Judicial corporal punishment: Is judicial corporal punishment (such as caning) justifiable?

  • Yes, Sir. . . A great deterrent. . .

    I'd much rather be paddled, Whipped, Caned, Or strapped for misdemeanors or lower felonies than be locked up. Sure, It would be humiliating, But I would learn my lesson, And so would other men. JCP was common up to the middle of last century. Prison is not always the answer. . .

  • Yes to judicial corporal punishment

    Yes judicial corporal punsihment so be brought back to the us it would be much better to be cained or paddled for traffic offences or drug charges vrs prison and fines i would choose to be paddle or cained or straped instead of paying the fines and going to jail and it would save tax dollars.

  • Prison is far worse

    Any argument about it being cruel or not helping the criminal ignores the fact that prison is far crueler to the incredible isolation it brings and associated physical suffering such as pain caused in prison fights. Also by isolating people prison makes it hard for criminals to improve and sorrounds them with bad influnces.

  • I agree .

    In my opinion . Like we say spare the rod . Spoil the child similarly it is important to make sure that such criminals think twice before they think of doing such big crimes.
    Keeping prisioners in a cell is making them feel relaxed like there's nothing to worry about.

  • Government has the right to discipline it's people

    Many times when I ask people where they stand on the issue as soon as they hear the word whip or cane or they even picture any type of pain, they're faces immediately turn disgusted by this picture. These people allow their emotions and "sympathy" to lead their judgement on this issue. Emotions blind the fact that the people who would be recieving these crimes have commited horrendous crimes, possibly taking the lives of other loved ones, stealing a families asset, disturbing the well being of other people in the community. The government has the right to inlfict damage on those disturbing the peace and order of the community. Just like a child that evidently lacks discipline, once discipline is administered it will cause the child to "adjust" or get back in order" , it will allow the child to really think about what he or she did. Note that discipline will not change the heart of a defiant individual it will only assure that they understand what the did was wrong. In the book of Romans in the Bible CHapter 13 verse 4, it says that the governemnt has not been granted arms for nothing. Meaning God has instilled the government of this world. It also mean that they have a right to inflict damage on individuals who are problems to society. NO matter what vessel is used to administer punishment or discipline people will always commit crime, because thats what people are. They're sinners. They're hearts are "only evil continually" (Genesis 6:5) Corporal punishment is justifiable because the Bible says so "an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" NOW STOP those who want to argue with me "christians need to repay evil with good" yes that's true, in civilized matters. However an eye for an eye is a command towards government rule. That indiciates that the government has that right to do so. When people disagree it's not so much because they feel bad for the criminals but because they hate discipline. (Proverbs 12:1) One guy I asked said he was against it, but also prior to asking him that he disclosed that he doesn't like being told what to do. When I asked him about corporal punishment he said he doesnt agree with any "inhumane" or "pain inflicting" punishments. Now whether the fact that this can be misused does not refute it's effectiveness. People even on here say it's bad because "the government can misuse it" Now think about that its bad because the government can misuse it. If that were a logical viewpoint that would say that everything is bad because everything can be misused. A car could be used to take children to school, doctors appointments and church, but a car can also be used to kill people. Does that make the car bad?NO, of course not, therefore corporal punishment is not bad because it can be misused by that government, the problem behind that statement would be the government for misusing it.

  • Matthew 26:52, Genesis 9:6, Romans 13:4, Levitcus 24:17,

    Capital punishment is a biblical concept. It is the law of God that a murderer be put to death. Romans 13:4 says that government does not bear the sword for nothing, meaning they do have power to inflict damage on its citizens for the protection and well being of it's own.

  • For males only, the best deterrent, cheap and swift.

    Males of all ages need to fear the cane. It always worked for boys at school in my day. Made us better people and more respectful to women. Crime and rape would be slashed if it was applied to adult males. Women would feel safer and more confident. Instate it.

  • Face the facts

    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.

  • Judicial Corporal Punishment is Fully Constitutional & Effective

    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 cane works!

    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?'

  • No, it is cruel and bloody

    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.

  • Corporal Punishment is a inhumane.

    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.

  • Torture as a state sanctioned punishment is never justified.

    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, it is cruel and unusual.

    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.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.