[w00pla]

> graffiti and vandalism on bus stops by sandblasting motifs into the glass: http://trimet.org/publicart/busshelters.htm

That addresses the consequences of a problem and not the root causes. It is important to stop the cause of petty vandalism.

I can take a bet that if most countries had corporal punishment and applied it readily and liberally to vandalism cases, both vandalism and other offenses would be stopped.

In the west people continue to do crimes (and let off) until they do a major crime (when it is too late to change entrenched behaviour).

[abraham]

Corporal punishment addresses the consequences of problems instead of the causes as well.

[b-man]

I can take a bet that if most countries had corporal punishment and applied it readily and liberally to vandalism cases, both vandalism and other offenses would be stopped. [citation needed]

[eitland]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Singapore

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore

[b-man]

The thing about references is that they should demonstrate or negate the connection or affirmation that was presented.

I fail to see that in these links. I think a more appropriate set of citations would be:

basic research

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spanking_menu.htm

against corporal punishment as an educative method

http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/corporal- punishment.aspx

http://www.nospank.net/vcb.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin4.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin29.htm

for corporal punishment as an educative method

http://www.corpun.com/ukju9803.htm

http://www.corpun.com/10archive/ukd01001.htm#21929

I personally find a lack of serious psychological research that finds correlation between corporal punishment and increase of quality of life in the society where it is practiced. That observation makes me believe that this practice should be abolished, or severely restricted at least.

[w00pla]

Firstly, a lot of studies (esp. in the USA) shows that corporal punishment have negative outcomes. This is because they do not control for other variables (such as socio-economic circumstances). Poorer parents often hit their kids more (and many studies do make a distinction between parental abuse and responsible punishment).

This is the same as the “powerlines causes cancer” research (people living near powerlines tend to be poorer and more prone to cancer). And powerlines is not even an ideological viewpoint!

The problem is that I can give you a slew of papers saying that “corporal punishment has no detrimental effects” and you can give me another slew saying it has detrimental effects. Such internet discussions will not go anywhere (the same as with the death penalty or gun rights). Perhaps I was wrong to bring this up in YCNews (since this is not the forum for such debates).

In any case, in the country of Singapore they have less crime and fewer problems that 99% of Western countries. Yet they have very strict laws (including corporal and capital punishment for drug offences).

EDIT: The original point I wanted to make was this:

In the USA, tough punishment only comes after the criminal has firmly established his bad behaviour. Any pet owner knows that at that stage it is the most difficult to change set behaviour.

You have silly things such as three strikes laws. Why? The third time that behaviour is fixed.

If that same person were punished severely for his first crime (however minor) he would think twice about breaking the law.

That is how it works in Singapore - the first crime is punished hard, and the behaviour doesn't re-occur.

[rdtsc]

> capital punishment for drug offences ...

> the first crime is punished hard, and the behaviour doesn't re-occur.

Of course it "doesn't re-occur" -- the person is already dead the second time around ;-)

[w00pla]

How many lives do you think one drug dealer ruin before they are caught?

[barrkel]

Coming up with a single example of correlation without demonstrating causation is an insult to readers, IMO.

[speleding]

In Singapore you also have a very high chance of getting caught. The change of getting caught is a much better prediction for crime than the severity of punishment.