In Jeff Jacoby’s essay, “Revive Flogging,” he strongly exposes his opinions and beliefs on corporal penalty. Jacoby shows using verbal paradox and sarcasm. He uses spoken paradox and sarcasm in such a method that by reading what is composed is quickly understood to interpret what he truly indicates. Jacoby explains what flogging is, how it was valuable, and argues that flogging requirements to be reminded our society. After checking out Jacoby’s argument for reviving the harsh pounding and whipping, called flogging, I see that flogging would be useful if it is restored.
Flogging is working out the practice of harsh whippings and whippings. Flogging has actually been practiced by the Puritans in 1632, all the method to 1972 when it was rescinded. The Puritans acted in flogging when offenders were sentenced for devoting a crime, such as adultery or blaspheme. When founded guilty of the criminal activity a specific dedicated, they were connected to a post in public, with no t-shirt, and severely flogged.
By practicing flogging, and showing the beating to the citizens of the town, the residents might see what would be provided for their punishment if they devote the same or various criminal offense.
If flogging were to be revived and consistently practiced on wrongdoers of particular crimes, and the pounding was shown to the general public, it might greatly decrease criminal offenses devoted. Being whipped is not any more or less degrading that being secured a cage, like an animal. Bringing back flogging would motivate possible lawbreakers not to dedicate a criminal activity that they could be planning.
By being whipped in public, the wrongdoer will be extremely ashamed and have extreme discomfort. Hopefully this felling of embarrassment and the discomfort experienced will stay with them, if they consider dedicating another crime. Also, after beaten the wounds will rely on scars, these would work as a permanent reminders of the effects acquired from their actions.
Prisons are packed tightly with hundreds of criminals. Some prisoners are violent offenders and others are not. Providing meals, building new jails, keeping a prison running, and providing prisoners with necessities, is very expensive. If flogging was the consequence of committing crimes, the money spent in and for prisons, could be used for other and more important items, such as books for school systems. In addition, less dangerous offenders will not be abused or raped in prison. The practice of flogging would also increase prison space for more dangerous offenders.
Bringing back the punishment of flogging would greatly reduce crimes committed. Also, the public display, pain, and the permanent reminder from scars, will reduce the possibility of participating in the crime again. It would also serve as a physical image to others of what will happen if they commit a crime. Puritan forefathers had an excellent idea of punishment for committing crimes. Flogging was also a very effective punishment. The knowledge of what will happen if a crime is committed, and knowing how painful it is, will allow individuals to think thoroughly if they ever decide they want to commit a crime. I vote to bring back flogging!