Do you agree that “public flogging and amputation may be more barbaric forms of punishment than imprisonment” (376)? Explain your answer using information from Chapman’s essay.

I personally think that flogging and amputation are more barbaric than imprisonment. With imprisonment, prisoners are allowed to go back to the world just as you were when you left. With amputation, criminals are permenantly happicapped for the rest of their life, which might make it hard for them to get a job or live a normal life. Plus, if the criminal is later found not guilty, they will have lost a limb because of someone else's mistake. Chapman does make a good point when he says, "would you rather be subjected to a few minutes of intense pain and considerable public humiliation, or be locked away for two or three years in a prison cell crowded with ill-tempered sociopaths?" (374). I see how being in a crowded cell would be severe tourtue, but amputation is more permanent than being claustrophobic for some years.