Would SEVERE torture against criminals decrease crime?

[StageLeft]

I know that capital punishment in no way affects crime rates in that it doesn't scare criminals away from their activities. I also know that myself and the vast majority of the population would never endorse our legal system giving people torture sentences because its barbaric.

But, I wonder...if severe crimes carried with them incredible torture sentences wouldn't it lower crime rates? I think it would only take one person saying how horrible their pain was to scare off some potential evil-doers.

 

[jsbush]

It would work, but would be inhuman. That's why they don't use it. I guess I don't know. They should just make more movies of people in jail and make it really horrible it will scare some people.

 

[AndyHui]

As a deterrent? Probably...but that's really quite nasty, and probably a contravention of human rights, even if they ARE criminals.

An effective method in Asian societies is public shamings...that seems to work fairly well where "face" is very important.

 

[desy]

No it wouldn't
They are lots of coutries in this world where you can get a caining and they Wow, surprise , still have crime.
Sorry its a part of human nature.

 

[hendon]

You'll be surprised that caning is a huge deterrent, especially if it's publicized.

 

[SmiZ]

It does in middle eastern countries. I worked with a guy from OMAN and he said that their policy of cutting off the hand of those that stole had all but eliminated that crime from his country. He said it is common for shop owners to leave their shops open while they are gone with no fear of anything being taken.

A major drawback to this is mistakes, or someone being framed. If someone is wrongly put in jail, it is easy to open the cell once the mistake is realized. They lost their freedom for a time, but life goes on. Someone loses a hand when they shouldn't have, and they're pretty much stuck with "lefty" for the rest of their life.

 

[guyver01]

Yeah.. caning works well..

look at that american kid a few years ago who was cained in singapore because he stole a car or something..

now tourism has decreased dramatically!

 

[StageLeft]

desy

I am not talking about a caning - i'm talking about the things like hand removal.

I think why public shaming may work in other countries is because society is different. I doubt it would carry such an effect here.

 

[hendon]

That's rubbish...
tourism has not decreased dramatically there...

 

[AndyHui]

He vandalised the car...he did not steal it.

Removal of hands is pretty permanent....you'd wan't to be very sure the person was guilty before going ahead.

 

[Ornery]

Maybe the parents ought to be held more responsible for what their offspring do. And what about compensation for victims? Make the SOBs pay and pay for their crimes. And if they can't pay, go after the parents or family or something.

Actually, an eye for an eye doesn't sound bad. I think I've heard that it's part of the law in parts of the Mid East or Iraq and the victim's family gets the final say in whether the punishment is carried out or not.

 

[SuperSix]

Wanna scare people about prison?

Bring back chain gangs, put them to work cleaning roads, buildings, etc..

 

[AndrewR]

Worth a shot.

 

[Dedpuhl]

The problem is the punishments are not enforced in a timely manner.


There are so many people on death row rotting away. If the U.S. would start killing these leeches to society, then people would take notice and think twice.
I say that if DNA evidence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone committed a crime that is a candidate for the death penalty, then the person should die IMMEDIATELY.

 

[vi edit]

Yes and no. But it really depends upon which crimes you are talking about. Many homicides involve drugs/alcohol, and are "heat of the moment" so to speak. The person committing the crime has their logic impaired by the drug/alcohol and the anger doesn't help much either. At that point in time they aren't concerned about the repercussions that may be facing.

As far as lower crimes such as theft, drug possesion, ect, I don't think that lobbing off an appendege will help things much. I don't know if you'll have less criminals, I think you'll just have smarter criminals.

Also, if you did lob off somebodies hand, and it was later found that they were innocent, can you imagine the lawsuits that would follow? I think all this does is increase the number of handicapped workers filing for social security and increasing the unemployement rate.

I think that SuperSix has the right idea. Make prisions much less appealing. Make an inmate pay for their stay and work for their food and priveledges. If I want to eat, I have to work and pay for my food. I don't see why the same doesn't apply to an imate.

 

[Jmman]

Most assuredly the systems you are talking about in the Mideast are a deterrent to crime. Unfortunately, they wouldn't work here. Look at the thread on litigation reform and personal responsibilty. There are so many inmate lawsuits now, it is not even funny. Something like 50k lawsuits yearly, for things as stupid as being made to listen to country music. How many would we have if we brought back chain gangs? A million lawsuits a year?

 

[BoberFett]

Absolutely not.

Prison isn't a nice place to go, yet people continue to commit crimes.

I'm convinced that punishment, to any degree, is not a deterrant. I support long prison sentences because I view prison as a place to keep the criminal element away from society. When a person has committed a crime and demonstrated that they are unwilling to live by the rules society has set forth, they forfeit the right to enjoy the freedoms and benefits that society provides. That's it. What benefit does harming the criminal further have? Revenge?

For these reasons, I've actually had to reconsider my stance on the death penalty. I used to be 100% for the death penalty in cases of murder or other heinous crimes against persons (rape, etc) but I'm rethinking it. Perhaps a life sentence with no chance of parole is all that's needed.

 

[classy]

Super Six has the right idea. We need to make them do hard labor. But torture no. Its inhumane, this is not China.

 

[classy]

Bober your having a possible change of heart? No wonder we're having all this crazy weather here in NJ. No, but in all seriousness you might be right.

 

[StageLeft]

Bobber, thats certainly something to consider.

I agree with below that criminals should be made to do some work - of course what do you do if they don't agree to work for their room and board? I suppose you could give the working criminals better condtions - ie, better food and bigger rooms...

Nova scotia is thinking of charing drunk drivers $100 per night they spend in jail.

 

[SuperTool]

You are all savages. If you like torture, go live in some third world country.

 

[AndrewR]

While hard labor and chain gangs are a nice idea, the state can expect a goodly number of lawsuits and protests over such practices. Alabama tried it a few years ago but has since re-abandoned the concept.

 

[Adul]

They brought back chain gangs here in AZ. Sherif Joe Arpio's idea. he also have the inmates where pink underwear, take away TTV privilages, serves them bolognia sandwhiches for meals, taken away their cofee, and varies other things.

 

[thebestMAX]

<<Wanna scare people about prison?

Bring back chain gangs, put them to work cleaning roads, buildings, etc..>>

I agree. We need prisons that are punishment, not country clubs for TV fanatics and bodybuilding. No torture but a place people would not want to be.

Dont give me the liberal bleeding heart excuse that TV and body building keeps prisoners well behaved either.

 

[vi edit]

<< While hard labor and chain gangs are a nice idea, the state can expect a goodly number of lawsuits and protests over such practices. Alabama tried it a few years ago but has since re-abandoned the concept. >>



God forbid you have to work to earn your keep! :| :|