In recent years, police departments have been looking at instituting the use of Taser-like
handcuffs to control prisoners.
These handcuffs are able to wirelessly deliver 80,000 volts, whereas most Tasers deliver
about 50,000 volts.
Many have questioned whether this device falls under the “cruel and unusual” punishment
amendment of the US constitution.
So, how do we determine what is cruel and unusual?
Well, the Eighth Amendment reads “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive
fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
However, the constitution doesn’t explain what constitutes a cruel or unusual punishment.
As a result, courts have long debated its intended meaning.
One view is that of Constitutional originalists, who believe that the state of the country,
when the constitution was written, should be its guiding principle.
This would mean that anything acceptable in 1790 would be constitutional, include things
like public flogging, being dunked in water, and even child slavery.
More realistically, the Supreme Court tends to use “evolving standards of decency”
based on public opinion.
This is established by how state judges and juries around the country tend to rule.
For example, in 1977 the Supreme Court decided that giving the death penalty in rape cases
was unconstitutional, based on the fact that only one state allowed that punishment.
The Eighth Amendment has also been applied to the treatment of prisoners, with a 1992
ruling prohibiting “unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain”.
While police may argue that the 80,000 volt handcuffs will be used humanely, in their
short period of availability they have already been abused.
In a 2014 court trial, a judge ordered his bailiff to shock a prisoner with high voltage
leg cuffs in order to stop him from talking.
The judge was soon after removed from the bench, ostensibly for this cruel and unreasonable
order.
In 1972, Justice William Brennan laid out four guiding principles for narrowing down
the criteria of “cruel and unusual”.
First and foremost, “the punishment must not, by its severity, be degrading to human
dignity”, which primarily relates to torture.
The punishment must also not be “obviously inflicted in a wholly arbitrary fashion”.
Nor can a punishment be “clearly and totally rejected throughout society”.
Finally, it cannot be “patently unnecessary”.
Although these guidelines are slightly less ambiguous, they still leave the full weight
of the punishment on the court’s judgement.
Some punishments have been considered to violate the eighth amendment, such as giving the death
penalty to children, or locking prisoners to a pole in the hot sun for hours.
In fact, the death penalty itself was briefly ruled cruel and unusual.
However there are still laws on the books which many have considered unconstitutional.
Unfortunately, until they are brought to the Supreme Court, there is no real way of addressing
potentially cruel and unusual punishment until it actually occurs.
If you’d like to dive deeper into the debate over punishment, check out our video on the
ultimate form of punishment, execution, right here.
Thanks for watching TestTube News, please subscribe now, and we’ll see you next time.