Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

rockerbikie wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:I think there should be a choice between Death or Life in Prison.

I don't. If you kill 5≤ people in the first or second degree, you die. You don't get to live the rest of your life. You do not pass go. You do not collect 200 dollars.

Monsters shouldn't be treated nicely.

I agree with you but the backlash from the Human Rights and the Liberal groups would be too much. If people want him to die that much just say he wanted to die anyway.

I'm socialist and I'm fine with killing murderers. I can't speak for my fellow liberals, however.

Chowderhead wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:I think there should be a choice between Death or Life in Prison.

I don't. If you kill 5≤ people in the first or second degree, you die. You don't get to live the rest of your life. You do not pass go. You do not collect 200 dollars.

Monsters shouldn't be treated nicely.

I agree with you but the backlash from the Human Rights and the Liberal groups would be too much. If people want him to die that much just say he wanted to die anyway.

I'm socialist and I'm fine with killing murderers. I can't speak for my fellow liberals, however.

Unfortunately, most Liberals want rehabilitation is stupid. Sometimes, we have to satisfy both groups. I am willing to compromise in the issue.

rockerbikie wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:I think there should be a choice between Death or Life in Prison.

I don't. If you kill 5≤ people in the first or second degree, you die. You don't get to live the rest of your life. You do not pass go. You do not collect 200 dollars.

Monsters shouldn't be treated nicely.

I agree with you but the backlash from the Human Rights and the Liberal groups would be too much. If people want him to die that much just say he wanted to die anyway.

I'm socialist and I'm fine with killing murderers. I can't speak for my fellow liberals, however.

Unfortunately, most Liberals want rehabilitation is stupid. Sometimes, we have to satisfy both groups. I am willing to compromise in the issue.

For some with mental illness, I am fine with rehabilitation. For those without, off the Ol' Sparky.

I think this is something we can both agree on.

If i want to give a kid a smack, I will. The fact that so many people are too weak or stupid to raise their young isn't really my fault.

Testify wrote:If i want to give a kid a smack, I will. The fact that so many people are too weak or stupid to raise their young isn't really my fault.

Whoa whoa whoa.

Why would you hit your kid? Why can't you just, you know, talk it out with him, or give him a non physically painful punishment?

Chowderhead wrote:

Testify wrote:If i want to give a kid a smack, I will. The fact that so many people are too weak or stupid to raise their young isn't really my fault.

Whoa whoa whoa.

Why would you hit your kid? Why can't you just, you know, talk it out with him, or give him a non physically painful punishment?

Depends what my non-existent children have done.
If they've done wrong, they should be punished so they don't do it again. Physical punishment is an effective way of doing this.

Testify wrote:
If they've done wrong, they should be punished so they don't do it again. Physical punishment is an effective way of doing this.

Except it isn't effective. There is very little, if any credible evidence to show that spanking actually has any long term effect on alleviating problematic behaviour. There is lots of credible research illustrating that it can encourage violence and social problems.

Chongara wrote:

Testify wrote:
If they've done wrong, they should be punished so they don't do it again. Physical punishment is an effective way of doing this.

Except it isn't effective. There is very little, if any credible evidence to show that spanking actually has any long term effect on alleviating problematic behaviour. There is lots of credible research illustrating that it can encourage violence and social problems.

Studies like that refuse to draw a distinction between punishment and abuse. Shockingly, they prove that people who're abused as children grow up to be emotionally maladjusted.
Ask a random group of adults if they were hit as a child and chances are the only ones who'll say yes are the ones who were abused. The ones who were hit as part of a punishment don't particularly remember it because it's just part of growing up.
Fact is, getting children to talk about problems convinces them that their emotions are important and that they will never get in trouble for their actions. Ergo the English riots.
Know what happens when a teenager beats up his mum? A policeman comes round and talks about his feelings, then they agree to respect the child. Now, I want you to guess whether that child will grow up to be a decent member of society, or a parasitic scumbag.

I think the death penalty is fine, for certain things. Robbing a bank isn't worth death, nor is rape or drug possession/dealing. Killing a bunch of people is worth death. I don't think any amount of time in the slammer is going to teach you that what you did is wrong, and a life in prison solves nothing.

Agreeing with chowderhead that there's a threshold where the penalty should always be death.

However.... Where do you draw the line? Is killing a single person worth death? Does "A life for a life" hold any sway?

Chongara wrote:

Testify wrote:
If they've done wrong, they should be punished so they don't do it again. Physical punishment is an effective way of doing this.

Except it isn't effective. There is very little, if any credible evidence to show that spanking actually has any long term effect on alleviating problematic behaviour. There is lots of credible research illustrating that it can encourage violence and social problems.

There is a distinct difference between being spanked and being hit. As a child, I was spanked whenever I did something wrong, and if I had a lapse in judgement and did something stupid (like hitting my dad in the groin with a snowball a foot in diameter that was filled with sticks and ice), then I was given a stern talking to. I was never spanked unless I needed to be, and I turned out to be a really good person. So did my sister, for that matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As to why I hit my dad in the groin with that snowball, it was a lapse of judgement (I thought it would be funny).

This is going to be based on the UK system, since that's what I know.

Based on what I hear from the rather large critical law based school at my university there seems to be a trend among the theorists involved in such things to argue for the abolish of prisons for all but the very worst criminals and focus on true rehabilitation.
I have to say I agree with them.

For a start most rehabilitation in prison doesn't work because it's underfunded and not large enough. Considering that the majority of prisoners are in for less than 6 months and you generally can't start rehabilitation programmes until you've been in for 6 months+ then you can hardly expect it to actually succeed, especially when most repeat offences are for minor crimes.

As for the rather simplistic argument that corporal punishment would work because it leverages those animalistic instincts (which is effectively the argument in Starship Troopers), that's frankly insulting to the entire human condition. Humanity is successful because it can overcome those instincts. And the other argument is that simply put (in the case of violent crimes) you're teaching people that violence is wrong by using violence.

Capital punishment... When did the US prison population drop? What happens if you find out after you've killed them they didn't do it (as happened with some of the last British executions)?
And again, teaching people killing is wrong by killing them.

You're better off creating a situation where the benefit of following the rules is greater than the benefit of breaking them, and teaching that to people who stray. Importantly, you need to give people the chance to succeed without crime. The majority of prisoners are lower class, have poor educations, feel excluded etc (look at the reports about the London riots).

And to add, yeah there are of course going to be truly bad people who need locking up, but for the majority that's not the way to go. Obviously, given that it hasn't worked.

Henners91 wrote:Pain = something is bad. Don't do it again.

The problem is that such a reaction isn't guaranteed. Just because tries to communicate to you that something is bad, there is no guarantee that said person will agree. And if the methods are sufficiently aggressive, there may also exist a desire to persist in the undesirable behavior out of spite, or to prove the absence of power with regards to the punishing authority.

I mean, I know when I was a kid, and to some extent even today, my normal reaction to be told I can't do something is somewhere between "Watch me." and "feth you."

You're a loose cannon dogma, but you're a damn good platypus.

Except it isn't effective. There is very little, if any credible evidence to show that spanking actually has any long term effect on alleviating problematic behaviour. There is lots of credible research illustrating that it can encourage violence and social problems.

Interestingly, there is no credible alternative. Non-smacking punishments don't do anything to teach why something is wrong and most kids can easily get around it. Talking to them is pointless as they just don't care.

You're better off creating a situation where the benefit of following the rules is greater than the benefit of breaking them, and teaching that to people who stray. Importantly, you need to give people the chance to succeed without crime. The majority of prisoners are lower class, have poor educations, feel excluded etc (look at the reports about the London riots).

Then why didn't they do better at school then? Where is the hard work they should have done? There are plenty of ways for poorer kids to get into education, its zero justification. The London riots were the product of selfish, irresponsible, ferals running around and smashing up peoples livelihoods (whom did not get compensated for all the damage done)

Death penalties shouldn't come back until there is no other way to stop overcrowding. In the meantime...turn criminals into slave labour.

Mr Hyena wrote:
Then why didn't they do better at school then? Where is the hard work they should have done? There are plenty of ways for poorer kids to get into education, its zero justification. The London riots were the product of selfish, irresponsible, ferals running around and smashing up peoples livelihoods (whom did not get compensated for all the damage done)

Why is it that when taken as a whole lower class people do so much worse than middle or upper class people in a whole range of areas from life expectancy to education. Obviously its because they simply aren't trying hard enough the damn scrounging layabouts. There are a whole range of deeply rooted social problems which are often difficult to identify which lead to things like the riots. Simply calling the rioters 'feral' does absolutely no one any good; complex problems need complex answers not tabloid headlines.

Why would you hit your kid? Why can't you just, you know, talk it out with him, or give him a non physically painful punishment?

If he is too young to understand why he shouldn't have done what he has, especially if it could result in his death or serious injury. Mild and appropriate corporal punishment is completely justifiable at least until the child is old enough to genuinely understand what they have done is wrong.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Except it isn't effective. There is very little, if any credible evidence to show that spanking actually has any long term effect on alleviating problematic behaviour. There is lots of credible research illustrating that it can encourage violence and social problems.

Interestingly, there is no credible alternative. Non-smacking punishments don't do anything to teach why something is wrong and most kids can easily get around it. Talking to them is pointless as they just don't care.

Except there is; corporeal punishment has been forbidden in Sweden for over fifty years, yet us Swedes seem to have no issue raising our kids. Meanwhile in England, where corporeal punishment is allowed, there's riots. Seems as if it isn't working very well, eh?

Mr Hyena wrote:

You're better off creating a situation where the benefit of following the rules is greater than the benefit of breaking them, and teaching that to people who stray. Importantly, you need to give people the chance to succeed without crime. The majority of prisoners are lower class, have poor educations, feel excluded etc (look at the reports about the London riots).

Then why didn't they do better at school then? Where is the hard work they should have done? There are plenty of ways for poorer kids to get into education, its zero justification. The London riots were the product of selfish, irresponsible, ferals running around and smashing up peoples livelihoods (whom did not get compensated for all the damage done)

Death penalties shouldn't come back until there is no other way to stop overcrowding. In the meantime...turn criminals into slave labour.

You frighten me. This has to be among the most narrow-minded, hateful nonsense I've seen in quite a while. "Ferals"? "Why didn't they do better in school?"? Yeah, it's obviously THEIR fault 100% of the time. Domestic abuse, poor living conditions and similar factors don't matter, right?!

BLAME THE VICTIM!!

That said, I agree that rioting and looting is contraproductive, but let's not pretend that it exists because these people are "ferals" or somehow worse than other people. That way lies Godwin's Law...

Simply calling the rioters 'feral' does absolutely no one any good; complex problems need complex answers not tabloid headlines.

'Complex' answers? Like how prison inmates in the UK get Sky TV in their cells?. Or do you mean giving them freebies like benefits?

There is a whole variety of ways in which underprivileged people can improve their own situation, I did it myself. Why can't others?

Except there is; corporeal punishment has been forbidden in Sweden for over fifty years, yet us Swedes seem to have no issue raising our kids. Meanwhile in England, where corporeal punishment is allowed, there's riots. Seems as if it isn't working very well, eh?

Sweden is a completely different place. The idea of comparing the two is laughable. Clearly Sweden has its own problems, otherwise it would be doing better than all the riot countries (US, UK, France etc).

You frighten me. This has to be among the most narrow-minded, hateful nonsense I've seen in quite a while. "Ferals"? "Why didn't they do better in school?"? Yeah, it's obviously THEIR fault 100% of the time. Domestic abuse, poor living conditions and similar factors don't matter, right?!

So we're passing the blame now? When do we get to call a spade, a spade? Anything can happen, but more often than not...its not the fault of the state. That kind of talk is used only by benefits claimers and sue-happy people.

Mr Hyena wrote:
'Complex' answers? Like how prison inmates in the UK get Sky TV in their cells?. Or do you mean giving them freebies like benefits?

There is a whole variety of ways in which underprivileged people can improve their own situation, I did it myself. Why can't others?

Well done for completely missing the point. Its also not the states fault, it is largely due to societal problems such as large income disparities, broken homes, teenage pregnancies and all the usual suspects that never seem to have anything done about them.

I also 'bettered' myself but that involved not an inconsiderable amount of luck; if I wasn't so lucky I would either be unemployed or working in some dead end job for a pittance, resulting in a substantially bleaker outlook for myself and my family. The evidence is clear that poor people have a lot harder, and usually shorter, lives than the affluent, don't even pretend that this is due to laziness or that they like it.

Thats a topic for another thread though.

I am all for Corporal Punishment for minor crimes, speeding, anti-social, drunk and disorderly should be a day in the stocks or something similar. Maybe a three strike system working towards prison; first offence stocks, second a flogging and third offence prison.

As for Capital Punishment treason, crimes against humanity and serial murderers.

Mr Hyena wrote:
Sweden is a completely different place. The idea of comparing the two is laughable. Clearly Sweden has its own problems, otherwise it would be doing better than all the riot countries (US, UK, France etc).

You claimed that there's no viable alternative to corporeal punishment, I proved you wrong. You can't just handwave that away by claiming it's not comparable, because in this case it is.

Also, all considered, Sweden got through the worst of this recession (assuming there's not worse to come) pretty fine, unlike certain other countries on that list (and before someone plays the "you're biased!" card, Sweden is far from perfect, but we're ahead in this particular instance).

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:
Sweden is a completely different place. The idea of comparing the two is laughable. Clearly Sweden has its own problems, otherwise it would be doing better than all the riot countries (US, UK, France etc).

You claimed that there's no viable alternative to corporeal punishment, I proved you wrong. You can't just handwave that away by claiming it's not comparable, because in this case it is.

Also, all considered, Sweden got through the worst of this recession (assuming there's not worse to come) pretty fine, unlike certain other countries on that list (and before someone plays the "you're biased!" card, Sweden is far from perfect, but we're ahead in this particular instance).

Sweden and the UK cannot be fairly compared. When one is surrounded by Swedish women, one cannot help but be happy and content.


UK lasses, OTOH......

The overcrowding of prisons is a problem in the US because of the war on drugs mainly. You have people getting arrested for such a petty crime and they can spend years in jail for it.

Now add in to the problem that prisons in the US are being switched over to private companies. these companies make money based on the number of people in prison.

To make more money through privatizing prisons, they pay a prisoner slave wages to do clerical jobs for the government or other company.

This guy is a ACLU lawyer who made a good video about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10hFcVIFt2E&feature=plcp&context=C4e52f5eVDvjVQa1PpcFP4JJ-Ym6Gjnx1SqsdTnslHX6fOyhI9FS8%3D

Going back to corporeal punishment and those that insist that just talking it out always works, I tend to look at my life experiences more than supposed research, at least ever so often. Corporal punishment is one of those times. I got the swats growing up, and my friends did too. We grew up pretty well adjusted. On the other hand, I've got relatives and friends who choose not to lay a finger on their child. Suffice to say their children are spiteful little urchins that laugh at their parents when they try to pull the "stern talk".

I'm open to the idea that it's coming from somewhere else, but said people are a mix of living conditions. Some rich, some poor, some divorced, some still married. Hardly enough evidence to say "screw what you know, this is the truth as I've experienced", but I'm not about to discard some possibly insightful experiences.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Except there is; corporeal punishment has been forbidden in Sweden for over fifty years, yet us Swedes seem to have no issue raising our kids. Meanwhile in England, where corporeal punishment is allowed, there's riots. Seems as if it isn't working very well, eh?

Corporal Punishment is not allowed here. And I'd say that Sweden is definitely having problems with the raising of children, considering how many of them seem to enjoy making and consuming fascist Black Metal.

Albatross wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Except there is; corporeal punishment has been forbidden in Sweden for over fifty years, yet us Swedes seem to have no issue raising our kids. Meanwhile in England, where corporeal punishment is allowed, there's riots. Seems as if it isn't working very well, eh?

Corporal Punishment is not allowed here. And I'd say that Sweden is definitely having problems with the raising of children, considering how many of them seem to enjoy making and consuming fascist Black Metal.

Wikipedia says it is, although that could obviously be wrong. My apologies if that's the case, however my point still stands; corporeal punishment isn't needed.

Not sure how serious you are about the Black Metal thing, before Metal was ruining the youth it was rock'n'roll and before that something else.

Lads, let's not get into a pissing contest over this. Walrus, corporal punishment is illegal here AFAIK, but I think people make too big a deal over it in both ways. Corporal punishment is not the magic cure all, consistent parenting with clear boundaries and rewards and sanctions are. I was physically punished as a kid, and I am not violent at all.
I am a teacher, and if the state told me I had to start physically reprimanding other people's children, I would quit.

However, I do think that in the UK at least there is a culture of disrespect towards authority of all kinds. I have been attacked during the course of my work as a teacher. Not a big deal (teenage boys are never as strong as they look- limited muscle density) but quite stressful and unacceptable. The only punishment we seem to be able to lade out is exclusion from school for a couple of weeks, which is really no punishment at all for a kid who doesn't want to go in the first place. The police, likewise, are not very authoritarian here, so there are no clear consequences to any action. Is this a reason to bring back corporal punishment? I'm not so sure. It seems like wishful quick fix thinking. It seems to me a greater problem in the UK is classism. It's bloody obvious to me that your school system reinforces the class stereotypes from day one, and that you've got a deeply divided society. To get people to engage and care, they've got to have something to lose. Consider how hopeless it is for the average long term benefit claimant with a poor education at the moment. You can blame them all you want, but most of them will not have had much encouragement in school from parents, possibly no place to study, and perhaps they were forced to take a job early rather than study. I'm not saying that individuals don't have a role to play- obviously some can drag themselves out of this sort of situation. But a rational assessment of humanity must take into account that most people are flawed and will feth up.

I do think there are serious problems in the UK, more so than in Ireland. I think we are headed the same way, but we are about 10 years behind you. I don't know what the solution is, but I think it will be more complex than teachers and policemen smacking kids.

The problem with corpral punishment is, well, talk to anyone over the age of about 50 in the UK and they will tell you about the violent psycopath of a teacher they will have had. It seems almost everyone had one who was just a bully who was aloud to be violent.

I was samcked by my parants as a child and it did me no harm, however it was exteamley rare (3 times i remember) and the ultimat punishment. However it can very easerly drop in to abuse. Everyone knows the parants who have no impuls control and will smack as first punishment. Equaly though some of the alternatives can be just as bad. People will find a way to be abusive. Sending a child to bed with no food (so not letting them eat for 18hours) or ignoring the child for hours on end, long after the child has forgoten what they did.

What i'm saying is for children schools should not be aloud to use corpral punishment, too often it was used as an alternative to being a good teacher, for parants, its a much more gray area.

And the arguments that people give for corparal , and capital, punishment are not born out by fact. Crime rates have been going down year after year and school grades up since the 80's, both in the UK and the US. FYI I don't subscribe to the idea exams are getting easyer. I think teaching is getting better and students are working harder as more is at stake. You can't get a job without good exams nowadays.

Da Boss wrote:
However, I do think that in the UK at least there is a culture of disrespect towards authority of all kinds.

Its all Sid Vicious' fault.