Yes it is painful and leaves permanent scars, it's mean to be a deterrent. Lots of wild speculation from those who disapprove such as using it for "political position" outrageous. If you have a fair and just system then it is totally fine. Words like "primitive" and "cruel" are always subjective. If you're gonna say it at least explain why it is.
In "Prison Overcrowding Cure: Judicial Corporal Punishment of Adults," published in The Criminal Law Bulletin, a law review available on Westlaw, I show that judicial corporal punishment is mentioned in the Fifth Amendment, favored by all the presidents carved into Mt. Rushmore, and specifically endorsed in the Bible: Deuteronomy 25:1-3. It works, it is public, it warns observers to obey the law, and it usually only has to be applied once -- it is truly rehabilitative for most normal humans. It is clearly cost effective and can be applied soon after violations of parole or probation. Most criminals would prefer 40 lashes to a year in prison. We can cut the American prison population in half! It is just the ticket to prevent theft and drug addiction and sales. Biblical judicial corporal punishment, which I favor, has its own due process guarantees: it is witnessed by the sentencing judge, proportional to the crime, and always in public. [You may also read this article at my Academia.Edu website: John Dewar Gleissner]. Facts are stubborn things, and judicial corporal punishment has worked everywhere. It was abolished in the USA for being too effective!
The scars and pains of the cane will make sure that the criminal will not do another crime again. Its as simple as that so when the criminal wants to commit another crime, he would stop and think, 'do i want another cane? Do i want that pain and scars?'
I firmly believe that discipline begins at home and I am not talking about abuse. There is a line between punishment and abuse, but when children are allowed to run rampant without discipline, it births adults who also have no respect for authority. Not only is corporal punishment within the judicial system more cost effective than prison time, the humiliation of being put on public display and flogged/caned would likely deter more individuals from committing future crimes. But, we'll never really know unless they bring it back.
I am a strong believer in the efficacy of corporal punishment. It has immediate effect, is memorable for the recipient and is relatively quick and low on resource usage.
I received a severe caning on my bare buttocks at twelve years of age from my aunt for indecently propositioning my cousin. The pain and humiliation have never been forgotten, not least the enormous involuntary bowel movement I passed. However, it enabled me to concentrate on school and college and make a success of my life.
Mass incarceration is a failure; judicial corporal punishment has always worked. It is not unconstitutional. The horror many anticipate is well-controlled by due process protections in nations living under the rule of law. All four presidents carved into Mt. Rushmore favored JCP on white and black citizens ... And it is specifically endorsed in the Deuteronomy 35:1-3. Most offenders facing a year in jail would prefer 40 lashes with a whip, imposed in public and before the sentencing judge. I wrote a law review article supporting JCP: "Prison Overcrowding Cure: Judicial Corporal Punishment of Adults" - you may find it on Westlaw in The Criminal Law Bulletin (Summer 2013).
Corporal punishment in my opinion, is more effective than locking someone up in a cell with other criminals. No one wants to endure harsh pain. Millions upon millions of people would agree that pain is more of a suffering than say, solitary confinement. sitting in a room not having to worry about anything may even be a blessing to some impoverished people.
Corporal punishment, in my opinion is basically torture, the offender gets the pain from the cane and the is healed by the doctor, What is the meaning of that? It is just giving pain to the offender, which is inhumane. They can be sent to jail, made to be work, but physical punishment is outrageous. Also, even the offender has human rights and he or she should be treated like everyone of us, why should he or she be ordered to take on inhumane punishment? Caning could also anger the offender, and he or she might commit the crime again. Shouldn't we just reason with him? Caning can also decrease one's self esteem.
To whip someone for a crime that they committed will not only anger them, but give them motivation to cause more trouble in the future. If you hit someone, they will hit back. By sentencing them to time in prison is also not a good option. People commit crimes when they are angry, drunk, or paid. To get rid of this, we should not cane a person, but be able to reason with them. I am no man of science, I'm only 13, but I know what I talk about. Punishment will not bring peace. We need a better solution than this.
The use of Judicial corporal punishment as in Singapore and Malaysia is abhorrent and primitive. Rightly condemned by Amnesty,this ritualised form of torture causes excrutiating pain and permanent physical damage to those unfortunate men on whom it is inflicted. Many victims are simply immigrants and those seeking asylum who have no current visa. Even in the case of those found guilty of truly evil crimes,this type of primitive adherence to the most base instinct for retribution can not be justified. How is it possible to claim that such methods work when it is a fact that the periods of history when flogging was in frequent use were also very much more violent societies than those of today. Even if this arguement for efficiency were valid ,this would not justify these methods . Also, it is not possible to divorce an approval of the rituals of flogging from the overt sexual implications of these methods. Anyone watching the Malaysian Governments video of the modus operandi of judicial caning could not be blamed for thinking that they were watching a fetishist gay BDSM film ! I am somewhat surprised and dismayed at the approval the majority of respondants have expressed for this practice.
No, judicial corporal punishment is not justifiable, because it is cruel, and too open to abuse. The government will use corporal punishment as a way to abuse those who disagree with the government's political position. This is not to say things should be easy for prisoners. They can live in harsh conditions and be made to work. But physical punishment is outrageous.