, and there are lots of offenses that the public doesn't really need to be "protected" from: drug possession, tax evasion, etc. Besides, protecting the people is the job of Police, not Corrections. Arguably the nature of incarceration puts society in more danger in the long run due to prison culture and recidivism, I think.

[ErebusBass]

Originally Posted by MakiSupaStar

Let me start out by saying that this picture is awesome, and could probably deter a fair amount of crime if placed in high-crime areas.

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

FWIW if you accept that prison is intended to serve the three classic purposes:

Punitive (for the criminal)
Rehabilitative (for the criminal)
Protective (for society)

then the idea of corporal punishment really only serves the first, punitive, without really addressing the two other concerns. I think society is generally less concerned with rehabilitation, but it wants protection. That's not gonna happen with a corporal sentence with no incarceration.

Though it's a valid point that the prison system is INTENDED to serve those three purposes, to actually imply that our prison system rehabilitates anyone is just plain ignorant.

I'm not a fan of corporal punishment in any way, and I agree that it is a step down from our current system, but I am a fan of alternative punishments.

For example, I remember seeing something on the news about a judge in CA (I think) who ordered a man to wear a big sign that said "I stole from this store" and walk circles around the convenience store he stole from for something like 30 hours total. I thought that was great.

Public humiliation causes no long-term damage, shouldn't piss anyone off, and can often be more rehabilitative than a jail/prison-type environment.

[Deluge Of Sound]

I wonder if anyone who is suggesting that prison doesn't rehabilitate people has actually served any time in one.