Since this keeps coming up, some of you obviously are naive about construction workers. Many of the people doing public construction projects (yes, those bridges, too) ARE convicted criminals. Remember, those jobs go to the lowest bidder. The foremen, superintendents and estimators may have clean records (although, don't count on it), but the only difference between those laborers and the ones suggested to work from prison is that they had better attorneys.
I recognize that I probably have some bias here, but since my fiance went to jail, I've heard some horrific stories of what human beings are capable of doing to each other. I think there are some people who absolutely cannot be rehabilitated, and I think even among those who can be, there's a larger amount who would need something other than threat of pain to be so. Some people just flat out need to be locked up. Raise your hand if you'd be comfortable with the thought of a man who raped a 10 week old infant walking around your neighborhood freely, because he chose lashes. Or the guy who intimidated his girlfriend into prostitution by biting off and eating small pieces of her calves and ass. Lashes aren't going to solve the problems these men had and prevent them from re offending.
It may not be "ethical" but if there is so much evidence that it's obvious that some fuckhead molested a child or some horrible shit, we should just shoot 'em in the head. Bullets are cheaper than life in the hole. I'm somewhat serious.
I mentioned this. But the two points of contention would still be private sector contractors would be competing against slave labor prices, something I feel the ACLU and NAACP would have huge problems with, OR if the prisoners were paid it would exacerbate the money suck that is already heavy with the system. Given the choice to where my tax dollars went on a public works project I'd want them spent in the private sector then paying imprisoned convicts (at least the ones in the private sector served their time).
Fuck this PC bullshit. Somewhat serious? I'm 100% serious. Shoot them. Some people are broken and whatever metaphorical duct tape we have simply cannot fix them. Hell, if I'm ever proven to be dangerous to a degree where there is absolutely no hope for me to be placed back into society without the worry that I'll commit a heinous crime, shoot me, too. I'm useless at that point, anyway. Why waste the time or money to keep my broken ass around?
You are right, we need to what is good for the herd, instead of holding these fuckers hands and giving them more oppurtunities to harm.
We've done a lot on capital punishment here: <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.theidiotboard.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1289" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1289</a>
Stoopid werk. Doesn't my boss know that people are wrong on the internet, and that it's my job to tell them so? Spoiler I don't there would be an issue with this scenario taking jobs away from anyone, because we could use contractors and other free market agencies to make all the arrangements and manage the projects. Instead of paying for the overhead on equipment, these companies would be paying for unskilled labor on an as-needed basis. Without having any large-project construction management experience of my own, I'm betting that there is a way to make this economically feasible. The work may go more slowly, but the cost would also be much lower because the workers wouldn't be able to bargain for wages or benefits (or vacation time...). Many companies will elect to go with traditional building techniques due to the complexity of the project/timeframe requirements/PR complications; but this would provide a novel alternative for municipal or other endeavors that could benefit from some, ahem, flexibility. This isn't going to take any more jobs away from from 'Muricans any more than the Mexicans that jumped the border in order to work for shit pay, long hours, in horrible conditions, to pick produce. None of us wanted those jobs anyway. I would also hope that this implementation would help deal with many of the injusitices currently present in the system. Convicted of a nonviolent drug offense? Maybe your talents would be better served in a less back-breaking and more skilled position, such as worksite maintenence. The same kind of task allocation/differentiation could be applied to those that got caught up in an unforgiving system (Chellie, here's looking at you). For the ones that can't or won't be reintroduced to society; have their living conditions directly tied to their production. I'm not against capital punishment if the proof is conclusive; but how many people have been granted pardons while waiting on death row simply due to technology proving thier innocence? I will err on the side of caution, and simply make them earn their keep if they want anything more than a cot, a roof, and cold gruel three times a day.
What standard of evidence will make the crime "obvious"? I'm actually all for this idea. The reason it will never work is that we have to have some criteria that qualifies the evidence as "without a doubt." Many of the men released through Innocence Project were unquestionably identified by eyewitnesses, when new evidence later proved that it was impossible for them to have committed the crime.
I'd say a combination of DNA/forensic evidence and video recording could be used in a bulk of these instant death cases theoretically. Take a case like Jared Loughner, there is enough physical, eyewitness, and video evidence to throw him into a volcano today. I don't see why we even let mental illnesses exclude violent people from capital punishment in such cases (retardation is another matter).
It wouldn't shut down the entire prison system as those convicted of violent offenses wouldn't be given this option, per the author's premise. I don't think anyone would tolerate a murderer or rapist being allowed to take 20 to the back and walk (ok, be carried) away free. Though, I do like the idea of making it supplemental to a prison sentence for the more heinous crimes like rape, child molestation, rooting for Notre Dame. The idea also raised another question in my mind: could/would the scars from such punishment become some sort of "badge of honor/see what a badass I am?" among the criminal element?
Murder and Rape are the two big corporal punishments. Gallows, Firing Range, Lethal Injection, Toxic Gas... They get to take their pick. But the whipping / lashing isn't a look how cool I am thing. It wouldn't be like when you're momma spanked you for stealing a cookie out of the cookie jar. You may or may not pass out from the crippling pain of a lashing, as well as possibly piss / shit yourself. Not to mention the actual detrimental health effects of having your back whipped.
Not by intention, but I guarantee there would be people out there who would begin to view it that way.
Remember the American kid who got spray painting cars in the Philippines? Even after Pres. Clinton tried to intervene, they lashed him with a cane. I guaran-damn-tee you he never spray painted a car again. Flog away, I say. If you don't steal shit, graffiti shit, or do those kinds of crimes, then you have nothing to worry about. Sure, people will say, "But what if you're wrongly convicted?!?!?!" The people who are against that kind of punishment are the kinds of people I don't want anywhere near me, my family, or my property. Let's be honest here, people: If you are doing the right thing all the time (like I always do my damnedest to, and you probably do too), then you won't be in the position to be wrongly convicted. I'm not going to even be questioned for those kinds of crimes, because it is absolutely the last type of thing I'd be involved in. Flog away, I say.
The vast and overwhelming majority of abusers are abuse victims who never received help. Between 75% and 85% of abuse victims go on to be abusers themselves if not treated. But when they turn 18, they magically change from tragic victim, who's abuser should be shot in the face, to horrific monster fuck head, who should themselves be shot in the face? Never speed? Never run a red light? Never breach IP restrictions on the internets? Never had someone use your wifi network for something? Never looked like someone or had a similar name to someone who was kind of an asshole? I guess if you're name is Captain Unique Von Nobodyhasmyname, and you're 7'5 with naturally green hair, I could see not being worried about this shit. But a buddy of mine has lost his career as a pilot doing international runs, because he has the same name as someone on the No Fly list. He's not a US citizen, but since international long haul pilots can't be reasonably rostered to avoid all US air space by commercial airlines - he's stuck on a third of his previous income doing bullshit. I've personally been picked up for looking like a guy who robbed a seven eleven before. I had a pretty awesome alibi - but I could have been fucked if I there wasn't all kinds of evidence I was elsewhere. I know I personally break a bunch of minor laws pretty regularly - and the various threads on this board about intarwebs piracy and driving suggest that's true for most of us. Hell I jay walked on the way to work this morning. If you have a home wifi network that you let guests use, it's worth noting that paying for an internet connection is increasingly being offered as 'proof' that you personally did everything that ever happened on that internet connection in internet piracy cases. I can't wait till they extend that logic to child pornography charges against people with poorly secured home networks. Also? All the evidence shows that beating people, doesn't fucking work. It just makes assholes feel smug and superior. It doesn't diminish crime levels and it doesn't rehabilitate people. Prison works better, although not much. Increasing the odds of getting caught is pretty much the only thing that actually stops people from committing more crimes.
No, but I live in a real small town, and I might as well be 7'5" because the average height here is around 5'3" and I'm 6'3". I don't really need to worry about that shit. I think the whole penal system in the US is a joke, anyway. It's going to take a lot more to fix it than caning people, incarcerating people or putting them to death. It seems that no matter what the punishment is, recidivism is very, very high. The only real solution is to stop people from doing the first crime, not cracking ass on them after they do.
Call me naive, but I believe the majority of prisoners are in there for reasons that were set in motion years before. I'm not saying there are convicts that know how to work the system and fleece it (like any social service), but put yourself in a position with crackhead/incarcerated parents, and tell me the odds aren't heavily against you. Granted there are success "rags to riches" stories, but if you know no other way, who's going to pull you out of the cycle? We're talking about the majority here, not the exception. The death penalty doesn't reduce violent crimes, so why would a caning?
The death penalty is used on less than 1% of all murderers. If you had a less than 1% chance of something happening, would you even consider it yourself?
No, but then it kind of detracts from the whole reason of having it in the first place. If capital punishment is more expensive and doesn't discourage criminal activity, please remind me why we kill people again?
Capital punishment is spectacularly cheap. What is expensive is the 20 years of appeals and court room delay tactics we allow these murderers to get away with.