The Instigator
sadolite
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
SausageHacker
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

Public humiliation in town square

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 9 votes the winner is...
SausageHacker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/14/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,882 times Debate No: 5724
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (9)

 

sadolite

Pro

I would like to debate bringing back public humiliation as a form of punishment for misdemeanor repeat offenders. Putting people on probation and sending them to councilors is a complete waste of time in my opinion. These forms of so called punishment almost always cause the person to violate their probation and get them caught up in the legal system for ever. The cost of probation and these classes are astronomical and the people who run them are nothing more than money collectors for the state and offer little or nothing in the way of reforming the criminal. Most often people who are put on probation and sent to crime specific classes or councilors can't afford it and resort to stealing in order to pay for them. Public humiliation leaves a lasting impression as no one wants this to happen to them. I will give examples of public humiliation if my opponent needs them in order to make his case against it.
SausageHacker

Con

M. O'Donnell: 15 october 2008

In recent times, judicial use of public humiliation punishment has largely fallen out of favor since the practice is now considered cruel and unusual punishment, which is outlawed in the United States Constitution. According to sptimes.com, published Feb. 18, 2007,

"Times have changed since George led our country. Mail is no longer delivered by horseback, and white wigs are no longer in fashion. Back then, adultery was illegal and Hester was made to wear her scarlet A in public.

Public drunkenness was forbidden, and those who broke the law were made to stand in the town square in a wooden contraption with their heads and hands unable to move. Other crimes were punished the same way. It was not only humiliating but also painful.

Today, lawbreakers could not be treated this way. We would be taking away their civil rights. Public humiliation would not be allowed. The American Civil Liberties Union would bring lawsuits against the law enforcement agencies."

(http://www.sptimes.com...)

Now to attack my opponents case:

My opponent states that counseling and probation are a waste of time and resources, but can we really compare economics and convenience to justice and due process? This argument clearly falls.

My opponent gives 'his opinion' on how our nations legal system ought to work, but provides no facts or evidence (unless you you count your last sentence as evidence, well then, yes I would like to see an example other than what is in my evidence). Due to lack of support or statistical data, this point falls as well.

My opponent also states that they often resort to stealing to meet the cost of being a criminal, but no facts or statistics were provided so this point falls.

The affirmative also points out that public humiliation leaves a lasting impression on them. Answer me this: if you are permanently scarred by being publicly humiliated. are you more likely to hate the government or submit wholly to it?
Debate Round No. 1
sadolite

Pro

sadolite forfeited this round.
SausageHacker

Con

ok this is round 2 getting typed from my iPod touch. I am 'forfeiting' so it is possible to carry on the debate. Cheers
Debate Round No. 2
sadolite

Pro

Your first debate, let the mayhem begin! Just kidding, I am no better at this than you are most likely. Don't let my win ratio fool you. A couple of weeks ago I was 0-27 now as of this posting I am 24-3-1 I am a controversial personality and people mess with my voting record, it is a completely unreliable indicator of my debating skills or is it HMMM. Anywaaaay.

Let me start by saying your entire opening argument infers that all forms of public humiliation must include bodily harm. I specifically stated that if you needed examples to make your case I would provide them. Public humiliation that does not cause bodily harm is not against the law. "Do not confuse slander with public humiliation" Exhibit (A) All the major tabloids and news outlets publicly humiliate people everyday. They can say what ever they want about anybody without impunity. You can not sue anybody for publicly humiliating you. I can walk up to you in a crowd of people and make fun of you and make rude comments about you and there is nothing you can do about it. Public humiliation is in fact being used in several places around the country right now with very good results.

Tents for jail cells in the Arizona desert:

http://www.cnn.com...

The recidivism rate for the inmates that go through the sheriffs rehabilitation program is 14% verses 60% on the national average. You will note that every single human rights and civil rights group in the country has been unsuccessful at closing it down. So this is proof that public humiliation and harsh living environments are not inhumane as long as they don't cause bodily injury.

This judge in Texas makes people where signs, again not unconstitutional with better recidivism rate than national average.

http://articles.latimes.com...

Only 3 out of 600 people have repeated offenses.

"My opponent states that counseling and probation are a waste of time and resources, but can we really compare economics and convenience to justice and due process? This argument clearly falls."

This link explains the vicious cycle that 4 out of every ten people get caught up in starting out as misdemeanor offence in most cases and end up convicted felons because they can't pay the fees associated with it. It is cruel and unusual punishment to condemn people to a life of crime over a few thousand or even a few hundred dollars.

http://www.thenation.com...

"My opponent states that counseling and probation are a waste of time and resources, but can we really compare economics and convenience to justice and due process?"

The above comment is also addressed in the last link. The legal justice system today is pretty much a business or a corporation theses days. Entire sub businesses are propped up by the legal system. For example: DUI schools, Anger Management Schools, Financial planning schools, Driving schools, they have a school or a class or some sort of councilor for just about anything you can think of. And you have to attend these classes for weeks if not months and the cost of all these things add up: Fines, probation, schools, counseling. The vast majority of the people who have to attend and pay for these things are often indigent to begin with and wind up violating their probation because they can't pay all these fines and fees. Next thing they know they are convicted felons for VOP violations and are given more fines and ordered to more classes and more counseling on top of what they already can't pay for. The vicious cycle begins and a once misdemeanor offence ends up as a felony and the person just gives up and lives it up or runs from the law until the next time they get caught because they now have nothing to lose.

"My opponent also states that they often resort to stealing to meet the cost of being a criminal, but no facts or statistics were provided so this point falls"

This comment is addressed by the fact that people who get caught up in the legal system are unable to find employment because they have warrants and such that prohibit any kind of permanent gainful employment forcing them to engage in illegal means to earn or steel money.

Public humiliation is a much better option. People 9 times out of ten will choose to pay a fine or go to jail over being publicly humiliated. People choose to pay because public humiliation is just that "public humiliation" I have given numerous examples and statistics to prove that public humiliation of the types presented in my argument are far more effective at detouring repeat offenses than probation or counseling or schools. All these people caught up in the justice system should be publicly humiliated for their original offence and have all the fines and schools and on and on dropped so the person can get back to living. Public humiliation would reduce crime especially if it is used on first time offenders in particular as it will have a lasting and unforgettable deterrence effect.
SausageHacker

Con

My opponent states that my opening argument infers that all public humiliation is bodily harm. My argument doesn't mention this at all, so this attack is a matter of opinion and it falls.

He also states that public humiliation that does not inflict bodily harm is against the law. However, I clearly stated that this falls under cruel and unusual punishment.' My opponent failed to address this so therefore it is dropped.

The affirmative points out that the tabloid and the news outlets publicly humiliate people every day. This point is irreverent and invalid because they person being humiliated has not necessarily done anything wrong.

The affirmative also gives evidence for his case:

-Jail cells: This article is irrelevant to the resolution because it has absolutely nothing to do with public humiliation. Even if it were, "...in a remote area of Arizona." doesn't sound very public to me.

-Texas judge: This point is invalid because it is a matter of opinion of one judge. It even says so right in the title: "...Several jurists think public humiliation...is a more effective punishment." Highlight the word THINK.

-Criminal fees: My opponent has not answered my argument here; which is "can we really compare economics and convenience to justice and due process?" The answer is that we simply cannot compare these two. As for his evidence, it shows how a criminal must pay a fine in addition to jail time. A quote from the article: "The imposition of mandatory surcharges, like mandatory sentencing, erodes judicial independence by tying the judges' hands even when they think that justice requires a different result." This sure sounds like a contradiction to me. On top of that, let's be realistic: Can you borrow money from a firm? Yes, you can. There are special firms out there for criminals.

Well, it appears that my opponent has not responded to my other attacks:

"My opponent gives 'his opinion' on how our nations legal system ought to work, but provides no facts or evidence (unless you you count your last sentence as evidence, well then, yes I would like to see an example other than what is in my evidence). Due to lack of support or statistical data, this point falls as well.

My opponent also states that they often resort to stealing to meet the cost of being a criminal, but no facts or statistics were provided so this point falls.

The affirmative also points out that public humiliation leaves a lasting impression on them. Answer me this: if you are permanently scarred by being publicly humiliated. are you more likely to hate the government or submit wholly to it?"

You should vote negative because I have successfully proved how the resolution is best negated, I answered all attacks on my case, and I responded to all my opponent's points. Thanks for reading my arguments and thank you to my opponent.

*NOTE I also had 100% correct grammar and spelling. My true age revealed: I am 15 years old!!!
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
"My true age revealed: I am 15 years old!!!"

Am I supposed to care or think that you're special? "

EEH, What does this comment have to do with this debate or the price of tea in China?
Posted by wjmelements 8 years ago
wjmelements
"My true age revealed: I am 15 years old!!!"

Am I supposed to care or think that you're special?
Posted by jason_hendirx 8 years ago
jason_hendirx
I understand that scarlet letter punishment is primitive, but so is crime as a whole. It seems almost appropriate to use primitive methods to deal with primitive problems. I'm leaning pro.
Posted by SausageHacker 8 years ago
SausageHacker
I love how nobody votes for this issue. Please vote guys. I don't care which side.
Posted by Sweatingjojo 9 years ago
Sweatingjojo
I voted Pro because he was able to provide examples of public humiliation that has evidentially been effective as punishment, and also humane.
Posted by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
Yes I did read it and you are wrong. Public humiliation that does not cause bodily harm is not cruel and unusual punishment and it is not against the law. If it were all of the judges and law enforcement officers would have been sued for civil rights violations and they have not nor will they be. It is not unconstitutional to publicly humiliate someone if it does "NOT" cause bodily harm.
Posted by SausageHacker 9 years ago
SausageHacker
well did you read my first argument at all? C&U punishment, son.
Posted by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
'Public humiliation that does not cause bodily harm is not against the law. " my opponent stated that it was.
Posted by SausageHacker 9 years ago
SausageHacker
Hahaha that's ok with me. I am typing this on my itouch so I will post in the morning as well. How about I forfeit round 2 and we go to round 3? Congrats on motorcycle ;-)
Posted by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
SausageSorry I missed my turn! I went and bought a motorcycle and forgot all about the debate. I will post an argument in the comment section if it is OK with you. I will do it in the morning
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by fresnoinvasion 8 years ago
fresnoinvasion
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by gonovice 8 years ago
gonovice
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by LakevilleNorthJT 8 years ago
LakevilleNorthJT
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by huskies5565 8 years ago
huskies5565
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Sweatingjojo 9 years ago
Sweatingjojo
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
sadoliteSausageHackerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70