SIR, —We who oppose flogging are dubbed " sentimentalists " by
those whose fear and emotion preclude wise judgement. Sound laws are born not of emotion and fear but of objective reasoning, in the light of which flogging must be considered.
Your correspondent, Admiral Sir William James, is sure that " thuggery would disappear overnight if the punishment fitted the crime." We see no reason for this belief. For effective results, rather than punishment to fit the crime there must be treatment to fit the criminal. In order rightly to decide this treatment the offender's upbringing and education must be studied and the degree of his moral culpability thereby assessed. Mr.. Westlake seems confident that the mere passing of a sentence of flogging will turn a " thug " into a " real man," " prepared to take his punishment if it were justly deserved." We disagree, as also with his assertion that " these criminals know, just as well as any of us, that their actions are criminal." Most have been brought up without respect for law or human life and without any conception of their membership of society. Already anti-social, they will be more so after flogging. It is unlikely that the re-introduction of flogging will act even as a deterrent, since the threat of capital punishment itself does not deter men from carrying and using lethal weapons. Moreover, we have the assurance of authorities with knowledge of the facts that since the abolition of corporal punishment the crimes for which it was formerly inflicted have in fact decreased.
In conclusion, may we assure Admiral Sir William James -that as single women, often out alone on foot at night, we have as much reason to fear the cosh for ourselves, and for relatives and friends, as any of his so-called " coshables " but we refuse to let our judgement be overruled by fear.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
