With his hands tied down the pole, the criminal whimpered for help, but no one cared, because all they wanted to see him be punished for the robberies he committed. He became the next to be publicly humiliated and punished with flogging instead of incarceration. Jeff Jacoby’s “Bring Back Flogging” is an intriguing piece of writing that pitches a wild idea that i am unsure is worth catching. Jacoby wrote a thorough essay and presented the idea well but did not have enough evidence to convince his audience.
Jacoby’s thesis argues that, flogging would be a more effective alternative punishment for wrongdoers opposed to sending them prison. From what I read in his essay it would seem that flogging would be the optimum choice of punishment for wrongdoers, according to Jacoby. The idea presented is to start using flogging as a punishment for wrongdoers. This idea is used to push flogging as more efficient punishment and is also cheaper than incarceration. Jacoby sees the criminal justice system as failure and would implement flogging to make it more ideal. As someone who did not know what flogging was until after reading this essay can occur it is not something everyone will agree on, everyone including his audience.
The target audience of this piece is all of the free and law abiding Americans in the U.S. I say this because they are not
…show more content…
It was somewhat included, but what included was when Jacoby reasons that, “Of course, their crimes are not out crimes: We do not arrest blasphemers or adulterers” (para. 10). Here Jacoby reveals how flogging was used as cruel punishment for actions that are more common now. When the puritans used flogging for those same crimes. These behaviors, blasphemers or adulterers, are more common now. Puritans saw them as crimes, because these crimes went against their religious beliefs. However, those behaviors are completely normal today so flogging would not be
In “Bring Back Flogging” the author, Jeff Jacoby suggests that maybe we should adopt some of the punishments of the puritans. He says that Puritan forefathers punished crimes with whipping and branding, but in current times we tend to put someone in jail, no matter the degree of the crime. Jacoby also tells how often, first and second time offenders don’t get jail time, and if one does wind up in jail, it proves rather dangerous. (Jeff Jacoby 196-198)
Flogging should definitely be brought back. One may disagree because it’s too degrading. Jacoby is trying to persuade the reader, the general public, that Flogging is a better consequence than imprisonment in certain cases. He implies throughout his essay that adopting the Puritans punishment flogging would be better than imprisonment.
In Peter Moskos’ article “In Lieu of Prison, Bring Back the Lash,” Moskos presents flogging as a means of decreasing prison populations. In the article, he states that “America has a prison problem,” and that this problem comes from a larger number of people being incarcerated and for a longer amount of time. The Moskos' solution to this ever increasing problem, is to bring back flogging. Penitentiaries, he says, were created to avoid corporal punishment, but the rate of crime did not decrease and the prisons began to fill very quickly. Moskos presents that the truly dangerous criminals should remain behind bars, but those who are likely to be released should be offered the choice to receive a flogging instead of incarceration.
5. Public trials and executions serve as a deterance of deviant behaviors. These sanctions act as a way to set an example and for people to see what will happen to them if they do the same thing, These sanctions can also be seen as reinforcing boundaries. Although public executions and trials in “town square” are not as common in most countries today, the media is utilized to fulfil the same purpose. When there are high profile cases going on in the United States often tmes the full trial and sentancings are televised so that much of society can see what the repercussions are for defying a social norm.
Jacoby believes flogging is far more effective than incarceration because the cost is less, it teaches a lesson and it will prevent more prisoners. Also the author gives the reader some examples of puritan style of punishment that was very popular about 150 years ago, then he proceeds to give the reader some facts and statistics about incarceration and supports
Jacoby starts off informing the reader about different scenarios on how the Boston Puritan forefathers went about flogging. For example, he states that in 1632, Richard Hopkins was sentenced to be “whipt, branded with a hott iron on one of his cheeks” (196). However, in modern society this method is not humane, therefore, “ lock them up in cages” (197). Locking inmates in cages is a “sign of manhood, a status symbol” (197). According to Jacoby flogging is cheaper due to the excessive amount of money each inmate cost.
He successfully refutes this claim by questioning, “Why is it more brutal to flog a wrongdoer than to throw him in prison -- where the risk of being beaten, raped, or murdered is terrifyingly high?” If Jacoby didn't address his opponent’s point of view and refute it, then the reader will have an excuse to reject your argument. Also, by understanding the other point of view and argue against it, then you can illustrate how mature you are with your topic and that you're not just complaining about it. He ends his article short and sweet by implying the Puritan style of punishment might work for the modern world. Jacoby also states at the end, “Maybe we should readopt a few.”
Oshinsky did a remarkable job explaining the history of the death penalty in a clear and concise way. While the text was fairly short, he effectively provided his readers with well documented and relevant information on how controversial the death penalty has been throughout the past few centuries. He undertook an exceptionally important issue that many Americans do not know much about, or may have conflicting feelings
In 1757, a sailor who was convicted of sexually assaulting a young male received a beating of 500 lashes, while in 1762, two men received 1000 lashes each for engaging in consensual sex, and in 1806, there were more hangings in England for sodomy than there were for murder offences. Chapter 3 of Rum, Sodomy and the Lash stresses the differences between a pirate’s trial versus a sodomist’s trial in court. Turley explains that pirates are economic criminals, and their crimes directly threaten property. At the same time, sodomites do not put the public in danger but rather challenge the separation between males and females and are no longer a part of the domestic economy and are instead a threat to society’s economic order. It is evident that sodomy was viewed as the worst offence and did not protect the public from real, dangerous
Jeff Jacoby provides a strong argument in “Bring Back Flogging”, suggesting that we should adopt a few of the punishments of the Puritans. This argument is built on logical appeal, emotional appeal, and his own personal credibility as a writer. Providing statistics and information, Jacoby creates the logos, or logical appeal, and ethos, or personal credibility. In Addition, he uses ethos, or emotional appeal to force the reader to think about what they believe is morally worse. In “Bring Back Flogging”, Jacoby says Puritan forefathers punished crimes with flogging, including whipping and branding; however, in current times we tend to put a person in jail, no matter the crime.
Penology is a system that a totalitarian government highly pays attention to. Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punishment traces the history of sovereign discipline and punishment from the medieval ages until the modern age in Western society. He argues that sovereign or authoritative punishment took four forms which are: torture – punishment – discipline – prison. Foucault examined the act of torturing and concluded that the public execution was ultimately an ineffective use of the body and non-economical, it also as applied non-uniformly and haphazardly. Thus, it was the antithesis of the more modern concerns of the state: order and generalization.
In Jeff Jacoby’s “Bring Back Flogging,” he compares the punishments for crimes in the 17th Century to the punishments for crimes in the present. Jacoby suggests in his essay that “the Puritans were more enlightened than we think, at least on the subject of punishment. Their sanctions were humiliating and painful, but quick and cheap.” Jacoby makes a good argument to bring back an old punishment policy. He points out that “a humiliating and painful paddling can be applied to the rear end of a crook for a lot less than $30,000 (per year).”
The Victorian Era is one of the most well known times, not only that, it is also the most interesting. The Victorian Era was called Victorian because of the ruler at that time was Queen Victoria. This Era dates back to 1837 to 1901. The Victorian Era is very interesting because of the different ideas and styles they had towards something. Some of the things that made the Victorian Era so captivating are Famous criminals, forms of punishment, and artistic styles.
If sending people off to get hanged was your job how do you think you would feel about it? In George Orwell’s personal essay “A Hanging,” Orwell designates the true impact hanging a person could have on someone’s soul. He ingeniously expresses how his view on taking someone’s life, while they are perfectly healthy is truly wrong. Orwell skillfully does this by using similes, describing scenes or people, and by his way of expressing the tone he wants to give. When reading this personal essay you notice a variety of similes.
There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation.