The book is basically two books: one against both the present system of mass incarceration and the ineffectual programs of prison reform thereof; and one for flogging as a more humane, effective, and socializing alternative for punishing criminals. The former is not entirely convincing, as he generally overstates his case and caricatures proponents of incarceration, though he makes many strong points; the latter is quite potent and persuasive.

The book could be criticized as disingenuously defending flogging just to shock you and thereby bring attention to the injustice and ineffectiveness of mass incarceration. And that criticism has some merit, but he ultimately treats flogging and more traditional approaches to criminal punishment as serious alternatives. This is made clearest by his eschewing of, not only mass incarceration, but also prison reform. He genuinely sees the need for a third option. ( )

A thoughtful and interesting essay-slash-short-book that does exactly what the title suggests: makes a case for flogging in modern society. The thesis is this: the United States' prison system is out of control, inhumane, and ineffective; a system of voluntary flogging, however brutal of a practice it is, would accomplish the goals of criminal punishment at a fraction of the cost, more honestly, and without the massive damage to society of prolonged mass incarceration. Moskos spends a ton of time saying "I know you're still horrified at this idea…", but I was pretty much on board after the initial statement of intent. Interestingly, Moskos doesn't try to make a case for flogging as a deterrent, pointing out only that imprisonment appears to be largely useless as a deterrent so flogging could not do worse (fair enough). He claims instead, simply, that we should flog because people want criminals to be punished. I don't know how I feel about this idea in general, though I acknowledge the pragmatism of it and it's true that we can't do worse than we already do. He's also pretty dismissive of all prison reform efforts, without providing as much evidence as other claims receive. This might be partly out of necessity to the argument being made—defending flogging depends on it being placed among alternatives that are equally brutal, and if prison reform held the potential to be humane and effective, no one would agree to implement flogging. However, he does make a convincing argument that the things most wrong with prison are also the things that make it prison, so any system that effectively treats criminals is likely to not look much like prison at all. In all, it's a quick read and worth it for the chance to ponder an unusual idea. You might be convinced as well. I'm not sure yet how I should work "I read an essay and now I'm pro-flogging" into casual conversation, but I'll figure it out. ( )

High marks for originality and accessibility. Most of the essay is spent document how our current system of criminal punishment, incarceration, is expensive, ineffective, and counterproductive. Better, he says, we return to corporeal punishment which satisfied the need to punish, but does so in an expedient manner that doesn't destroy the psyche or permanently stigmatize the violator. Only when he favorably suggests that we should return to the old days when police could "beat and release" rather than being required to arrest everyone does his argument lose steam. But on the whole, one wonders if the voluntary option to be caned (two strikes for every year of being jailed otherwise) shouldn't be on the table. ( )

I admit that reading this book in public could prove dangerous to your health, at least based on my experience on the New York city subway system returning home from BookExpo, where I obtained a review copy of this slim volume from its publishers. Glimpsing the title as I skimmed the first few pages, a woman sitting across from me began haranguing me about violence being the problem that makes the city unlivable, and suggesting that we flog our children is just going to make matters worse...

Well, to put matters straight, this book isn't about flogging children. Nor does it have anything at all to do with sexual deviancy (in case anyone is hoping that it does.) Rather, the author -- a former cop and now a professor -- crafted his opus as a semi-serious way to draw attention to his real concern: the fact that not only do prisons not work and cost us a tremendous amount of money, they actually damage society by rendering inmates (most of whom will eventually be released) insane, unemployable and criminal for life. Why, not he suggests (somewhat tongue in cheek) offer convicted people bound for prison the option to exchange their prison sentence for a specified ratio of, say, 1 lash for every two years of jail time? He's not suggesting cutting serial killers or terrorists loose, but thinks something needs to be done to address less dangerous offenders and rein in what is already the highest rate of incarceration in the world (five times the global average, far higher than in Iran or China, and higher even than Russia).

Moskos avoids several easy traps, such as not suggesting that all prisoners be eligible for this option and providing for some input by victims of crime, and he's creative in the way he diagnoses the problem and prescribes his rather unique and distinctive solution. It's an uncomfortable book to read sometimes, but also a witty and extremely well-written one, and it raises important issues that should be taken seriously even if his solution isn't.

The author has been asked to write an op-ed on the subject for the Wall Street Journal, and I'm ready to predict another Tiger Mother-style controversy. But the difference is that Moskos has ingredients in his arguments that are likely to appeal to both sides of the political spectrum, from the most woolly-minded liberal to conservatives in favor of the toughest punishments imaginable. Indeed, it would be rather amusing to watch the two extremes forced to agree on something at last...

For such a slim book, this is very comprehensive and even though I wriggled with discomfort, I can't help recommending it very highly. I just suggest removing the dust jacket if you're planning on reading it in public... ( )

From Amazon.com
Prisons impose tremendous costs, yet they're easily ignored. Criminals-- even low-level nonviolent offenders-- enter our dysfunctional criminal justice system and disappear into a morass that's safely hidden from public view. Our "tough on crime" political rhetoric offers us no way out, and prison reformers are too quickly dismissed as soft on criminals. Meanwhile, the taxpayer picks up the extraordinary and unnecessary bill. In Defense of Flogging presents a solution both radical and simple: give criminals a choice between incarceration and the lash. Flogging is punishment: quick, cheap, and honest. Noted criminologist Peter Moskos, in irrefutable style, shows the logic of the new system while highlighting flaws in the status quo. Flogging may be cruel, but In Defense of Flogging shows us that compared to our broken prison system, it is the lesser of two evils. ( )