An Analysis for “Bring Back Flogging”
In the essay written by Jeff Jacoby in “Bring back Flogging” The article is about how our prisons are over populated with people that are in there because of the none violence crime, which make the inmates to have higher chance of getting rape, beaten, or murder rather than getting whipped and embarrassment in public, that could help them to make better choice in the future and also teaches the public to behave the way that is acceptable in the society. Plus the cost that is associated with these inmates to keep them in prison that cost the tax payers millions of dollars every year.
Jeff Jacoby uses a lot of his own opinion, in some instances he used what John Dilulio, who is a Princeton criminologist”
…show more content…
His point is very valid because he is arguing that to overcome the population that is increasing day by day when we can have the people that got caught doing a nonviolent crime whipped and embarrassed in public and then let go instead of sending them to jail, which cost the tax payers $30,000 a year, and the criminal might pick up other bad habits from other inmates and start to become a career criminals.
“The writer uses the example of Rishard Hopking in 1632 for selling arms and gun powder to Indians, and once he was caught, he was sentenced to be whippet and branded with a hot iron on one of his cheeks” (197). Which at the time since he betrayed his country and sided with the enemies for profit
Another example of “Joseph Gatchell, convicted of blasphemy in 1684 was ordered to stand in pillory, have his head and hand put in & have his tongue drawn forth out of his mouth and pierced through with hot iron”
…show more content…
What Gatchel says makes a lot of sense, that states being under budget for the prisons due to the over population and since the income of a prison comes from tax payers, there is only so much that jails can take to take care of the inmates. What he is suggesting is why not going back to the old school ways of dealing with nonviolent crime, which costs a lot less than $30,000 a year to just whippet someone.
I come from a country that they still handle small criminals the old ways, and big time criminals are the only people that end up in jail, therefore when it comes to budgeting at the beginning of the year, the country has more money to invest towards the people, rather than the criminals that are part of the noncontributing part of the society.
The opposing issue that I can think of would be that some people might say that it is a cruel way to treat someone when you degrade them in public, but what they don't realize is that when people
In “Bring Back Flogging”, Jeff Jacoby addresses the problems within America 's criminal justice system. He gives many reasons why imprisonment simply does not work, and suggests that corporal punishment should be used as an alternative. Published in the Boston Globe, a newspaper well known for being liberal, Jacoby provides a conservative view and directs his argument towards those who strongly support imprisonment and view corporal punishment to be highly barbaric and inhumane. However, in order to shed light on our current situation, Jacoby discusses the dangers that we face though our criminal justice system a nd shows concern that imprisonment is doing more harm than good. In effect, Jacoby looks to the past for solutions, and
The United States spends nearly $81 billion per year on corrections, but where is this money coming from, where is it going, and is it actually reducing crime rates? Crime rates in the United States have fallen since 1991 and murder rates have also fallen by half in last 25 years, however the prison population has increased by 500% in the last 40 years. Increase in the number of incarcerated citizens also lead to an increase in new prisons around the country and also the crippling of the american justice system. As the author of Wages of Rebellion describes, the prison-industrial-system as the most
In, “The Caging of America”, by Adam Gopnik explains the problems in the in the American criminal justice system focusing more on the prison system. Some of the struggles that Gopnik states in his article are mass incarceration, crime rate, and judges giving long inappropriate sentencings to those with minor crimes. He demonstrates that inmates are getting treated poorly than helping them learn from their actions. Using facts and statistics, Gopnik makes his audience realize that there is an urgent need of change in the American prison system. The main idea of Gopnik’s article is that the prison system needs to improve its sentencing laws because prisons are getting over crowed. Gopnik’s argument is valid because there is a problem in the sentencing laws that has caused a malfunction in the prison system as a whole.
This essay by Jeff Jacoby illustrates an authors use of ironic sarcasm otherwise known as satire to defend and illustrate his platform on his position. Jacoby uses in this essay verbal irony (persuasion in the form of ridicule). In the irony of this sort there is a contrast between what is said and what is meant.
Jeff Jacobys’ essay, entitled “Bring Back Flogging” was, in my sincere opinion, poorly constructed. There are numerous instances where I felt that he had either not supported his premises with valid information or had negated his support in later sentences.
In Jeff Jacoby’s essay Bring Flogging Back, he discusses whether flogging is the more humane punishment compared to prison. Jacoby uses clear and compelling evidence to describe why prisons are a terrible punishment, but he lacks detail and information on why flogging is better. In the essay he explains how crime has gotten out of hand over the past few decades, which has lead to the government building more prisons to lock up more criminals. His effort to prove that current criminal punishment is not perfect or even effective is nicely done, but he struggled with discussing ways that flogging could lower the crime rates and provide a safer environment for America.
“Poverty goes up; Crime goes down; Prison population doubles. It doesn 't fit, unless some sort of alternative explanation comes into play. Maybe all those new nonviolent prisoners fit into some new national policy imperative. Maybe they all broke some new set of unwritten societal rules. But what?” – Matt Taibbi
While it’s cheap to put someone on probation or parole, it is expensive to incarcerate a person for a year. It costs $45,000 to house and feed an inmate for one year. “There are approximately 1,325 state prisons and 84 federal prisons in operation across the country today”. (Schmalleger pg 390) If you have 2000 inmates in one prison then that will cost roughly $90,000,000 to support those prisoners for just one year and that is only for one prison. From 1991 to 2007, there was a 37% decrease in the national crime rate and a 62% increase in the rate of imprisonment. The Public Safety Performance Project released a report that predicts the nation’s prison population will rise to more than
During the 1970’s, the tough on crime movement contributed to a drastic increase in punishment for lesser crimes and led a massive increase in imprisonment, even though the crime rates stayed the same (Gascon 2014). It is disputed that even though the movement was attractive to voters, it is doing more harm than good. Ever since the 1960’s, the amount of individuals detained has increased roughly about ten times than normal (Gascon 2014). Expanding a prison population requires more places, such as prisons and jails, to detain prisoners and California had built “22 new prisons in just 30 years” (Gascon 2014). Building new prisons and detaining more prisoner’s costs money and this money will come out of taxpayers. Newt Gingrich and B. Wayne Hughes Jr. said in an editorial that “prison is for people that we are afraid of, but we have been filling them with many folks we are just mad at.” They also state if the proposition is passed it will bring some light on the face that over $60,000 is spent on one inmate alone per year, while less than $10,000 is spent on each student in schools (Gingrich and Hughes 2014). The American Civil Liberties Union, the Sentencing Project, and the Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice are also in favor of the proposition. Some of these groups agree with Gingrich and Hughes statements, the money
No matter how you look at it, the prison system within the US holds too many people without valid reason. The last decade has seen a lot of states cut down on crime while also cutting down on their prison populations. In the years between 1999 and 2012, for example, both New York and New Jersey cut their prison populations by 30%, and crime rates fell “faster than they did nationally.”
From the article titled “The Punishment Imperative : The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America” by Todd Clear, and Natasha Frost, it goes into full detail on why the incarceration rate is failing. America incarcerates way more people that far exceeds the rate of our top allies. “With just under ten million people incarcerated in prisons and jails worldwide, America incarcerated more than one-fifth of the world’s total prison population.” (The Punishment Imperative: The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America, Page 17) The United States now is in the lead in the world of incarceration, that beats countries like Russia, Rwanda, St. Kitts & Nevis, and Cuba, and the country has four times the rate of European nations. Maintaining the prisons came with a staggering price. In 2006, jurisdictions would spend around $68 billion on correctional supervision. They went from spending from $9 billion in 1982 to an 660 percent increase of $68 billion in 2006. Around the same time period, direct judicial expenditures has increased by 503 percent and the policing expenditures increased by 420 percent. The huge majority of the correctional dollars, with was around 90 percent, went to stabilize mass incarceration. “With a national average annual price tag of almost $29,000 per person per year of incarceration, it cost taxpayers at least ten times more to incarcerate a person than it would have cost to maintain him or her under supervision in the community.” (The Punishment Imperative: The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America, Page 21) In general, this is an issue because the taxpayers are forced to pay a lot of money to maintain a person in prison. Locking up a serious violent offender is justified, however, for thousands of lower-level inmates, it costs taxpayers more than preventing
In “Bring Back Flogging” Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for the Boston Globe, presents the use of corporal punishment as an alternative to the current system of imprisonment. Published in February of 1997, the article states that flogging would be a more effective means of punishment than jail. He insists it would be less expensive and serve as a deterrent to first time offenders. Jacoby’s thoughts on prison reform are legitimate, but his reasoning behind the use of corporal punishment is flawed. He fails to provide reasonable support for his argument which leaves the reader guessing as to the seriousness of his claim.
In “Bring back flogging” Jeff Jacoby argues that corporal punishment should be brought back into our justice system because imprisoning criminals is taking up too much of tax payers money and criminals learn how to become better criminals in prison. He uses statistics, facts, and quotes to help support his claim that our justice system is sub par and does more harm than good to taxpayers and even criminals. Even though Jacoby makes a good point the essay fails to include ethos and pathos making it ineffective. Although he supports what he says with hard facts and statistics he fails to gain an emotional connection with the readers nor does he establish his credibility. Logos is important in an essay because readers are more capable of making
Evidence shows that overcrowded prison conditions increase crime in these confines, such as inmates attacking guards. Instances like this happen in these unprincipled institutions daily across the United States, making overcrowded prisons dangerous to
Critically, the study didn’t provide alternative way of how to govern, and how to control