CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
18
Yep Nope
Debate Score:29
Arguments:20
Total Votes:31
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yep (5)
 
 Nope (15)

Debate Creator

DaWolfman(3322) pic



Is physical force a justifiable method of punishing criminals?

For adults of course!

** EDIT - Criminals=Prisoners in this debate thank you - **

Yep

Side Score: 11
VS.

Nope

Side Score: 18
4 points

Physical punishment is a useful deterrent against prisoners breaking prison rules. Since their freedom is already gone and their date of release may seem distant (or non-existent), there is very little else with which to keep them in line with the rules.

Side: Yep
lawnman(1106) Disputed
1 point

Hello ally,

I don't purpose to do the following, but I must point something out to you.

Prisoners are in prison because they are criminals, that is their punishment. Punishing a prisoner because he is a prisoner is double punishment. That is a crime in itself. On the other hand, compelling a prisoner to abide his punishment is enforcement of the punishment of imprisonment. Physical force is acceptable in the fulfillment of the objective of punishment, but never imprisonment to be physically punished also.

One of the better questions at CD.

I clicked "oppose" accidentally and didn't realize it until after the submission.

(I did not answer the question of the debate)

Most respondents understood the word "criminal" as the equivalent of the word "prisoner", I do not.

Side: no duality in imprisonment
2 points

I posted on both sides of the matter and yes criminal was supposed to = prisoner I edited the debate's description.

I am guessing you meant propose?

I always post on both sides to show that both are not empty in the beginning I often do not really even agree at all with 1 post and will not defend it at all.

Side: Yep
2 points

I think society has gotten really wimpy through time. Why can't we act more like our fist century ancestors and give prisoners 40 lashings? :)

Side: Yep
ledhead818(637) Disputed
1 point

Better yet let's go back to the Middle Ages where criminals were simply executed. Also if you didn't follow the correct religion you were killed. Those were the good old days.

Side: NOPE
2 points

There are always alternative punishments that can be used in prison like solitary confinement, the removal of privileges, extension of sentence and so on. So there really is no need.

Mistreatment of prisoners is particularly open to excessive abuse from prison supervisors who seek to maintain order through a climate of fear.

Think of the short term inmates as well. What kind of beating rules would there be? How could any of them truly be justified? I say throwin' them in solitary sounds like just a good idea as any other!

Side: NOPE
2 points

not really. hard labor and death are much better ways to make someone wish they'd never done it.

Side: NOPE
ledhead818(637) Disputed
1 point

Do the ends justify the means? I've asked this question before, but I've never gotten a straight answer. The best way to prevent crime would be to execute everyone who is arrested. The rate would approach zero after a few years. Do you support this idea?

Side: NOPE
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
1 point

Sure, in the USSR that would work, but I don't believe in that mainly because laws can be unjustified here.

i mean, if i go to jail for cyber bullying, under that Stalinist belief I would be executed.

I just believe in killing the worst of worst criminals and forcing all other criminals to do hard labor.

i don't believe in physical force though... never have never will. punishment is a low level form of reinforcement.

Side: NOPE

No, and it doesn't matter if you're inside or out. In prison, as DaWolfman pointed out there are privileges that can be taken away. There's no need for physical force when locked up even in an uprising. Seal them off, allow nothing but bread and juice or water to pass through, disable the toilets and whatever else have you.

On the outside, must they always aim for the head or chest? Are knees and shooting arms or hands not good enough? If it must come to that there are many other ways to deal with a criminal.

Side: NOPE
1 point

Physical force is never OK. Well, in certain circumstances where it's your life or his... what would you choose? In the case of them being a criminal and you using force for that reason alone that could make them act out worse.

Side: NOPE
1 point

Imprisonment is physical force. The distinction that criminals are prisoners is redundant. The real question is, why are people being imprisoned for committing crimes in the first place? Most people do not agree to abide by laws and punishments arbitrarily decided for breaking those laws, it's just inflicted on them. Why do some people have the "right" to use physical force, and others do not? If it's wrong, then it's wrong for everyone.

Side: Initiating force is never justified
1 point

I suppose, it overall, depends what they're in prison for. If the prisoner is using physical force on the prison staff, then by all means, the guards (or whoever) shall have the right to use physical force to restrain them. And in some ways, people do believe that to give someone the same sort of punishment they've given, "may" teach the perpetrator the lesson. But overall, it's not entirely justifiable. However, I'd like to point out that I don't think prisons are really for the punishment of the criminals as much as they are about the safety of the public. Because in some ways, prison isn't the worst place in the world to some criminals. Some people really LOVE to be locked in a room by them self. I'm one of them; being alone is bliss for me. Sure, it's only great for so long if you have nothing to do in the room, but criminals do get the privilege of books these days, at the very least.

Side: NOPE
1 point

I think that might be torture, and torture is banned.

I think.

Side: NOPE
1 point

The criminals are in jail for that kind of crime...so just because the police are "the law" does that give them the "right" to do that crime???

Side: NOPE

I don't believe in using physical force. There are other ways to calm down a criminal.

Side: Nope
0 points

I'm not sure what the question is asking. Does it have anything to do with physically forcing people into prison as punishment? Is it hand cuffing people? What exactly do you mean by punishment by physical force?

Please don't up/down vote me so that I can edit this when the question is explained.

Side: Nope
1 point

It is meant to be as in if I am thrown in jail do the prison guards have the right to use physical force upon me as a punishment for my crime? Like say if I'm 'acting out' instead of throwing me in solitary they whip me or something along those lines.

Side: NOPE
2 points

In that case, no they don't.

Punishment is to be ascribed by the courts, not administered at the whims of the jailers.

If we're talking aobut punishment for actions while imprisoned, well, that's a completely different debate.

Side: NOPE