A question for Patrick and some others.

[AlanC]

I was just reading through the thread on the Florida teens who beat a girl for internet posts they didn't like.

I didn't want to take that one off topic but some of the responses did raise a question in my mind and I thought it might be a good discussion.

Patrick, you suggested in one of the posts that the offenders in this situation would be better off if they were cained as a part of their punishment. You also seemed to be saying that if they did not reform, and pay proper restitution, they should be cained again until their behavior became more acceptable to society.

What popped into my head is this question, is caining a form of torture? From what I read of the practice as its used in China and some other places, the process of caining inflects severe pain and considerable physical, though mostly temporary, physical damage in the form of highly painful welts and in some cases severe scars.

Now I know that you have brought this idea forward in other threads as well that caining would be an effective and viable method of child correction instead of expensive incarceration.

The truth here is that I wholeheartedly agree with you. But, how do you see this fitting into the whole torture discussion. If caining is torture and we are advocating its use on our children, can it also be used on prisoners? If it can be used to discipline a child, could it be used to say .. interrogate or even punish uncooperative prisoners?

I'm not trying to embarass you, I only saw this as an apparent paradox and wanted to discuss it.

[Deadshot]

Can you give me an example, anyone, where physical punishment is used to curtale the actions/attitude of an adult who does something wrong?

I am not speaking of spanking a child. I am speaking of an occasion when physical punishment "X" is preformed on another adult, here in the USA, that is sanctioned by the Government, to change that adults behavior?

I do not think you will find one. I do not think caining will be allowed or would be very effective.

[PatrickHenry]

So speaks a member of the organizations fleecing us for "law enforcement" and "lawful imprisonment," Deadshot.

AlanC, I see your point in your concern that we not torture people.

The torture I have been opposed to is torture to extract information that may (or may not!) be held by "suspects."

And in fact, if torture were a method of punishment I would oppose that too.

But I see caning as actually a LESS SEVERE punishment than lengthy incarceration. The convicted criminal is whipped and released. They are returned to their families and communities to "live down" their previous behavior. Does anyone think that imprisonment is not torturously painful?

[NDNdancer]

Given law enforcement's predilection of dealing out "justice" in less then a fair manner to anyone with skin color other then white, I say "HELL NO".

Who would be the caner delving out this punishment? How do you train such people? How do you determine "hard enough" vs. "beating". What kind of person would apply for this kind of position?

And finally, are you guys out of your minds? *L*

[PatrickHenry]

OK...just lock up the Indians...

It did Geronimo a world of good.

(That was irony)

[potter]

So speaks a member of the organizations fleecing us for "law enforcement" and "lawful imprisonment," Deadshot.

AlanC, I see your point in your concern that we not torture people.

The torture I have been opposed to is torture to extract information that may (or may not!) be held by "suspects."

And in fact, if torture were a method of punishment I would oppose that too.

But I see caning as actually a LESS SEVERE punishment than lengthy incarceration. The convicted criminal is whipped and released. They are returned to their families and communities to "live down" their previous behavior. Does anyone think that imprisonment is not torturously painful?


How about putting them on the rack?

Do we really want to go there?

[Wndrtch]

The convicted criminal is whipped and released. They are returned to their families and communities to "live down" their previous behavior.

Sorry Pat.

If I can't beat a terrorist to get information, you can't beat a child to correct their behavior. You want to loosen-up, then maybe we could talk.
:thumbsup:

[AlanC]

AlanC, I see your point in your concern that we not torture people.

The torture I have been opposed to is torture to extract information that may (or may not!) be held by "suspects."

And in fact, if torture were a method of punishment I would oppose that too.

But I see caning as actually a LESS SEVERE punishment than lengthy incarceration. The convicted criminal is whipped and released. They are returned to their families and communities to "live down" their previous behavior. Does anyone think that imprisonment is not torturously painful?

Patrick, torture is an act, a method if you will. What it is used for is a policy, a decision or an application of the method.

We used to have a sign on the wall that said "When there was a woodshed behind every house, most cases of juvenile delequency were settled out of court."

As I said, I agree that some form of caining and restitution would make better citizens and cost far less in both the short term and the long run.

But I would not go so far as to say that any restriction of freedom amounts to torture. I understand your point, but if we define even incarceration as torture, don't we marginalize torture to the extent that it can't be banned?

Do you see caining as being possible under current law regarding torture? I would think that it would conflict. And if we have to modify those laws to allow it, how would that be done?

[PatrickHenry]

It's all in the perception AlanC.

Locking someone in a cage isn't perceived as torture because we have been instructed all our lives to think that way.

Beating is called torture for the same reason. It's how our minds have been manipulated.

Look, all we have is our lives...our time on this earth. To be forced to endure it behind bars is the ultimate deprivation.

The rack, potter? That was a cheap shot...

[AlanC]

Given law enforcement's predilection of dealing out "justice" in less then a fair manner to anyone with skin color other then white, I say "HELL NO".

Who would be the caner delving out this punishment? How do you train such people? How do you determine "hard enough" vs. "beating". What kind of person would apply for this kind of position?

And finally, are you guys out of your minds? *L*

Out of our minds? We continue in these forums and you even have to ask that question? Of course we are! :dork:

But seriously, no one is suggesting the legitimzation of "street justice." Do you remember the row that occured a few years ago when a teen ager was caught with drugs I beleive and I think it was in Singapore, but I can't be sure.

The crux of it was that there was outrage here because under local law, he was tried and sentenced to caining instead of incarceration. I also don't remember the number of lashes, but I think it was between 5 and 8. As it is codified in their law, it was only meted out after a trial and sentence. He recieved his punishment and was sent home, and everyone raised some hue and cry over how barbaric it was.

Knowing the condition of their jails, I would have taken the caining in a heart beat to avoid a sentence to jail of any period of time.

[AlanC]

It's all in the perception AlanC.

Locking someone in a cage isn't perceived as torture because we have been instructed all our lives to think that way.

Beating is called torture for the same reason. It's how our minds have been manipulated.

Look, all we have is our lives...our time on this earth. To be forced to endure it behind bars is the ultimate deprivation.

The rack, potter? That was a cheap shot...

But that perception is what would probably stand in its way. First off, I do think that our current law and its interpretation would not allow caining as a sentence for anyone, much less a juvenile.

Being the conservative that I am, I would prefer that the Feds stay out of it and let the states decide for themselves these kinds of issures. I think it would be a given that it would never see the light of day in say, California or Vermont. But some places might see it as an asnwer to a problem that we do not now do a good job of addressing.

[PatrickHenry]

But that perception is what would probably stand in its way. First off, I do think that our current law and its interpretation would not allow caining as a sentence for anyone, much less a juvenile.

Being the conservative that I am, I would prefer that the Feds stay out of it and let the states decide for themselves these kinds of issures. I think it would be a given that it would never see the light of day in say, California or Vermont. But some places might see it as an asnwer to a problem that we do not now do a good job of addressing.

Agreed that if it were not prevented by our federal overlords, some of our states might try it.

I think careful studies of the results would send our society in the direction we need to go. If caning was ineffective and imprisonment brought better results, then I would stand corrected.

IMHO, what we are doing now isn't working very well and we need to try some new approaches. :embarrased:

[AlanC]

Agreed that if it were not prevented by our federal overlords, some of our states might try it.

I think careful studies of the results would send our society in the direction we need to go. If caning was ineffective and imprisonment brought better results, then I would stand corrected.

IMHO, what we are doing now isn't working very well and we need to try some new approaches. :embarrased:


Well on that we agree completely. You know, it used to be that the values that were taught in the home, were reinforced by the churches, refined by the schools and enforced by the courts.

What we do today is just a mess. There is no longer any such societal consistency and as could be seen in the case of the girls, the only adult mentioned was trying to excuse the deplorable actions of the kids. Its not a pretty picture.

[NDNdancer]

Out of our minds? We continue in these forums and you even have to ask that question? Of course we are! :dork:

But seriously, no one is suggesting the legitimzation of "street justice." Do you remember the row that occured a few years ago when a teen ager was caught with drugs I beleive and I think it was in Singapore, but I can't be sure.

The crux of it was that there was outrage here because under local law, he was tried and sentenced to caining instead of incarceration. I also don't remember the number of lashes, but I think it was between 5 and 8. As it is codified in their law, it was only meted out after a trial and sentence. He recieved his punishment and was sent home, and everyone raised some hue and cry over how barbaric it was.

Knowing the condition of their jails, I would have taken the caining in a heart beat to avoid a sentence to jail of any period of time.

The problem with the suggestion is taking an acceptable practice of another culture and trying to use it given the culture here. It wouldn't work given the system in place here in the US. It would only set up another form of abuse.

Now, in my culture we have an entirely different way of disciplining children and adults. Unfortunately, that's been fractured by the residential/boarding school experience and we now have rampant family violence to deal with. The Christian boarding school form of discipline was, by all legal definitions, torture and murder. Those who survived came back to wreak havoc in our communities.

The system that's set up now in the US, incarceration, doesn't work. It's become a huge business, and outsourced like so many other segments of the culture and needs serious reform.

I believe there are some very smart, intelligent, caring, loving people in the US who could dismantle the system in place now and build a new one that achieves the overall goals.

Physical abuse never works, never has, and never will.

Treating drug addiction as criminal is as goofy as treating cancer patients as criminal when they use medical marijuana to alleviate their symptoms. Drug addicts are using drugs to alleviate their spiritual, mental and psychic ailments. We use bandaids for the symptoms without ever trying to cure the cause.

[PatrickHenry]

There is a constitutional proscription on "cruel and unusual punishment."

How that term is defined is the basis for this argument.

Is it cruel to hold a prisoner behind bars in a notorious enviroment of years of his life?

Yes, but not unusual.

Is it unusual to beat a convicted criminal's body and then release him to his family and a work life?

Yes, but not cruel, IMHO.

Please understand that it would take careful study to discover the benefits and drawbacks of such a punishment regime.

It might be best for those who are younger and more correctible.

It may be unfruitful for those who are hardened criminals.

I would not think it applicable to those who have committed "heinous crimes."

But it's worth a try...

[brien]

If caning is a form of punishment and not torture, perhaps we could cane captured terrorists once we have a trial to determine they are terrorists. Once it is established someone is operating as a terrorist, and it is determined they are operating outside, and against, international law, then perhaps as a fitting punishment, according to some, could we cane them without the worry of the torture label? Very good question.

[PatrickHenry]

Physical abuse never works, never has, and never will. You are quite mistaken.

Physical methods of punishment have been used for thousands of years. Very effective.

[4Reaganomics]

When I attempt to understand cruel and unusual punishment, I look at the timeframe in which our framers wrote the constitution. If it was widely acceptable at that point then clearly it was seen as fit and legal for society in the years that were to follow in this great nation

[NDNdancer]

I find it such a strange twist in a Christian country that whipping children is seen as an acceptable punishment. I guess it explains the abusive nature of the Christian churches.

[NDNdancer]

You are quite mistaken.

Physical methods of punishment have been used for thousands of years. Very effective.

Can you show me some links that shows this please PH?

[AlanC]

Kyi Yo,

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I learned somewhere that it was a tribal practice of at least some Native Americans to allow a small child crawling towards a camp fire to do what it was going to do. Knowing that as soon as the child got close enough to feel the heat, it would get slightly burned but learn forever that fire is dangerous.

Is that true? And, if it is, doesn't that flow into this discussion? Pain can and does modify behavior. We learn through pain what not to do in many cases. Now I don't advocate caining as a general practice. In fact that is part of the failure of our system, thinking that one approach to every individual will always yield the same results.

But some form of caining might be the single thing that corrects a first time offender and makes enough of an impression to change a life. If that is possible, shouldn't it be at least considered?

[PatrickHenry]

I find it such a strange twist in a Christian country that whipping children is seen as an acceptable punishment. I guess it explains the abusive nature of the Christian churches.You accuse what you don't understand.

Shall I go into AmerIndian atrocities and claim that is YOUR legacy?

Or shall we have a civilized debate and recognize the strengths as well as the weaknesses of our opponent's ethnic chums?

Regarding the effectiveness of corporal punishment OF ADULTS, I am not aware of controlled studies on the subject, but I note that it has been a preferred method by social groups for countless generations.

I won't argue beating children by parents, since I think there are better methods. I am aware of the injustice of the United Sates toward Indian children and the beatings they endured in "Indian schools." That would not be a useful referent in this debate, IMHO.

[NDNdancer]

Kyi Yo,

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I learned somewhere that it was a tribal practice of at least some Native Americans to allow a small child crawling towards a camp fire to do what it was going to do. Knowing that as soon as the child got close enough to feel the heat, it would get slightly burned but learn forever that fire is dangerous.

Is that true? And, if it is, doesn't that flow into this discussion? Pain can and does modify behavior. We learn through pain what not to do in many cases. Now I don't advocate caining as a general practice. In fact that is part of the failure of our system, thinking that one approach to every individual will always yield the same results.

But some form of caining might be the single thing that corrects a first time offender and makes enough of an impression to change a life. If that is possible, shouldn't it be at least considered?

It's much different when a baby approaches a fire and feels the increasing heat and decides through the process that fire can harm, then having someone they love or care about take a burning stick and burning them with it. Using pain as a behavioural modification method teaches that it's acceptable to hurt other people to get them to behave. It's not teaching and learning, it's abuse that leaves harmful impacts on the person it's being done to.

I've dealt with a bunch of kids who came through the juvenile justice system. Rather then find out why they drank, used drugs, stole or were violent, the system only reinforced their reasons for doing such things. Once they were given an environment where they could learn the consequences, as well as explored the consequences of what had been done to them, given the choice, they changed their behaviour.

People continually underestimate the intelligence and resilience of children to learn about love and caring even after they've suffered horrible abuse. I never was. It only reinforced what I know about kids. There are no bad kids, their's only bad situations they had to grow up in. When you change the environment, change how you deal with them, teach them right from wrong in a loving caring way that honors their innate intelligence and humanity, they change.

Just delving into child and developmental psychology and reading about the horrors of previous institutions who used pain as a behavioural modification tool, shows that pain only creates more pain. As people become immune, their tolerance for pain becomes higher and higher, more and more pain must be used to attain the same result. Until, ultimately, it doesn't work any longer. Not to mention the psychological damage it does to those who inflict the pain.

[potter]

Well said Kyi Yo

[NDNdancer]

You accuse what you don't understand.

Shall I go into AmerIndian atrocities and claim that is YOUR legacy?

Or shall we have a civilized debate and recognize the strengths as well as the weaknesses of our opponent's ethnic chums?

Regarding the effectiveness of corporal punishment OF ADULTS, I am not aware of controlled studies on the subject, but I note that it has been a preferred method by social groups for countless generations.

I won't argue beating children by parents, since I think there are better methods. I am aware of the injustice of the United Sates toward Indian children and the beatings they endured in "Indian schools." That would not be a useful referent in this debate, IMHO.

I know alot about the Christian-run boarding schools and residential schools and it's impacts on my community. I can say without question that those who survived (~50%) of the children, came back to the reserves and reservations to "teach what they learned". The attrocities perpetrated on them became their way of life and it has fractured our family structures to this day. We are only now beginning to get a handle on the "reasons" and are now tackling the solutions.

I brought it up because the discussion was talking about juveniles as well as adults and suggesting using caning as a behavioural modification technique in law enforcement. It was an example of what doesn't work.

You'd have to understand the utter devastation Christianity did to Indigenous Peoples all over the world in order to really understand what I'm talking about. It's always puzzled me and puzzled my ancestors before me given the teachings and words of it's founder, Jesus Christ. We never really understood the disconnect between the words of it's greatest prophet and the actions of his believers. I still don't understand it.

I hope that clarifies my somewhat trite statement.

Do you have any proof to offer for your assertion that physical punishment that includes pain has been used and is successful? I'm really interested because in all of my research, I've only seen the opposite to be true.

[AlanC]

It's much different when a baby approaches a fire and feels the increasing heat and decides through the process that fire can harm, then having someone they love or care about take a burning stick and burning them with it. Using pain as a behavioural modification method teaches that it's acceptable to hurt other people to get them to behave. It's not teaching and learning, it's abuse that leaves harmful impacts on the person it's being done to.

I've dealt with a bunch of kids who came through the juvenile justice system. Rather then find out why they drank, used drugs, stole or were violent, the system only reinforced their reasons for doing such things. Once they were given an environment where they could learn the consequences, as well as explored the consequences of what had been done to them, given the choice, they changed their behaviour.

People continually underestimate the intelligence and resilience of children to learn about love and caring even after they've suffered horrible abuse. I never was. It only reinforced what I know about kids. There are no bad kids, their's only bad situations they had to grow up in. When you change the environment, change how you deal with them, teach them right from wrong in a loving caring way that honors their innate intelligence and humanity, they change.

Just delving into child and developmental psychology and reading about the horrors of previous institutions who used pain as a behavioural modification tool, shows that pain only creates more pain. As people become immune, their tolerance for pain becomes higher and higher, more and more pain must be used to attain the same result. Until, ultimately, it doesn't work any longer. Not to mention the psychological damage it does to those who inflict the pain.

I agree with everything you have said here. I also agree that multiple uses of pain are often counterproductive. But for many a first time experience can affect a life altering behavior pattern. Obviously anything that fails once will continue to fail. And I could not agree more that our entire juvenile justice system is a morass of failure.

And while most kids can be brought to a better place if they are removed from their abusive surroundings, the older they are, the harder it will be to reach them. Once a teen has figured out that he can make a living selling drugs, the odds of finding a way to reach them is very remote.

And governments and systems, don't provide the type of care you are talking about. Even when they try, they fail because they cannot or do not properly monitor and screen the families they place kids with. Sorry for the rant, but its a long term frustration of mine.

[NDNdancer]

I agree with everything you have said here. I also agree that multiple uses of pain are often counterproductive. But for many a first time experience can affect a life altering behavior pattern.

The problem is that for 99.99% of those who would be "sentenced" to a caning, it wouldn't be their first time experience with pain. For them, it would be "more of the same".

[AlanC]

The problem is that for 99.99% of those who would be "sentenced" to a caning, it wouldn't be their first time experience with pain. For them, it would be "more of the same".


Those are not the ones I would see it applied to either for all the same reasons. I don't see it as something to be used frivolously, but rather in a considered manner that was seen as keeping the child out of the system and encouraging better behavior. Its only an idea and one born of the utter failure we have seen from institutionalizing our children.

I will admit too that there are many instances when I would rather see parents punished in that way than their kids. But that is a whole different discussion.

[NDNdancer]

Those are not the ones I would see it applied to either for all the same reasons. I don't see it as something to be used frivolously, but rather in a considered manner that was seen as keeping the child out of the system and encouraging better behavior. Its only an idea and one born of the utter failure we have seen from institutionalizing our children.

I will admit too that there are many instances when I would rather see parents punished in that way than their kids. But that is a whole different discussion.

But how would you know? Kids, or even adults who have been abused, often don't even KNOW or recognize it as abuse. If they do, they are often too afraid to admit it or report it because abuse can only continue in situations where it's hidden.

They are often scared to death to reveal it because they've been told, and believe, that they will be killed or other family members will be harmed. Just witness spousal abuse and the powerful reasons many men and women caught up in that situation DON't tell.

It sounds good in theory, but in practice, I believe it would add "insult to injury" to many children or adults who are already in danger within their own homes.

[AlanC]

But how would you know? Kids, or even adults who have been abused, often don't even KNOW or recognize it as abuse. If they do, they are often too afraid to admit it or report it because abuse can only continue in situations where it's hidden.

They are often scared to death to reveal it because they've been told, and believe, that they will be killed or other family members will be harmed. Just witness spousal abuse and the powerful reasons many men and women caught up in that situation DON't tell.

It sounds good in theory, but in practice, I believe it would add "insult to injury" to many children or adults who are already in danger within their own homes.

Physical and mental abuse are things that kids are reluctant to talk about, true. But it is also true that such abuse is fairly easy to spot and is pretty easy to determine in the course of complaint, investigation and trial or adjudication process. By the time any judge sentences a kid, particularly a teenager, there should be bountiful evidence of abuse if that is the problem.

[NDNdancer]

Physical and mental abuse are things that kids are reluctant to talk about, true. But it is also true that such abuse is fairly easy to spot and is pretty easy to determine in the course of complaint, investigation and trial or adjudication process. By the time any judge sentences a kid, particularly a teenager, there should be bountiful evidence of abuse if that is the problem.

Actually, no. You forgot sexual abuse. I'll use that as an example because I know the data pretty intimately. I worked with the State Offenders office here in Montana. We invited him to a meeting of adult survivors of sexual abuse to talk about perpetrators. We had many questions that we couldn't answer for ourselves and needed someone who worked on the other end of the cycle, the offenders.

He told us, that by the time a perpetrator gets arrested, tried, sentenced and actually goes to prison or jail, they have offended ON AVERAGE, ~100 victims. We asked him why? Because there is often very little to no physical evidence to convict them. By the time they amass enough evidence there is a long trail of broken victims left in their wake. He also said that's true for physical abuse. We again asked him why. He said it's because abusers are most often, family members, "blood is thicker then water" mentality, reluctance of law enforcement to pursue the cases because they're so difficult to find evidence, witnesses, and witnesses who will testify, and the abused themselves who are often so terrified, they refuse to file a complaint or testify themselves.

[PatrickHenry]

...Do you have any proof to offer for your assertion that physical punishment that includes pain has been used and is successful? I'm really interested because in all of my research, I've only seen the opposite to be true.

Do you have alternatives to imprisonment you wish to discuss?

Or do you think the current system is just fine?

Or what?

The actual research to support my espousal of corporal punishment would be in the realm of traumatic avoidance conditioning.

We would be looking for an extinction response in terms of criminal behavior.

I don't advocate violence for punishing petty misbehavior.