An alternative to incarceration
 

A public flogging in Delaware in the early 1900s

By Peter Moskos

A crazy idea came from a dinner in New Orleans. I had cold-called (or whatever the e-mail equivalent is) a writer and his wife because I was a fan of his work and thought we had much in common. They were gracious enough to arrange a meal and treat me, without much justification, as a professional equal more than a stalker. The conversation turned to corporal punishment in public schools. They were amazed not that such a peculiarity existed in a city ripe with oddities, but that such illegal punishments were administered at the urging of and with the full consent of the students' parents.

http://chronicle.com/article/In-Defense-of-Flogging/127208/

That looks like it ought to be an interesting read - thanks for sharing this.

If the option of flogging could relieve the massive overcrowding in our prisons, especially the large numbers of incarcerated drug users, I say give 'em a choice.
I like that the author says that the public has a justifiable desire to punish the criminals. My liberal friends attempt to make me feel like a heel for actually wanting criminals to be punished instead of treating them like patients in need of treatment.
I like alternative sentencing. This is actually a morally acceptable option. Too bad it will NEVER happen.

It would probably turn into a macho "honor" to be flogged and avoid going to prison for "tough guy" drug dealers. Anything the government can do will probably be more desirable than some forms of "street justice."

I would make a distinction between drug dealers (profit driven criminals) and the drug users who are dumb/stoned enough to get caught (usually people with issues, who should be treated).

Hope you do not object to the edit, but the point I want to jump off on, is the one quoted.
As much as we debate the effectiveness of capital punishment, the drug dealers use it quite often, and to good ( for their purposes) effect.

No question, those guys no how to keep their troops in line and their enemies worried. Being caught by law enforcement is the least of their worries.

Well, I'm sure you think so but when the flogging is severe enough, you might have a different opinion. Why don't you ask Michael Fay? He was definitely certified fit to receive punishment and there was a physician on hand at each and every stroke. IIRC, Bill Clinton was worried about it enough to have to beg the Singapore govt to reduce the sentence and as a token gesture, it was changed from 6 strokes to 4 to help Bill "save face".

Therein lies the rub. No chance of sufficiently severe punishment being meted out in the west.

- Peter.

back to the original topic....

There is a faction of Christianity which believes that the only 2 options for criminals--restoration, or execution.
Restoration means repaying the loss plus a multiplier of ( I think) 4X to 7X) depending on the case.

I have a friend who promotes this, and I find it untenable.

Someone steals a substantial sum of money from you. It wipes you out and leaves you destitute. You have been forced to live without the money so why shouldn't you receive punitive plus compensatory damages? For instance, do you think Bernie Madoff's victims will ever be made whole financially? One item of interest though; Bernie does not have the opportunity to earn one thin dime while sitting in the big house. I say get the man a job and take his earnings and divide it among his victims.