Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FearfulJesuit]

So would Bernie Madoff be caned until liquified?

I'm not saying all crimes should be punished by caning! I'm simply pointing out that a humane method of corporal punishment such as caning can be an integral part of a modern justice system whose aim is to minimize crime.

[Bauglir]

Plus, there's a remarkably progressive side to it, too: unlike fines, or rich-person's jails, everyone's equal before corporal punishment, and it's difficult to make the punishment discriminate between its criminals (whether or not the courts are fair about it is of course another matter). Ten hits with a cane is as painful for a white-collar embezzler as it is for a burgler.

sort of

rich folks can afford better post-beating medical care, which may or may not be necessary depending on the severity of the crime

and i can all but guarantee that "justice beatings" will be covered by nobody's insurance

kind of like how wealth allows you to weather a prison sentence more effectively because you have some funds to return to when you get out and will likely experience less of a shock to your lifestyle as a result of lost earnings, and your investments keep appreciating in value and suchlike

[RedKing]

Moreover, canings for petty crime will wind up disproportionately applied to black males, and parallels will be immediately drawn with the whipping of slaves.

Good luck with that.

[Baffler]

Plus, there's a remarkably progressive side to it, too: unlike fines, or rich-person's jails, everyone's equal before corporal punishment, and it's difficult to make the punishment discriminate between its criminals (whether or not the courts are fair about it is of course another matter). Ten hits with a cane is as painful for a white-collar embezzler as it is for a burgler.

sort of

rich folks can afford better post-beating medical care, which may or may not be necessary depending on the severity of the crime

and i can all but guarantee that "justice beatings" will be covered by nobody's insurance

kind of like how wealth allows you to weather a prison sentence more effectively because you have some funds to return to when you get out and will likely experience less of a shock to your lifestyle as a result of lost earnings, and your investments keep appreciating in value and suchlike

You have a strange idea of what caning entails. It's literally just x number of solid smacks on the behind by a trained administrator with a wooden rod. It's not a random beating a la Dwarven Justice. Singapore even puts padding everywhere else on you in case the dude misses, and a doctor is required to be on-site during and afterward to treat any bleeding.

[FearfulJesuit]

Re: the medical side, well, this is why you have Canadian or British healthcare instead of the abortion that America has duct-taped together.

As for the financial support awaiting you when you get out...I think that's probably an inevitable side-effect of the existence of wealth. I'm not sure how you would correct for this...hand poor inmates a large check when they get out? I'm all for vocational training in prisons and other methods of trying to improve inmates' lives when they leave prison, but that's an incentive for crime if I've ever heard it.

RedKing: Excellent point, and one that had not occurred to me.

[smjjames]

There needs to be some sort of comprehensive study of all of the judicial systems of the world, compare what works and what doesn't.

Which would be far harder to actually accomplish than it sounds on paper I think.....

[mainiac]

Don't particularly see why caning is terribly worse than a stint in jail.

In theory we justify putting people in jail on a case by case basis not by saying "this guy wont like it!"

TBH, I haven't really seen a good argument against corporal punishment other than "it looks like torture methods from the bad old days, so we can't possibly have it."

1) Because desensitizing and dehumanizing criminals to violence is horrible idea
2) Because it gives criminals a pretty fucking valid reason to see the institions they dont respect as arbitrary and violent
3) Because there are a lot of people it would have zero deterrent effect on.  If someone thinks they are cheating the system because of this it's actually a psychological incentive to commit crimes compared to no punishment at all.
4) Because coercion through violence a default state of law is fundamentally at odds with the principles of liberalism this country is supposed to be about

[Grim Portent]

As for the financial support awaiting you when you get out...I think that's probably an inevitable side-effect of the existence of wealth. I'm not sure how you would correct for this...hand poor inmates a large check when they get out? I'm all for vocational training in prisons and other methods of trying to improve inmates' lives when they leave prison, but that's an incentive for crime if I've ever heard it.

Fines can be percentage based on personal income/savings, so a rich man loses the same proportion of their wealth that a poor man does. Not perfect, but better than fixed rate fines in my opinion.

Adjusting the prison discrepancy is more tricky and would probably necessitate trying to make sure all prisoners leave prison with decent skills and a chance at paying work, which is obviously impractical with people who are in for short sentences.

[mainiac]

The goal of justice shouldn't be to be equally punitive and painful to each prisoner.  The goal should be increasing the public welfare.

[Shadowlord]

TBH, I haven't really seen a good argument against corporal punishment other than "it looks like torture methods from the bad old days, so we can't possibly have it."

How about "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

I think Frumple's right. If someone steals $100, that's usually a symptom of a problem. Whether that's because they need money to fulfill basic needs or because they're addicted to something, caning them isn't going to do anything to address the actual cause behind their actions. Throwing them in jail won't help much either, though you can at least claim it might force an addict to go cold turkey, and stop people from committing crimes while locked up, but if you get out, have a record, and can't get a job? That just leads right back to being forced into crime to survive.

[smjjames]

As for the financial support awaiting you when you get out...I think that's probably an inevitable side-effect of the existence of wealth. I'm not sure how you would correct for this...hand poor inmates a large check when they get out? I'm all for vocational training in prisons and other methods of trying to improve inmates' lives when they leave prison, but that's an incentive for crime if I've ever heard it.

Fines can be percentage based on personal income/savings, so a rich man loses the same proportion of their wealth that a poor man does. Not perfect, but better than fixed rate fines in my opinion.

Adjusting the prison discrepancy is more tricky and would probably necessitate trying to make sure all prisoners leave prison with decent skills and a chance at paying work, which is obviously impractical with people who are in for short sentences.

That's what rehab plus probation afterwards would be for, with those that have short sentences, and some way to continue their rehabilitation when they do get out.

Obviously not all criminals can be rehabbed, but a path should be at least available for those who can be.

TBH, I haven't really seen a good argument against corporal punishment other than "it looks like torture methods from the bad old days, so we can't possibly have it."

How about "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

I think Frumple's right. If someone steals $100, that's usually a symptom of a problem. Whether that's because they need money to fulfill basic needs or because they're addicted to something, caning them isn't going to do anything to address the actual cause behind their actions. Throwing them in jail won't help much either, though you can at least claim it might force an addict to go cold turkey, and stop people from committing crimes while locked up, but if you get out, have a record, and can't get a job? That just leads right back to being forced into crime to survive.

Isn't that only a problem if you commited a felony?

[Bauglir]

You have a strange idea of what caning entails. It's literally just x number of solid smacks on the behind by a trained administrator with a wooden rod. It's not a random beating a la Dwarven Justice. Singapore even puts padding everywhere else on you in case the dude misses, and a doctor is required to be on-site during and afterward to treat any bleeding.

no, i've just been taking folks at their word on the assumption that caning is just an example of a more extensive system that incorporates corporal punishment

at some point such a system is all but certainly going to include a more severe sort of punishment to handle cases where a beating light enough to have no long-lasting effects is just not going to be a deterrent

you're faced with a catch-22 of sorts - either the violence is inadequate to deter any but the most petty crimes, or it's provided in conjunction with other punishments, or it's so violent that it requires a meaningful recuperation period

and the middle option, while probably the best, raises the question of why you're not just using the other punishments, a la the plan to supplement human batteries with some kind of fusion technology

and good luck convincing the sorts of folk who want corporal punishment that they should pay for any medical consequences that arise - the "let's deter crime with violence" crowd does not overlap strongly with the "let's reform criminals even if it means being nice to them" crowd, although i guess the fact that we're even having this conversation makes it a nonzero overlap

[mainiac]

the fact that we're even having this conversation makes it a nonzero overlap

I congratulate you on finding a silver lining in the stormiest of skies.

[Rolan7]

Ah minimize the inconvenience to society. The center of all successful criminal codes. Out of sight no problem.

... The caning position is to *not* stuff all our petty offenders in prisons, out of sight.  It also saves a ton of money that could be spent on, say, rehabilitation programs.

I may be a supporter of the police, but it's horrible that we put so many people in prison for tiny stuff.  That's what criminalizes them - being stuck in a dangerous, tight space with a bunch of criminals.  It's a horrible vicious cycle, and also extraordinarily expensive.

Still, there has to be some consequence for crime or else people (particularly in dire straights) will do lots of crime.  Community service is a useful option, sure.  But in cases where it doesn't work, there's corporal punishment.  Anything but prison, which is has an amazing track record for *permanently destroying lives*.  Arguably a fate worse than death, particularly for everybody else involved.

[Shadowlord]

Smjjames: From what I have read, many employers can and will pass on anyone who has an arrest record even without any convictions, and regardless of the charges.