Which is better, caning or prison ?

@advokatku (4033)
Indonesia
June 28, 2011 7:03pm CST
Many people argue that caning is inhumane, violating human rights, equating humans with animals and some other reason, which actually expect punish people with whip can banned, suspended or abolished. For me, actually punishment with a whip is much more humane than jailing people. With caning, the defendant is no longer running their life confined in a small room with a relatively long time thereby inhibiting their freedom of activity, including seeking sustenance for their families. Even, that if we see in the context of Human Rights, imprisonment much more violate human rights because in prison, there are many violations of human rights, whether committed by prison guards or fellow inmates. Caning is basically not to injure. Before whipped, first time, inmates ascertained must do run several test whether physically, mentally and health. When whipped, inmate or prisoners are also required to wear clothing and which whipped is the back area their bodies. If when whipped bloody, then caning should be stopped. If when they whipped faint, they must immediately given treatment.
2 responses
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
6 Jul 11
They are both inhumane for different reasons...
@anklesmash (1412)
29 Jun 11
At least a caning would be over quickly and a prison sentence could last for years and a good caning could put a first time offender off reoffending.I think caning shouldnt just be an alternative to prison for example rapists,paedophiles and murderers should be caned or whipped on a regular basis as their crime is so bad they deserve a very harsh punishment .