3 ms·

This violates the constitution because it is unusual (the constitution bans cruel and unusual punishments). So, we'll have to normalize this punishment.

• gadders 2y ago
  Maybe do the board of directors as well?
• x3n0ph3n3 2y ago
  It can be unusual as long as it is not cruel. It bans "cruel and unusual" not "cruel or unusual." That's why a judge can order, as punishment for shoplifting, that the perpetrator stands in front of the store with a sign saying "I shoplifted here."
  • foobarian 2y ago
    By that token, it could be a cruel punishment as long as it's not unusual. Hmm...
    • hunter2_ 2y ago
      Some may see usual punishment such as customary fines and jail time as cruel, but the usual-ness making the arguable cruelness moot is convenient as it eliminates the need to argue it.
    • digging 2y ago
      Have you heard of American prisons?
    • gs17 2y ago
      Here's the test the Supreme Court established in 1972: > The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture. > "A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." (Furman v. Georgia temporarily suspended capital punishment for this reason.) > "A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." > "A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary."
• capnsalty 2y ago
  [flagged]