|
April 03, 2007
choose your favorite torture
Glenn Reynolds quoted Megan McArdle as saying (in part) that she'd "rather be waterboarded than put in the general population of a high security prison," and that: "it is entirely possible that life at Guantanamo is more bearable than life at San Quentin, and no, that is not a defense of Guantanamo.I'd take the waterboarding too -- even if I thought I was drowning and nearly gagged myself to death. Reading McArdle's post, I found this earlier post, which reflects on criminal offenses of people as diverse as Rush Limbaugh (facing charges that he removed money from his own bank account) and Cory Maye (sent to death row for defending himself against police he thought were armed criminal invaders): To take an example I've been harping on recently, there are all sorts of appalling violations of power by local police and prosecutors, as Radley Balko has recently exposed with his superb work on the Cory Maye case. Taking cash out of your bank account is not in any moral sense a crime. Nor is having a house where some developer would like to build a shopping mall. Or owning a tree where a woodpecker likes to nest. The fact that people can be put in jail for these non-crimes horrifies me to the depth of my soul.No wonder we're so close to having hate crime legislation. I mean, why not? If it's a crime to take your money out of the bank, or offend some environmental bureaucrat's idea of what's best for a woodpecker, surely thought crimes should qualify. I'd be horrified to the depth of my soul too, except it's tough to be horrified by things that are no longer surprising. What a lot of people who routinely advocate imprisonment for things they dislike forget (at least I like to hope they forget) is that prison is an awful place. To drive the point home, McCardle compares prison to torture, and says she would prefer the latter: Many prisoners endure such brutalization that if I had to choose between going to a high-security prison and being interrogated by the Bush administration's favoured methods, I'd pick the waterboarding. This is a stain on our national honour, an outrage, an abomination. But does it mean that our society is not worth living in? Are we not free? Have we no liberty? Do we live in a police state because some peoples' liberties are thusly threatened? Are we close to a police state? Were we under the Democrats, when such abuses were equally likely to occur?No, I'm not asleep at all! In fact, I'm reminded of a painful post I wrote in 2004: .....try going to a cocktail party today and advocating a return to the lash. You'll get one of those looks usually reserved for cranks who like to talk about the death of Vincent Foster. Why? Because times have changed, and the law -- even part of the constitution unchanged since the founding -- has changed with them. Social conventions simply do not countenance tying a man to a post and scourging him with the cat-o'nine tails -- for any reason.People who advocate prison for things they don't like need to ask themselves whether they'd rather be tied up and scourged than imprisoned, then ask again whether either are appropriate things to do to people who medicate themselves with unapproved medication. Would they have these things done to their own children? Or just someone else's? On this related issue, M. Simon has a brilliant essay on the nature of drug addiction, which he (rightly IMO) calls "self treatment of undiagnosed pain": This is a truly revolutionary idea. If it is in fact true then the whole notion of a drug war to save the children is a lie from beginning to end. Those of you who have read my article on heroin have a window into this new idea. What I tried to show in that article was that medical research shows that victims of sexual abuse and severe physical abuse (PTSD) are many times more likely to get addicted to heroin than the general public.M. Simon also has a very interesting (abridged) quote from one of this nation's founders, Declaration signer Dr. Benjamin Rush: "Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize an undercover dictatorship. To restrict the art of healing to one class of men, and deny equal privilege to others, will be to constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic, and have no place in a Republic. The Constitution of this Republic should make special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom."I'm sure at the time it wasn't considered necessary to put such a thing into the Constitution. After all, there's no specific power to regulate medicine (or drugs), just as there was no power to regulate alcohol. Hence the wonderful 18th Amendment -- which I like so much that I have called it the "telltale amendment." It stands as a reminder that this country once took its Constitution literally. If the country wanted to prohibit alcohol today, there'd be no need for an amendment. If only the Constitution had prohibited torturing the Constitution! I think this calls for a poll: I'm thinking that might have been too easy a choice for some people, so I'll make it harder:
UPDATE: Thank you, Glenn Reynolds, for the link, and welcome all! Thanks to all commenters too; I'm particularly fascinated by the differing opinions about prison versus the lash. A local sheriff once told me that some people will commit suicide rather than face prison, and while that's doubtless an outlier, I'm sure that a lot of people would prefer a short and certain (even if horribly severe) punishment to a lengthy stay in an unknown hell. I suspect that the kind of guy who doesn't like traveling or going out would rather take the lashes than have to live in a crowded criminal environment. posted by Eric on 04.03.07 at 10:43 AM
Comments
I think your 'prison vs. the lash' thought experiment reveals a much more prevalent attitude in our culture, namely, the preference given to shifting blame over actually doing what's right. The difference between prison and the lash, at its heart, is a question of who carries out the violence. Since the lash would be administered by the authorities, people would view it as unforgiveable government brutality. But since prison rape and violence is the responsibility of other inmates, people look the other way because that's what criminals do, and in fact, it only reinforces our idea that 'those kinds of people' belong in prison to begin with. P. Aeneas · April 3, 2007 06:47 PM Aeneas, exactly, even if they are non-violent drug offenders. Jon Thompson · April 3, 2007 08:49 PM This would be an easier experiment if 100 lashes wouldn't be fatal. By historical standards, 50 was a death sentance. Matthew Hooper · April 3, 2007 10:25 PM This would be an easier thought experiment if 100 lashes wouldn't be fatal. Jesus recieved 29 lashes becuase 30 was a death sentance, if my Catholic school days haven't failed me. Matthew Hooper · April 3, 2007 10:30 PM ...or if my internet connection doesn't make me double post. Grr. Anonymous · April 3, 2007 10:31 PM Great point Hooper. Water-boarding is safe, you know you'll recover, at least physically. Compare that to what one used to picture when they thought of torture: burnt fee that would never heal, splintered or severed fingers, burnt out eyes, etc. Harkonnendog · April 3, 2007 10:39 PM Not all in prison are monsters who rape and victomize other prisoners. It's a horrible place to be and the only way to survive (not being raped, but to stay alive) is to make yourself ugly as possible and act tough 24/7. I had a small ad agency in the 1980s. A man ordered cartoon character designs he could paint on childrens' bedroom walls, similar to Disney characters. He was out of prison and trying to get started in some kind of business. All the other agencies in town had refused his request. I did the work and he paid in cash. As he was leaving he asked if we could talk, saying he needed someone to talk to, not wanting to talk with his wife about the topic. It was close to quitting time so I locked the door and we sat at a conference table. He told me about being in the three worst US prisons and one in Mexico, for possesion, since he was 14-years-old. He was a big guy, arms covered with tatoos. If he approached you on the street you'd wet your pants, he was that mean-looking. Then he told me about all the really bad stuff that goes on and as he related the details his eyes filled with tears -- suddenly he started crying like a baby sobbing for 30 minutes letting all the pain out from the past 15 years. Recovering his composure he said, "You can't cry in prison the others will kill you!" Adding, "All of them would like to cry and if any prisoner did they would lose control, lose their toughness, and cry too." He thanked me for listening and said he had wanted to do that for a long, long time. Later I heard he was doing well and other job opportunities had come his way. All it takes is a helping-hand when others turn their backs. JimboNC · April 3, 2007 11:12 PM 100 lashes? I have to ask here -- what kind of lashes are we talking about? Are we talking about a cat o' nine tails? The rattan cane? It's worth noting that in Singapore, a maximum of 24 strokes may be administered, strongly suggesting to me that figures as high as 100 were deemed excessive for some reason. I'm not sure this is because of the 50 = death sentence or 30 = death sentence reasons adduced above (it surely depends on the nature of the cane/whip being used, whether and how quickly it breaks the skin, dangers of infection, etc.). But whatever the reason, 24 seems like a proper stopping point. 12 strokes seems imaginable, by analogy to past physical pain. 24 perhaps imaginable, though rather more horrible. 100 -- I can't really imagine that any more than I can imagine being raped and brutalised in an American prison. It's just got no analogy in my experience. Taeyoung · April 3, 2007 11:37 PM These tyrannical results are predictable outcomes of substituting democracy for individual liberty as the basis of the U.S. polity. One of the neatest tricks of the governing classes was convincing the people that such is the case. Solution? Fire them all. They have proved that government is not a legitimate vehicle for social reform. Most professional intellectuals would contribute more to society in new and productive careers, such as cooking and policing up cigarette butts. Brett · April 4, 2007 08:00 AM here is a picture of a lashing recipient.. And a biblical history of flagellation. stephen · April 4, 2007 08:40 AM I think your 'prison vs. the lash' thought experiment reveals a much more prevalent attitude in our culture, namely, the preference given to shifting blame over actually doing what's right. Great comment! The root problem is a prevailing moral cowardice that is so unsure of its own principles it cannot even muster the confidence to meet out justice. Anonymous · April 4, 2007 09:59 AM In Roman times 40 lashes pretty much always killed a man. James · April 4, 2007 11:11 AM The Judaic law was "no more than 40 lashes", and the tradition was to stop at 39 in case of a miscount. Cdeboe · April 4, 2007 02:48 PM Cdeboe...I thought the physician was on hand to make sure the recipient was awake the whole time and didn't pass out. Also, Roman lashings were brutal, as the lash would sometimes have metal spikes tied to the end of each lash in order to rip the flesh from the body with each stroke. I think the Royal Navy had the cat o' nine tails with a stiff leather with the end of each lash tied in a knot. Still, I think it would be nice to have a choice between 12 lashes and a year in prison. stephen · April 5, 2007 03:35 AM I've posted about alternative punishments before, and I don't think you should limit your thinking to only two possibilities, prison or lashings. I think public humiliation of all sorts could be used to correct a multitude of bad behaviors. Michael Williams · April 5, 2007 02:55 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
April 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
April 2007
March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
|
|
I've actually been saying for about five years that the average American prison is probably much worse than Gitmo. Which is, of course, one of the reasons I like the idea of transferring detainees to an American prison.