In defence of flogging

[SirDennis]

Peter Moskos's book In Defence of Flogging is getting a lot of attention, but likely not for the reason your gut tells you at first blush...

America has more prisoners than any other country (2.3 million). We have more prisoners than soldiers; more than China — which has a billion more people than we do. So what to do? Well, author and assistant professor at John Jay College, Peter Moskos, has an answer, as proposed in his new book “In Defense of Flogging.” He wants to give convicted criminals the chance to pick between flogging (a burst of searing pain) or incarceration (which breeds criminality and destroys family ties and job prospects). Moskos pleads his case to Metro:
Read more: http://www.metro.us/newyork/entertainme ... sus-prison

Here is a longer article by the author: http://chronicle.com/article/In-Defense ... ng/127208/

[axordil]

Flogging, like any other deliberate infliction of physical harm for its own sake, dehumanizes everyone involved. No.

Kidney, liver section and bone marrow donations I'd consider, for those with a clean bill of health. Similar amount of discomfort spread out over more time, and a benefit to the community.

[SirDennis]

That's not a bad idea ax.

Incidentally the author suggests that as a form of punishment prison inflicts a greater amount of harm on a person, their family and the broader community (physically, psychologically and economically) than a brief burst of searing physical pain would.

[axordil]

Imprisonment can be very bad for people, but it doesn't necessarily have to be. Confinement can be as degrading or as edifying as the people involved wish it to be.

Flogging, on the other hand, is flogging. Places that do it and try to make it look "civilized" by having a doctor on hand to tend to the wounds are trying to put lipstick on a pig.

[elfshadow]

Flogging, like any other deliberate infliction of physical harm for its own sake, dehumanizes everyone involved. No.

Kidney, liver section and bone marrow donations I'd consider, for those with a clean bill of health. Similar amount of discomfort spread out over more time, and a benefit to the community.

I agree wholeheartedly with the first statement. But I have to say that the idea of the second makes me deeply uncomfortable. It seems too much like convicts would be bargaining with their body parts to get out of prison. I would argue that there are a lot of better ways to decrease the number of people in jail, such as revising the penal code or increasing the use of rehab programs for those convicted of drug- and alcohol-related crimes. I think mandatory community service is a very appropriate punishment for those convicted of more minor, nonviolent crimes. But, "give us your kidney or you have to go to jail?" There is something about that idea that is repulsive to me.

[axordil]

Reframe it: If you don't want to go to jail, you have the choice of doing something productive that will cause you some discomfort. Make sure the choice is not coerced beyond that. Limit it to those guilty of crimes against property. The idea of someone in the slammer for insider trading being offered a different kind of trade sort of appeals to me, actually...

I'm all for community service and treatment where appropriate, btw. Incarceration for drug possession in particular fills jail cells and the coffers of the companies that own and operate them, while turning marginal people into (often hardened) criminals.

[Túrin Turambar]

We had a thread on this some years back here.

[Alatar]

Yes, and as I said there:

The Isle of Man had Birching as a punishment until relatively recently. The guy who used to administer the birchings said that he rarely saw the same backside twice. Put simply, it worked.

[eborr]

Flogging, ducking, burning at the stake, stoning, keel-hauling, garotting, water-torture, the rack, bear bating, crucifiction, spread-eagle: ad naseum.

They all had their proponents who made all sorts of claims about how their particular favourite form of barbarism would solve all the worlds ills.

[narya]

Incarceration isn't just to punish people (whether or not that works). It is also to warehouse them, to keep them away from the rest of us. If someone is a serial rapist, I would not be comfortable with a flogging and release. I'm not comfortable with warehousing, either, but the third option - rehab - does not seem to be available.

[axordil]

I don't think a serial anything should be released, and to be fair, I'm willing to bet most supporters of flogging would concentrate on first-time offenders, for deterrence purposes.

[SirDennis]

Incarceration isn't just to punish people (whether or not that works). It is also to warehouse them, to keep them away from the rest of us. If someone is a serial rapist, I would not be comfortable with a flogging and release. I'm not comfortable with warehousing, either, but the third option - rehab - does not seem to be available.

Just a general comment here (not directed at you my dear) but I encourage everyone to read the article at the second link in the TP. The point of the book isn't to reinstate flogging (or corporal punishment in general) but to draw attention to the fact that NA prisons are no longer in the business of rehab. It is strictly punishment and/or warehousing. The author makes the point that keeping some kind of offenders away from the public is necessary. But if punishment is the only attainable goal of incarceration, that purpose could be better administered in other ways.

Personally I would like to see a greater emphasis on rehab but it is not happening except outside of a few special facilities. But there are two problems with even those places. One is that when returned to the public the person's life is still a shambles if not utterly destroyed by the time they lost in this race we call life in a capitalist economy. Second there is a stigma attached to the person making reintegration virtually impossible.

Furthermore, the aim of such rehabilitative centres is not well understood; many people believe that somehow prison life is a holiday at a resort of sorts. Often people believe that inmates have a higher quality of life inside prisons than they do themselves, and that prisoners do not suffer or are not punished nearly enough for their crimes.

Of course expecting such people to give a rat's behind about the impact of incarceration on the innocent members of the prisoner's family is completely out of the question. (Imagine having a parent in prison, or a son or daughter you might have expected to be able to rely on in your old age.) For this reason alone, depending on the nature of their crime of course, since rehab isn't happening anyway, it makes sense to administer punishment in as short a time as possible.

Regarding LordMorningStar's point, if a mod thinks this thread could be fit into the previous similar thread, I have no objections to it being moved there.

[Frelga]

What does "flogging" mean in practical terms? How much physical damage would be inflicted? Light swats? Cut skin? Blood? Deeper injuries? Who will provide the follow-up care?

What does this actually look like?

[Dave_LF]

Yes, and as I said there:

The Isle of Man had Birching as a punishment until relatively recently. The guy who used to administer the birchings said that he rarely saw the same backside twice. Put simply, it worked.

Nothing says "don't do that" like physical pain. It's the whole reason physical pain exists.

I disagree that corporal punishment is dehumanizing--it's "despiritizing". But human beings aren't spirits--they're half spirit and half animal. Social programs that treat people like disembodied minds that make decisions purely based on abstract reason and self-interest are doomed to failure. Sometimes you need to speak to the animal half.

[axordil]

My concern is more for the effects on the person administering the punishment than receiving it, to be fair, because all they're doing is their job...but when that job is to be brutal, what does that make a person?

[eborr]

I think the notion that the prison system has given up on rehab is worthy of debate, but to postulate that we should replace it by a return to barbarity is quite shocking, but perhaps it's a logical conclusion to where the justice debate is going. My perception is that due to the increasing selfishness of our society justice is now being driven by the desire to provide restitution to the victim. In other words crime is seen completely as an act against an individual rather than against the whole of society.

As we have a number of folks out there who are far more competent than I am to frame the legal/ethical/philosophical arguments, I will defer at this point in the hope that some clarity can be given to my ramblings

[SirDennis]

I think the notion that the prison system has given up on rehab is worthy of debate, but to postulate that we should replace it by a return to barbarity is quite shocking, but perhaps it's a logical conclusion to where the justice debate is going. My perception is that due to the increasing selfishness of our society justice is now being driven by the desire to provide restitution to the victim. In other words crime is seen completely as an act against an individual rather than against the whole of society.

Agreed. Well said.

[narya]

Just a general comment here (not directed at you my dear)

And just as a general comment here, that is directed at you, SirDennis, when a man I don't know calls me "my dear" when telling me what to do, it is a not-so-subtle put-down. It is as much as saying "don't fret, little girl, I'll take care of this". It has no place in Lasto.

Carry on without me.

[SirDennis]

It was never my intention to insult you or your sensibilities. Please accept my sincere apology.