Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    You've created a false dichotomy; there isn't just two forms of justice (ie an often too lenient British style and and often too harsh Saudi style). There's a lot of middle ground to be covered to reach a happy compromise.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    To be honest, it doesn't sound that bad that they have to go to bed at a certain time. So do the rest of society, who have work/school/whatever to go to the next morning.
    Sure, they might lose their jobs and get set back in their careers while leading purposeless lives with the dregs of society which sounds bad to you or me - but consider the fact that a lot of prisoners would have lived their lives like this anyway - having had no job, or associating with the same type of people in the first place.
    And it's not as though going a few months or a couple of years without a beer or without sex is some kind of traumatic experience. Again, plenty of non-prisoners do this as well. Plenty of people even do this out of choice.



    What's lucky about it? Besides the standard emotional response of "Corporal punishment is so barbaric and uncivilised"? Sure, this type of punishment may be associated with medieval societies, but that by itself doesn't mean there's something wrong with it. In my view, the appropriateness of a punishment should be based on an objective standard - such as its effectiveness as a deterrent. And given that the majority of prisoners are neither in for their first offence, nor their last offence, I think it does sound as though we do need some alternative to prison.

    Besides, it's very compassionate of you to show such concern for these types of criminals, but it's not like they would do the same for you, were the roles reversed.
    Pretty much agree with this. I'm no conservative, but our often pathetic justice system frustrates me a great deal.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by noisy06)
    Are you seriously suggesting that prison in the UK is a effective punishment for criminals? Sounds like you have far-left ideas.
    Aye, there's a lot of us ****ing members of the Tory Party with radical far-left ideas. Kindly don't equate centre-right politics with the braindead rubbish the Daily Mail comes out with.

    Prison isn't nice. Rehabilitation isn't hugely effective in this country, but it should become more so. Yet then we'll have people like you complaining that it costs the taxpayer more, or that prisoners are being given some sort of advantage in life.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Yes, and when your friends are not posturing about how easy is it, do they mention that they've entirely lost the ability to do as the please? That they have to go to bed at a certain time? That even if they are not sacked from their jobs, they will undoubtedly be set back in life by their sentence?

    Or do they mention that even a simple glass of beer is impossible? Or that they will have no physical contact with any woman? Or that their days will be purposeless, circular streams of emptiness? Or that they'll be put in with the utter dregs of human society?

    You may think a bloody television is the be-all and end-all of life. I used be on a prison visiting committee (who are independent volunteer monitors who can enter prisons and view the conditions inside) for a short period, and I can imagine few worse things than imprisonment.



    Luckily most of the world has moved on from that.
    That was glorious :congrats: This is why you're awesome
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darth Stewie)
    30 lashes is nothing,
    Why don't you try having 30 lashes and then tell everyone how it's "nothing"?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GPODT)
    30 lashes is too lenient? You won't be saying that if you've been subjected to it and I am pretty sure if his wife complains again then he will face EVEN harsher punishments..
    Thirty lashes, while very painful is not all that bad....certainly something a sturdy individual could actually walk away from, there are a lot of records from the Nepolionic Wars and British war tribunals in which a serving solider was given 200 lashes, and was out of bed and marching in file within two days.

    That aside..nice to see a Positive Story come out of Saudi for a change.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    To be honest, it doesn't sound that bad that they have to go to bed at a certain time. So do the rest of society, who have work/school/whatever to go to the next morning.
    Sure, they might lose their jobs and get set back in their careers while leading purposeless lives with the dregs of society which sounds bad to you or me - but consider the fact that a lot of prisoners would have lived their lives like this anyway - having had no job, or associating with the same type of people in the first place.
    I'm not particularly convinced by the argument that prison isn't all that bad because most prisoners had a **** life to begin with. Indeed, it would generally tell me that there are greater problems to be addressed with their lives outside of prison than inside.


    What's lucky about it? Besides the standard emotional response of "Corporal punishment is so barbaric and uncivilised"? Sure, this type of punishment may be associated with medieval societies, but that by itself doesn't mean there's something wrong with it. In my view, the appropriateness of a punishment should be based on an objective standard - such as its effectiveness as a deterrent. And given that the majority of prisoners are neither in for their first offence, nor their last offence, I think it does sound as though we do need some alternative to prison.

    Besides, it's very compassionate of you to show such concern for these types of criminals, but it's not like they would do the same for you, were the roles reversed.
    That's because I'm better than them. I am a relatively moral individual, and even where I fall short I expect the state to do better.

    It is not just for their interests I am bringing this up, however. The deterrent effect of punishment is hugely overstated. Prisoners in general don't intend to get caught, and when they do - and you subject them to unpleasant things - they more likely than not simply become accustomed to them.

    When you imprison an offender, it should be an opportunity to rehabilitate them. Not just for their benefit, but for society's. Beating someone doesn't change them, it doesn't give them new opportunities or remove them from a cycle of behaviour. It doesn't help them see the harm their actions have caused to others. If anything, it makes them feel less inclined to respect civic institutions, the police and the people who have more ordered lives.

    That's not easy, I readily admit. But so what? When the alternative is genuinely discussing bringing back public lashings it actually seems quite attractive.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    Why don't you try having 30 lashes and then tell everyone how it's "nothing"?
    Ive taken twenty, and was fairly confident I could have made it to about sixty before I couldn't stand un-aided.

    You would be suprised what a human body can take, then again the "type" of lash would play a part I suppose, as long as it wasn't a seven-tail or something like that.

    Edit: For the record im not saying I took twenty and was all "Yea..gimme some more" because the pain was indeed immense, but history and modern day applications of this as a crime show that thirty is really bugger all.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    Why don't you try having 30 lashes and then tell everyone how it's "nothing"?
    30 lashes is a routine punishment, it is given for things like smoking in non smoking areas in some countries. 50 lashes is considered the limit for one session because that's the point where permanent injuries could be inflicted. I had quite a few belt whips as a kid, they hurt and broke the skin occasionally but healed quickly.

    I'm sure it is uncomfortable however it will not incapacitate anyone and is certainly a lot less of a deterrent (if it can even be considered a deterrent) than prison.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Aye, there's a lot of us ****ing members of the Tory Party with radical far-left ideas. Kindly don't equate centre-right politics with the braindead rubbish the Daily Mail comes out with.

    Prison isn't nice. Rehabilitation isn't hugely effective in this country, but it should become more so. Yet then we'll have people like you complaining that it costs the taxpayer more, or that prisoners are being given some sort of advantage in life.
    Oh grow up. While you're too busy thinking about rehab, I'm thinking about what society can do to give criminals the punishment they deserve. You're clearly too deep into left-wing politics to realise that the story had nothing to do with the Daily Mail. A boy of 15 was murdered and the perpertrator was given just over 3 years, how is that better than Saudi Arabia? In fact, that's more barbaric.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darth Stewie)
    30 lashes is nothing, he will be up and about after a week probably dishing out a lot harsher "punishment" to his wife. 6 years is far too lenient however i believe you are referring to this case. He wasn't jailed for 6 years he was jailed indefinitely and can be considered for parole after 6 years which he will only receive if he can provide considerable evidence that he has reformed and even then he will be closely watched and any criminal activity will result in him being returned to jail.

    Whether Islam allows beating or not can be debated however all Islamic countries would punish such a brutal attack, the problem is this punishment is far too lenient and ineffective. They are basically getting a violent wife beater, humiliating him in public then sending him back to the wife that he will blame for his humiliation. The Saudi legal system continues to be a cautionary tale of how religious beliefs damage society.
    I think this is pretty crucial here. The man's punishment lasts less than a month, and he'll probably blame his wife for it which just puts her in more danger.

    Obviously it's a good thing they're punishing him for what he did (I'm not going to respond to the point about him being from Saudi Arabia and their attitudes towards women which you seem to put a lot of emphasis on in this story because that's a totally different issue to whether or not lashes and community service is a suitable punishment for abuse and I don't think I know enough about it to comment) but I do think the punishment should be more long-term.

    Even though the case you mentioned where the guy got 6 years minimum in jail isn't harsh enough for gouging someone's eyes out, it gives the victim chance to try and get their life together while he's out of the picture (hopefully he'll be kept in their a lot longer and doesn't own a PS2 and such as you describe, although I do agree the UK crime system isn't harsh enough for a lot of cases). While the victim here is given just a couple of weeks relief while he does some community service and "a course in how to treat women" before being placed into what could prove to be an even more dangerous situation than before.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GPODT)
    What would the punishment be if this happened in the UK? A 3 month jail sentence with TV, PS2 and comfort at Her Majesty's pleasure?
    They wouldn't even get a PS3. Disgraceful.

    I'd take the lashes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by noisy06)
    Oh grow up. While you're too busy thinking about rehab, I'm thinking about what society can do to give criminals the punishment they deserve. You're clearly too deep into left-wing politics to realise that the story had nothing to do with the Daily Mail. A boy of 15 was murdered and the perpertrator was given just over 3 years, how is that better than Saudi Arabia? In fact, that's more barbaric.
    Once again, I am an active member of the Conservative Party, the SWP shout abuse at me when I'm at a party conference, I'm not exactly left-wing.

    If someone commits murder there is only one sentence available to a judge: not three years, not 15 years, but life.

    Now that we've addressed that issue, let me go on to illustrate something. If your daughter, younger brother or whatever was beaten up on the street by some local hooligan, would you like to have that person whipped and released back into the same environment, probably only angrier and more viscous from his experiences of the justice system?

    Or would you prefer to have the causes of his offending examined, serious attempts made at breaking offending behaviour and situations which encourage it, effective monitoring after release and so on?

    I think there's only one sensible answer to that.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I'm not particularly convinced by the argument that prison isn't all that bad because most prisoners had a **** life to begin with. Indeed, it would generally tell me that there are greater problems to be addressed with their lives outside of prison than inside.
    Well whether prison is "bad" or not is relative to what you're comparing it to. It seems bad to you, because I'm sure it's much worse than the life you currently lead. Whereas if most prisoners had an equally bad life to begin with before going to prison, then it'll just seem normal to them. How is it supposed to deter them from anything?

    Now I agree that there are two ways of fixing this - [1] either raising their standard of living outside of prison, or [2] making life in prison even more unbearable. But then there's the issue of practicality. If it were that easy to vastly improve the prospects of those people, why hasn't it been done already?
    It's very easy to say that option 1 is preferable to option 2, so we shouldn't take option 2. But in reality what happens is that we don't/can't really take option 1 either. So we end up doing neither. And as long as we do neither, prison is no kind of deterrent for those people.

    It is not just for their interests I am bringing this up, however. The deterrent effect of punishment is hugely overstated. Prisoners in general don't intend to get caught, and when they do - and you subject them to unpleasant things - they more likely than not simply become accustomed to them.
    Sure, prisoners don't intend to get caught. But they still know that they're running the risk of getting caught. And if the risk of getting caught carries nothing that you'd consider a serious punishment, I don't think they would be that afraid to commit their crime.

    I'm not really sure what makes you think that corporal punishment is something that you can just get "accustomed to", whereas you can't with prison. In fact I would have thought it was the other way round, if anything - since prison is more of a "chronic" punishment, while a lashing is more of an "acute" punishment.

    When you imprison an offender, it should be an opportunity to rehabilitate them. Not just for their benefit, but for society's. Beating someone doesn't change them, it doesn't give them new opportunities or remove them from a cycle of behaviour. It doesn't help them see the harm their actions have caused to others. If anything, it makes them feel less inclined to respect civic institutions, the police and the people who have more ordered lives.
    If their crime was something like possession and usage of Class A drugs, then I would agree with you - they need rehabilitation. They can't just stop doing it like that, because of an addiction. They need to be "helped".

    Whereas if their crime is beating their wife, this isn't the case. It's very easy to stop doing that (unless you're mentally ill, which is a separate issue). You just don't beat your wife. When the primary aim is to prevent them from doing this again, in my opinion, what they need is simply to be afraid of the consequences, and to fear civic institutions rather than respect them - so that they won't beat their wives, for the same reason that they won't put their hand in an open flame, or touch live electrical wires. Sure, it would be nice if they respected civic institutions - but do you really think that prison successfully achieves this? Do serial prisoners really respect the police and their prison guards? If they did, why do the majority end up reoffending?

    That's not easy, I readily admit. But so what? When the alternative is genuinely discussing bringing back public lashings it actually seems quite attractive.
    Not really. It depends on what your priority is. My priority is doing whatever it takes to make society safe, and to ensure that people (for whatever reason) don't commit these sorts of crimes, and not to shy away from inflicting punishment on serious criminals because it's a bit mean to them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    a crap country is a crap country. I don't care for anything coming from Saudi Arabia.
    Beating people to tell them beating is wrong is ridiculous.
    You are also talking about a country where women are not allowed voting until 2010, and not allowed to attend Olympics until 2012.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone else notice the man was punished for having left marks on his wife's face and not for beating her in the first place?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    HAHAHAHAHAA

    wait im not done, HAHAHAHAHAHA

    are you serious? Prison is Butlins.
    Have you ever seen the inside of one?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [GPODT40766142]http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-...shes-1.1117591

    What would the punishment be if this happened in the UK? A 3 month jail sentence with TV, PS2 and comfort at Her Majesty's pleasure? Or would it be a £100 fine?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwomQ7v1bN0

    Before you say ''Islam allows the beating of women'', look at the following and re-evaluate your existence. Thank you.

    [/QUOTE]

    Whats the point of this thread again? And whyhave you added a pic of a stale old joint
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wife beaters in Catholic communities in Northern Ireland got 'summary justice' from the IRA as well, but it was more likely to involve a bottle or bullet to the kneecap.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 100hundreds)
    Whats the point of this thread again? And whyhave you added a pic of a stale old joint
    I think I know why.

    It says in the quran that Muslim should beat their wives if they are being rebellious. This they find embarrassing but cannot remove the verse, since quran is divine and all :rolleyes:

    Some scholars, trying to adjust the book to the 21st century have argued that wives should be beaten very lightly, with something like a miswak (the joint in picture), which shouldn't leave a mark. I think the OP was trying to emphasize this point.

    Its religious logic. You cant change the word of god, but you can reinterpret it to suit the changing society, to make it look good. The OP is clutching at straws here, literally.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.