Dear Snake,

Indeed something more creative should be done instead of locking up people and paying their guards' salaries from our tax money.

Here are some ideas:

1. If citizens are interested in keeping someone in jail, then they should volunteer to guard him themselves (or hire guards with their own money).

2. Corporal punishment should be offered as an option to reduce prison time.

3. When future offending can be prevented by removing certain body parts, then that should be given as option to prisoners instead of a lengthy jail-time.

4. Organ donation should also be counted towards reducing jail-time.

5. Unless a volunteer is found as in (1), exile should be considered for prisoners when another country is willing to take them and there's no likelihood for them to ever be able to return to Australia.

6. I agree with Susan that innocent persons should never be murdered, even if the chance of them being innocent is 0.0000000000000000000001%. However, OPTIONAL capital punishment should be available at all times to all prisoners (with appropriate provisions to ensure they are not coerced into it by other inmates). That would be a more proper way for one to atone for their sins instead of adding even more burden on society.

P.S. I could not view your Singapore clip because it cannot be viewed without registering into Google's evil empire.

Hi there SNAKE...

Thank you for furnishing that link featuring the application of corporal punishment. Whereupon twelve strokes of the rotan were being applied to a criminal in Malaysia. With respect my friend, the police were speaking in Bahasa Malaysia, and wearing the uniform of the Malay police. Therefore, it's more than probable the punishment was meted out in Malaysia ?

As a retired copper, I've fully supported corporal punishment for those heinous crimes occasioned against women, children, the elderly and others, who by some physical defect, are unable to adequately defend themselves against a violent attack.

I'm on record herein, as being vehemently against capital punishment for any offence. However, for those category of offences described as heinous, odious, or abominable, long periods of penal servitude together with an appropriate amount of corporal punishment, is the only real deterrent against such crimes. Forget about rehabilitation, it's both too late, and totally inappropriate for such criminals. Punishment is the only remedy for these evil maggots, regrettably.

6. I agree with Susan that innocent persons should never be murdered,
Yuyutsu,
No innocent person should be killed let alone murdered. There are many who should be killed because they cause the deaths of many more.
The animal like human beings that this thread is about should be disposed of as soon as they are proven guilty. The judge that gave the Morecombe murderer 20 years should be doing 20 years also.
We really need a referendum on Law & Order if we don't want to go down the tube if the Taliban & Co don't shove us down there before.

Yuyutsu

I think number one suggestion might be impractical, but the the others seem to me to be spot on. I liked the idea of the culprit choosing his punishment, but it would have to be a combination of both prison and corporal punishment, just reducing the incarceration a tad in return for the latter and it should be inflicted at intervals, say every 3 months. I should have mentioned that the link was very graphic of the punishment being undertaken and therefore needed to be seen only by adults hence the sign-in required.

You are right, it must have been Malaysia not Singapore O Sung Wu.....Sorry about that.

Hi again SNAKE...

The question of punishment has always been a controversial issue in this country. If you were to ask, the average man or woman in the street, an academic, a law lecturer, criminologists, someone involved in jurisprudence, even a member of the Judiciary, what is the purpose of sending a convicted person to gaol ?

To the man or women, they would all say '...a person is sent to gaol as a punishment...' ? And it's this confinement in prison, that is the punishment. Denying them access to the outside world, for a preordained period of time.

For most felons, this might be an appropriate action, But NOT for those few who commit these odious and heinous crimes. They should be irrefutably sentenced to prison F O R punishment, including mandatory corporal punishment, together with hard labour. I wonder if anyone might disagree with this proposition ?

Hi O Sung Wu,

That's an interesting proposition. I think every individual behaves differently under different circumstances. The "first timer" may think he is never going back to prison and makes sure he obeys the law in future, while the recidivist may "take his chances" and probably has a philosophical view about going back inside for maybe the 3rd or 4th time. I guess they all have their reasons for their nefarious activities, drugs, unemployment, total disregard for others and selfishness, the psychology of paedophilia, a chip on their shoulders about society in general, anger......There must be 101 reasons, so the punishment should be made to fit the crime, and the individual... here lies the problem because one size fits all in our endeavour to uphold the law. I think most judges must confront this problem and thus they get accused of being soft, but they are also probably mindful of the cost to the public purse (although they don't mind being paid handsomely themselves!) Nothing is ever simple , straightforward and easy.

I have probably got off subject a little, but I agree with you that certain crimes require certain measures to make an impact on certain perpetrators.