I have to say that the more I think about it, the more I am in favour of using corporal punishment to punish convicted criminals for smaller crimes, which would normally land them some chickenshit fine, or a short prison sentence. Ive been told that they used corporal punishment for criminals in Texas less than a century ago, and that it had an astonishingly positive affect on the ordinary crime rate.

The fact of the matter is that criminals are very affraid of that type of punishment.

__________________
Jesus was a communist!

You want to spank them?

Indeed. Whipping would be good too!

__________________
Jesus was a communist!

Most violent crime at least risks retaliation of defensive measures that could also cause severe psychical pain and harm and this doesn't stop it from happening anyway.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Did you miss the entire original post?

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

It wouldnt have much affect on violent crime in particular if thats what you are referring to, but thats another ball game.

__________________
Jesus was a communist!

For non-violent crimes I would be much more in favor of public humiliation than violent punishment. I think holding a sign on a street corner that says I am a shoplifter for 8 hours would be much more effective.

__________________
Abstinence Education at its finest:

What kind of corporal punishment are we talking about here? It seems to be there are three options:

1) Brief application of pain/discomfort. I.E. Something akin to a severe spanking.
I can't say I see this as being much of a deterrent; spankings didn't really scare me as a kid.

2) Extended periods of applied pain/discomfort.
This runs awfully close to the line of "torture," and I don't think you're going to see any approval for torturing someone as punishment for minor crimes.

3) Brief application of pain/discomfort that leaves long-term physical effects. I.E. Scourging, breaking bones, etc.
This, like (2), is unlikely to get support because it seems to severe for small crimes. Also, the punished individual would likely require medical treatment to prevent infection or deformity and that would have to come out of the state's purse (unless potential death and deformity are to be considered part of the punishment but only applicable to the poor).

I don't see any of these options working out, though perhaps there are others I haven't considered.
Precisely what kind of punishment were you thinking of?
And could you offer some sample crimes that would deserve them so we'll know what level of criminality you're talking about?

__________________
To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. -Theodore Roosevelt

I've always been of the opinion that punishing adults serves no purpose. You can attempt to rehabilitate them, which occasionally happens in the American correctional system(not sure about other nations) or you can remove the threat they pose to society(obviously this doesn't really extend to minor crimes). Anything else is just institutional revenge.

I'm curious as to why you take such a hard line approach to minor crimes.

__________________
During the journey we commonly forget its goal. Almost every profession is chosen as a means to an end but continued as an end in itself. Forgetting our objectives is the most frequent act of stupidity.
-Friedrich Nietzsche, The Wanderer and his Shadow

All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist

The choice depends on the purpose. Is punishment aimed at retribution or reformation or protection of the public?
Corporal punishment in and of itself is so short term as to offer little reformative power. The humiliation factor of public corporal punishment may be more long lasting but how many people today really want to watch someone else beaten? And do we as a society want to encourage those who do enjoy it? In any case public humiliation can be achieved by means which don't involve corporal punishment. Jail offers protection of the public from the miscreant by virtue of their incarceration . That's not accomplished by corporal punishment either. I guess corporal punishment has some retributive benefit but is it more than that offered by seeing criminals locked up? The only benefit I can see is that corporal punishment might be cheaper than incarceration but even there fines are a better answer.

I think corporal punishment has some limited value when dealing with children but that's about it.

__________________
The most important political office is that of private citizen.
Louis D. Brandeis - First Jewish Supreme Court Justice

Personally, if I were in a position where it mattered, I'd prefer a whipping over being incarcerated any day of the week and twice on Sundays. That's over quickly and with no restriction of my freedom. If I were a petty criminal, I'd be on board with your plan. Getting caught doesn't take me off the street - it's basically no more real risk than a lot of the crimes I might try to commit where I could be maced/punched/knifed/whatever.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Im not into humiliating people in public as such - I just want them to feel some pain for what they did.

__________________
Jesus was a communist!

Just because he said he heard it doesn't mean it's true.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
In terms of judicial punishment, I think our current system is really the most appropriate, but Ill still play along.

When I was a kid, I would much rather get spanked than grounded.

I am thinking back as well to my team sports days. It was much more of a consequence and effective to ensure not making the same mistake again when it involved isolated humiliation.

If I stole something, or did a minor crime and was punished to endure being hit on the knuckles with a ruler, for example. That would only harden my resolve against authority. If you handcuffed me to a signpost with a sign around my neck telling everyone who drove by that I shoplifted a soda. I wouldnt shoplift again. But everyone is different.

__________________
Abstinence Education at its finest:

Whipping would be the most obvious method of corporal punishment to use, since it doesnt disable the convicted criminal physically. Sure, it hurts like a son of a bitch and leave scars, but thats about it!


Im talking about smaller crimes where criminals (for the most part) are taking the punishment into consideration - like destruction of public and private property, petty/grand theft, violence against innoncent strangers, and other less severe crimes where it could have a great preventive affect. It would make most criminals think twice, and save a lot of tax money on the prison system.

__________________
Jesus was a communist!