Should flogging be an alternative to prison?

southsiderosie

An American academic takes a controversial position on prison reform.

From Time Magazine:

It's tough stuff and generally considered a barbaric punishment that the 21st century Western world would and should never consider. That makes it a bit startling to find a new book by a serious U.S. academic arguing that the U.S. should start flogging criminals. Peter Moskos' In Defense of Flogging might seem like a satire — akin to Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal," an essay advocating the eating of children — but it is as serious as a wooden stick lashing into a blood-splattered back.

Despite what you may think, Moskos is not pushing flogging as part of a "get tougher on criminals" campaign. In fact Moskos, who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, begins not by arguing that the justice system is too soft on criminals, but the opposite. So before you accuse him of advocating a cruel and unusual form of punishment, he offers this reminder: in the U.S., there are 2.3 million inmates incarcerated in barbaric conditions. American prisons are bleak and violent, and sexual assault is rampant.

And, Moskos points out, imprisonment is not just cruel — it is ineffective. The original idea for the penitentiary was that criminals would become penitent and turn away from their lives of crime. Today, prisons are criminogenic — they help train inmates in how to commit crimes on release.

Flogging, Moskos argues, is an appealing alternative. Why not give convicts a choice, he says: let them substitute flogging for imprisonment under a formula of two lashes for every year of their sentence.

There would, he says, be advantages all around. Convicts would be able to replace soul-crushing years behind bars with intense but short-lived physical pain. When the flogging was over, they could get on with their lives. For those who say flogging is too cruel, Moskos has a simple retort: it would only be imposed if the convicts themselves chose it.

At the same time, Moskos says, society would benefit. Under his proposal, the most dangerous criminals would not be eligible for flogging; the worst offenders, including serial killers and child molesters, would still be locked up and kept off the streets. But even so, he guesses the prison population could decline from 2.3 million to 300,000. That would free up much of the $60 billion or more the U.S. spends on prisons for more socially useful purposes.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2079933,00.html#ixzz1QYaFQcLi

Should flogging be re-introduced as an alternative punishment to time in prison? Or is this a barbaric practice that has no place in modern society? Do you think this is something that could work in Ireland?

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it does seem kind of barbaric, and basically gives up on the end goal of the criminal justice system being rehabilitation rather than simply punishment. On the other hand, for the kind of low-level crimes that affect quality of life (vandalism and the like), maybe this would act as a deterrent? Caning is used in Singapore, which is a very clean, safe, low-crime city, but I wonder if it would have been like that anyway without caning as a punishment.

What do other people think?

pickarooney

I think it's a ridiculous argument. A few belts with a stick would be no deterrant to someone brought up in a violent environment as a good proportion of offenders are.

Biggins

No. Violence (in any description) in the long run, is not the answer.

(Curiously, its still on the law books of the Isle of Man I'm told)

chin_grin

No. Physical wounds heal. Contrast that to their mental state after being continually raped by "Bubba" in prison. Now that's punishment. (Depending on the crime of course! I'm talking about heinous ones.....not petty theft).

ronan45

Bit Barbaric............What about dusting off the stocks in dublin castle and having a 15 inch rubber dildo shoved up your arse outside Berties office in Drumcondra while strapped up?

southsiderosie

chin_grin wrote: »

No. Physical wounds heal. Contrast that to their mental state after being continually raped by "Bubba" in prison. Now that's punishment. (Depending on the crime of course! I'm talking about heinous ones.....not petty theft).

The article says that serious offenders (rape, murder, assault) would not be eligible for caning - it would essentially be for stuff like vandalism, petty theft, etc.

Kev_ps3

No but it should be included in prison punishment, prisoners have it too easy.

Wazdakka

No,

If anything use it in conjunction with a prison sentence.

I really don't think that short term violence or pain is in any way as big a deterrent as confinement and long term stripping of freedoms.

Especially not to the general populous who are likely to end up in prison.

grizzly

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

southsiderosie

grizzly wrote: »

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

But part of the argument is that prisons themselves are extremely violent. Should someone who spray painted cars be sent to prison with Bubba who is doing hard time, or should he get two strokes and be done with it?

racso1975

I'd certainly advocate the flogging of healy rae's listening to the sh1te bags on radio today

ilovesleep

I like getting my bum flogged, and caned and spanked. It is very good. Just saying like. Could do with a bating right now actually.

chin_grin

southsiderosie wrote: »

The article says that serious offenders (rape, murder, assault) would not be eligible for caning - it would essentially be for stuff like vandalism, petty theft, etc.

Well then definitely a bad idea. It's a very childish attitude to fight fire with fire especially where crime is concerned. Why don't they take a page out of South Parks book and concoct some really awkward situation where they trap the offender?

Like that one armed guy the dad hires in Arrested Development to teach the kids a lesson.

ilovesleep

grizzly wrote: »

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

It makes me better. Talking about bdsm of course.

YFlyer

ilovesleep wrote: »

I like getting my bum flogged, and caned and spanked. It is very good. Just saying like. Could do with a bating right now actually.

Come here NOW!

tayto lover

Violence solves absolutely nothing.
Community service is the answer. Cutting grass and roadside hedges, painting O.P.D's, cleaning up estates, graffiti etc. Good hard work for their dole is the answer to crime.
The serious criminals like armed robbers, rapists, paedos and murderers should be the only ones locked up.

Chuck Stone

I'd take the flogging if it were me but i'm uncomfortable with it as being a solution.


Legalize drugs imo.

CreepingDeath

southsiderosie wrote: »

Should flogging be re-introduced as an alternative punishment to time in prison? Or is this a barbaric practice that has no place in modern society? Do you think this is something that could work in Ireland?

People don't really have a fear of the justice system any more.
Most criminals see it as an occupational hazard and even a holiday away from the family to meet their mates inside again.

Throwing in some physical pain isn't a bad thing.
Especially if you catch the young offenders for anti-social behaviour early.
That catches the problem earlier before it gets worse.

ilovesleep

YFlyer wrote: »

Come here NOW!

OK. Thanks. Would love that. That would be good.

I know I'm talking about batings in two very different situations. As part of bdsm roleplay it is welcomed. But in normal day to day life, even receiving a pinch it is not.

Look whos talking

Prison solves nothing in my opinion it just causes the tax payer and government, they should be sent to work on the roads.....

CreepingDeath

tayto lover wrote: »

Violence solves absolutely nothing.

You probably want to read a few history books and reconsider your opinion.

komodosp

I don't think it would be useful... I don't think it would be a deterrent to crime. Especially as pickarooney said quite a few criminals probably come from violent backgrounds anyway, so how would this be any different?

Although I do agree that imprisonment is not the answer. I'd say the worst possible thing you can do to a criminal is lock him up with other criminals. Also I'd imagine that you get used to being in jail so it's no way to discourage repeat offenders.

The punishment should fit the criminal. They don't care about being locked up? Find somehting else they do care about.

stovelid

For a lot of people, I think violence actually turns them on as much as the perpetrators but they're too passive to actually practice it themselves. Therefore any proposal to do with public beatings, whippings or executions (or any chance to vent about gory punishments online) is popular because you can get your kicks but subsume it beneath a veneer of corrective morality.

Monty Burnz

At least the guy is asking questions. Who thinks that the current system (here, or in the US) is actually working? How many times have you heard about someone who knifes someone to death being sentenced to 10 years for manslaughter (and they will only serve 6 due to 'remission' which was never legislated for in this country, it just became the norm somehow ). Then you hear that they have 80 (or some other ludicrous number) previous convictions. And they are 30 years old. And then you think, how many crimes did they actually commit, to get charged AND convicted 80 times? 800??

The current criminal justice system here and the US does not work if the intention is to protect citizens or reform criminals. Does anyone want to claim otherwise?

And the most depressing thing is that if someone suggests doing something different, you get outrage.

Rawhead

Remember watching a program about the spate of armed robberies that plagued England in the 70's and 80's. The program asked what stopped the robberies. They interviewed the robbers, cops, bank managers everyone involved and they all said that better policing and technology helped, but the one thing that everyone agreed on (the robbers especially) was the introduction of mandatory 18 year sentences stopped the robberies over night.

The reason that I remember the program was that they interviewed one particular scrote and they asked what turned him from a petty thief to a armed robber and he said it was the flogging. He remembers getting flogged and looking behind him to see the prison officers smirking, he reckons it made him so angry at the system that he swore he'd rebel against it for life.
Could also be that he was a lazy dirtbag like all the other lags and just wants to blame other people for his lot in life.

willow tree

the judicial system does my head in. the guards could work on a case only for it to get to court and be thrown out or a very small sentence for the crime. like look at the people walking around who should be locked up, its insanity and as previous poster said people with loads of convictions eventually commit a really bad crime, thats the systems fault i think. anyways there was a study done years ago (unfortunately i dont have all details or a link to it but i'll try find it)... it had 2 groups with similar crimes. one group was sent to regular prison. the other group was given made to take part in therapy (kind of like they were in rehab). the group in normal prison mostly reoffended. the group from rehab mostly went on to rebuild their lives and never reoffend. i think every prisoner should have to work out their issues and why they acted the way they did and yeah working on roads as others have suggested.

Rawhead

I'm a Prison Officer and we know more than most how badly broke the system is. I love the way that people who have never even been outside a prison always give out that it's so soft when I know they would be the very people crying their eyes out, shaking and begging us to put them on protection 5 minutes after coming through the gates.
If brutally tough prisons deterred crime then California would have zero crime, France would have had no crime while they had penal colonies and Russia would be a crime free paradise.
Remember when California introduced the 3 strike rule in the 90's and everyone said how good an idea it was, well now they have a major problem. Their prison system is so over crowded that the U.S. Supreme court has ruled that it is in breach of the constitutional right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment and ordered the State to fix it, immediately. The state is as broke as Ireland and they cannot afford to keep their prison system going so they are left with a stark choice,
1. Build more prisons which they cannot even come close to affording
or
2. Release 30,000 of the most brutalised and hardened criminals in the U.S. penal system onto the streets.

Puts our revolving door system into perspective and shows how the short sighted plans of a politician looking for votes can have unthinkable long term consequences.

The King of Moo

I can see where this guy is coming from, as an alternative to prison and prison reform are both needed. I don't see how flogging would help anything. There's no way two lashes could be the equivalent to one year in prison, and physical pain is something you have a great degree of control over. Repeat offenders would get used to it, and you can also train your body to feel less pain and distract yourself.

And the idea that it's better than prison as prison is very violent is like admitting defeat on the idea of prison reform. Why not try to make prisons safer but still somewhere you don't want to go to make it a deterrent to crime?

I think as tayto lover mentioned above, community service could be used in lots of minor cases instead of prison sentences, as long as it was just hard enough that it wouldn't be seen as an incentive to commit petty crimes in order to get a little security in the form of food and perhaps shelter or simply something to pass the time(as is already the case with some homeless and destitute people who deliberately get locked up in the winter to have somewhere warm with food and a bed.)

LeeHoffmann

Why do we have prisons? I think there are 3 main answers - to rehabilitate, to punish, to protect the rest of us. These 3 answers seem to me to correspond to different types of criminal behaviour, yet they've become all muddled together, leading us to treat drug dealers, burglars, repeat assailants and rapists with the same solution of imprisonment. As previously noted, there are many drawbacks to this approach: prisons become training camps for committing crime, prisons don't prevent violent crime, prisons are overcrowded and inhumane, prisons cost too much money to run.

I haven't fully thought this all out but, to start with, how about we lay down 3 categories of crime - violent crime (rape, assault, abuse); non-violent crime against the person (burglary, forgery, identity theft, privacy violation, slander, neglect); crime against society (white collar crime, drink driving, drug dealing, drug use).

What if we had different approaches/solutions for the different types of crime? Maybe we should try to match up the type of crime with the goal we want to accomplish in responding to it and then try to work out what an effective treatment would be.

Violent crime - the aim: to protect the rest of us - appropriate solution: incarceration.
Crime against society - the aim: punishment - appropriate solution: community service.
Non-violent crime against the person - aim: rehabilitation - appropriate solution: perhaps a combination of community service, compensation to the victim, and personal assistance (counselling/ education and training for employment).

As I said, I haven't thought out all aspects of this approach so this post is not meant to be comprehensive, but maybe it hints at a more effective way of dealing with crime than locking everyone up together.
I don't think flogging people is an effective remedy for crime because it doesn't address the heart of the issue (the motivations for engaging in crime) for any of the above categories outlined.

Rawhead

As an interesting aside I have talked to some of the most violent and hardest nuts in our prison system and they nearly all agree on one thing, they quietly admit to liking the harsh strict system that is operated in the punishment block in Cork prison. They have had such chaotic, crazy lives, that they like the order and regiment of the Block.
The idea of boot camps starts to make sense.

Duiske

Biggins wrote: »

No. Violence (in any description) in the long run, is not the answer.

(Curiously, its still on the law books of the Isle of Man I'm told)

Just a pity it is not enforced over there. Was there for a weekend a couple of years back and hooligans on motorbikes were treating the place like their own personal racetrack. And no-one reported them. They were just standing there cheering them on.
And I think they are all pervs as well. Everywhere I went people were asking if I was enjoying the titty. Sickos