What are yes-or-no pro-and-con arguments for and against corporal punishment of criminals?

Answer:

Answer

In other foreign countries they have tougher punishments that we view as "cruel." Yet people are a lot more likely not to steal if they know they are going to lose a hand for doing it.

Comment

Having a hand, foot or ear chopped off is mutilation and falls fairly and squarely under the heading of 'cruel and unusual punishments' which are expressly banned by the American constitution. In Britain, too, mutilation would be contrary to the English Bill of Rights (1689) and its Scottish counterpart.

'Corporal punishment' generally denotes birching, whipping, caning, etc. IF it were a patent solution to crime that would have become obvious ages ago. On the contrary, in the days when judicial whippings were used in Britain, some people showed off their marks, for example, to other gang members ... In some circles it became a kind of badge of honour, a rite of passage, a visible sign that one had 'graduated' into the world of adult crime and so on.

The notion that the whip works wonders is bizarre.

First answer by ID3434701572. Last edit by Chewd. Contributor trust: 243 [recommend contributor recommended]. Question popularity: 113 [recommend question].