Bring Back Flogging Analysis

Bring Back Flogging by Jeff Jacoby advocates the restoring of the ancient Puritan penalty for crimes to some extent. Via the sentence “Now we practice a more enlightened, more humane way of disciplining wrongdoers: We lock them up in cages”, the author pointed out the unwise in the application of the all-purposed penalty-imprisonment in an ironic tone. By wording with statistic and citations, the author revealed the plight faced by the present imprisonment penalty: imprisonment is an all-purposed punishment; crime is out of control penal system in choked to bursting; price of keeping criminals in cages is appalling; in prison, the risk of being beaten, raped, or murdered is terrifyingly high. As far as the essay is concerned, the author extended the solution that sentencing
What’s more? It relies too much on unsupported generalizations. As we can see that there are many questions posed, though in a strong tone and seemly a convincing way at the first sight. These questions cannot stand themselves for absence of adequate reasons and evidences. Therefore the author’s wording fails to convince me that flogging is a more preferable alternative than imprisonment, for bringing back flogging is neither the civilized way nor the only way. I’d like to share my analysis by sequence in accordance with the structure of the essay. At the very beginning, the author introduced the flogging employed by the Puritan to punish the criminals. After several examples given by the author, most of us may be impressed by the cruelty and savageness. Personally speaking, these materials worked to undermine the essay by convincing contrary evidence. After that the author started to talk about the shortness of imprisonment which seemed hardly to be supported by adequate evidence. If any, the evidence is not to the point to justify his opinion. To take a sentence for example in paragraph 4: Some 1.6 million Americans...the number is climbing. What does these data do with the imprisonment’s