cheesemonster2005 Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 How a country treats it's criminals shows how civilised it is. Well the Isle of Man will be at the top of the list when the new prison is finished, what with its running track and football pitch, sky TV, radiators in every room, (umm sorry cell). There'll be people banging on the door to get in. Give em the birch instead. WilDDog are you sure you're not the editor of the Daily Mail in disguise? Or, maybe someone from the 19th century? I would imagine that even with Sky TV, losing your liberty for 2 years, being told what to do, what to eat, when to sleep, etc. is enough of a punishment. Running track and football pitch are there to provide recreation and maybe to ensure that they won't be claiming disability benefit when released because they're too fat. Prisons serve many purposes asides from degrading someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 I would imagine that even with Sky TV, losing your liberty for 2 years, being told what to do, what to eat, when to sleep, etc. is enough of a punishment. Running track and football pitch are there to provide recreation. Prisons serve many purposes asides from degrading someone. Ah right, been locked up in one have you? You're on a different planet to everyone else dude, even the prison that's here now is home from home. Give em the birch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 I agree with m_m and La Grand Fromage. Justice systems are administered by people who WILL make mistakes. So for me the death penalty is not an option. However birching scrotes sounds like an excellent idea. One problem with the prison system rests on what purpose does it serve? Are they places where criminals are rehabilitated or are they places where criminals lose their freedom as a punishment? In business when you try to do two diverse things with the same process you end up doing both badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 The birch is barbaric because like capital punishment you can't take it away if they are later found innocent. Can you take a prison sentence away? Some way of making people live that bit longer? One of my relatives (by mariage) was birched when he was younger. He'll freely admit that it wasn't pleasant but he deserved it and it straightened him out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Well, it's too late for him now: Australian executed in Singapore Singapore is well known for it's zero tolerance approach towards crime - anyone who commits such an offence there simply has to submit to the given punishment, even if I also think that the death penalty should be abolished... They also still swing the cane over there, and reading about the dimensions of that thing, it's very likely to be worse than any birching ever given out over here: The Singapore Prison cane is made of rattan......For adult men it is 1.2 metres long and 1.3cm thick From this site Looking at the way some of these thugs in the UK and over here seem to laugh at the Police and any Asbos or other lenient punishments, it might well be worth importing one of them, or at least wiping the dust of the birch. Prison is useless - it's Open University for criminals. Corporal punishment, as much as it might be against "human rights", is cheap and quick and a serious deterrent - and it also doesn't make you lose your job and mess up your life in the way that a prison sentence might do, hence making you less likely to re-offend... I think that being told what to eat/when to sleep/how to behave for a year is more in-humane than a dose of the birch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Prison is useless - it's Open University for criminals. Corporal punishment, as much as it might be against "human rights", is cheap and quick and a serious deterrent - and it also doesn't make you lose your job and mess up your life in the way that a prison sentence might do, hence making you less likely to re-offend... Excellent post. You could also have added that corporal punishment doesn't give them the opportunity to get hooked on drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speckled Frost Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Corporal punishment only has one string to it's bow - a deterrent. If done properly, prison can be a deterrent, provide rehab and actually take criminals off the streets for a period. If the problem relates to prisoners having too easy a time, pick up new criminal tips and get hooked on drugs, then surely the issue is the running of our prison rather than the effectiveness of prisons per se. Corporal punishment would be an uneasy bedfellow in a society which won't even let parents slap children. It would be far too hypercritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Just to get back on the thread for a moment - does anyone know whether or not the Australian authorities managed to apprehend whoever it was that supplied Nguyen Tuong Van with the cocaine? If they have, then they have every right to insist that the 'real' culprits have been caught and punished - if not, then they have no right to interfere in an individual case such as this, although they have every right to let their feelings about capital punishment in general be known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 2, 2005 Author Share Posted December 2, 2005 Just to get back on the thread for a moment - does anyone know whether or not the Australian authorities managed to apprehend whoever it was that supplied Nguyen Tuong Van with the cocaine?If they have, then they have every right to insist that the 'real' culprits have been caught and punished - if not, then they have no right to interfere in an individual case such as this, although they have every right to let their feelings about capital punishment in general be known. I think I read somewhere that Australia wasn't one of the countries involved in the smuggling. He was smuggling from one country (Cambodia?) to another but had to change planes or whatever in Singapore. He was apparently doing the smuggling to pay of debts which his twin brother owed after recovering from heroin addiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Anderton Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Cheesemonster you said I don't support the death sentence for any purpose as I think it makes the government who carry it to be guilty of murder The birch is barbaric because like capital punishment you can't take it away if they are later found innocent. It encourages more coverups. Assault is assault no matter who does it - criminal or police officer. How can any government commit murder by a death sentence when it is a 'lawful' killing carried out in accordance with their legislation. Assault isnt just assault. Again it all revolves around what is and isnt lawful. The policeman who sprays CS in your face and puts you to the ground because you're violent commits a 'lawful' assault. one who did it for laughs obviously commits an unlawful assault. Me, i say bring back the death penalty warts and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alias Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 There was a certain case in the ozzy news about a woman checking into an airport, and them finding nothing but on arrival in Singapore they found a stash of drugs. The weight had changed since handing in for departure, yet the only people who had access to the baggage was the airport staff and not the owner, and the ozzy woman received a life sentence. I can't find a link but it was pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Cheesemonster you said I don't support the death sentence for any purpose as I think it makes the government who carry it to be guilty of murder The birch is barbaric because like capital punishment you can't take it away if they are later found innocent. It encourages more coverups. Assault is assault no matter who does it - criminal or police officer. How can any government commit murder by a death sentence when it is a 'lawful' killing carried out in accordance with their legislation. Assault isnt just assault. Again it all revolves around what is and isnt lawful. The policeman who sprays CS in your face and puts you to the ground because you're violent commits a 'lawful' assault. one who did it for laughs obviously commits an unlawful assault. Me, i say bring back the death penalty warts and all. What is and isn't lawful, is not necessarily what is and isn't right. Sharia law may say that it is lawful to perform female circumcision, but it ain't necessarily right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 3, 2005 Author Share Posted December 3, 2005 What is and isn't lawful, is not necessarily what is and isn't right. Sharia law may say that it is lawful to perform female circumcision, but it ain't necessarily right! I just don't think that we are/should be powerless if we disapprove of another countries laws. As Glad to be Back has said there are many laws around the world which are not right and only through international pressure can we change them. And I don't mean doing it the Bush/Blair way. I said 'assault is assault' no matter who does it - criminal or policeman. Maybe the policeman or authorities assault is justified by law but that doesn't necessarily make it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.