Posted on Jun 7, 2021
In WW2 how did The United States Navy beat the Japanese Navy without flogging?
1.25K
14
9
4
4
0
It seems Flogging was the only way to keep the guys in line. So why did the Navy not fall apart in disarray after Flogging was outlawed? How did we do so well in WW2 without flogging?
If you dont need flogging to do better then someone else then what is there to learn from that?
The Law
The Colonial Naval Rules of 1775 regarding punishments, state,"No Commander shall inflict any punishments upon a seaman beyond twelve lashes upon his bare back with a cat-o'-nine tails;if the fault shall deserve a greater punishment,he is to apply to the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy in order to the trying of him by a Court-Martial,and in the meantime, he may put him under confinement."
In 1799, Congress passed a law that restricted a Commander of a naval vesselto applying no more than twelve lashes on the bare back of a sailor or marine,unless more were ordered by a court-martial. The law, as noted above,was abused in many cases.
New Hampshire Senator Hale in 1850 added an anti-flogging clause to the Naval Appropriation Bill. Commander Uriah P. Levy had been instrumental in securing Senator Hale's interest in the measure. Hale showed that one sailor had been sentenced at court-martial"to receive 500 lashes,and actually received 400 ." This punishment was given in twelve lash installments. The attempt to ban flogging didn't pass as the Navy Department reported that it would be impossible to maintain discipline at sea without this form of punishment.
Finally, in 1851-1853 Commodore R. F.Stockton,Senatorfrom California,further restricted flogging by legislation But it wasn't until 17 July 1862,that Congress finally abolished flogging entirely
Wondering how we beat the Japanese in WW2 without Flogging?
If you dont need flogging to do better then someone else then what is there to learn from that?
The Law
The Colonial Naval Rules of 1775 regarding punishments, state,"No Commander shall inflict any punishments upon a seaman beyond twelve lashes upon his bare back with a cat-o'-nine tails;if the fault shall deserve a greater punishment,he is to apply to the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy in order to the trying of him by a Court-Martial,and in the meantime, he may put him under confinement."
In 1799, Congress passed a law that restricted a Commander of a naval vesselto applying no more than twelve lashes on the bare back of a sailor or marine,unless more were ordered by a court-martial. The law, as noted above,was abused in many cases.
New Hampshire Senator Hale in 1850 added an anti-flogging clause to the Naval Appropriation Bill. Commander Uriah P. Levy had been instrumental in securing Senator Hale's interest in the measure. Hale showed that one sailor had been sentenced at court-martial"to receive 500 lashes,and actually received 400 ." This punishment was given in twelve lash installments. The attempt to ban flogging didn't pass as the Navy Department reported that it would be impossible to maintain discipline at sea without this form of punishment.
Finally, in 1851-1853 Commodore R. F.Stockton,Senatorfrom California,further restricted flogging by legislation But it wasn't until 17 July 1862,that Congress finally abolished flogging entirely
Wondering how we beat the Japanese in WW2 without Flogging?
Posted in these groups: 
Punishment
UCMJ
Punishment UCMJ
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
Good question. What is your opinion? Mine is that flogging is demeaning and counter productive. The UCMJ, also known in the Navy as 'Rock and Shoals' outlines specific punishment for specific offenses. In the NJP side the idea is supposed to stress reprimanded and restructuring the mindset of the offender. Just my opinion.
(2)
(0)
PO3 Aaron Hassay
I have focused on this idea for some time as I recalculate my history. It seems to me there are ways to flog someone beyond actually flogging them.
Personally I do not believe you have the correct crew if you need to flog anyone
People do the most amazing things in selfless nature if the cause is just and correct.
I know they’re are grey areas. I try to be a devil advocate.
Personally I believe things like impressment, slavery, or the draft are similar and will fail
I believe you can build a military and society built on ideals that will win every time like WW2.
Forcing someone to do something like drafting with threat of jail if you do not report is a form of flogging.
Actually I am seeing a lot of similarities between different but similar words these days.
Watch Russian Bootcamp and see how the guys the company commanders literally jump kick the recruits, on YouTube
If we are to build a better smarter army or navy I say we build our society with a more shared goal following ideals like the Constitution creates in the Preamble.
If we built the contracts for federal military service like the FBI that at will contracts then i believe you will create a better military service top down and have a endless supply of people
For some reason people think signing a contract is very risky for a military enlistment.
It is an obligation that you can not leave even if you are assigned to a command that is currently being investigated by the IG for toxic leadership or something similar.
I guess in the end believing you can build a team that is a more shared experience top down without similar threats of some kind of totalitarian flogging to scare people straight or trap them in a contract they can not leave willfully if for example they are in toxic command.
I believe 1000% that you will have an endless supply of recruits if you open up the trust barrier and build it on ideals held in the Constitutions Preamble.
If you read the Preamble it seems to point in a direction against flogging and slavery
If you raise the bar on human development psychologically you will get a better team
In reality there are no slaves. Anyone can stop doing something and run. It is just the consequences you must look at
I believe the military ability to get a bunch of young men and women going in the same direction is a real great format to also inject higher levels of society.
If you read QOL Quality of Life reports or other similar reports that the Navy has put out you will see the intellectuals who created the reports note that Literacy rates in America are not good.
Bootcamp again is the answer.
Maybe they could create a military system that creates a longer remedial education bootcamp for those.
Again I think the military experience has shown you do not need to flog people to win a war. Flogging and other similar things are going out of style. We need to see the future and develop the people with some basic principles found in the Constitution Preamble.
There will be offenders even in this mix but it will be dealt with in a much more I say group way to correct said issue.
The fruits of this labor will bear fruits that are obvious. You will have a stronger society that will defend itself as a whole and not destroy and use itself if we start with fundamentals like that
I did not edit this is a one shot type.
Let me know what you think
Personally I do not believe you have the correct crew if you need to flog anyone
People do the most amazing things in selfless nature if the cause is just and correct.
I know they’re are grey areas. I try to be a devil advocate.
Personally I believe things like impressment, slavery, or the draft are similar and will fail
I believe you can build a military and society built on ideals that will win every time like WW2.
Forcing someone to do something like drafting with threat of jail if you do not report is a form of flogging.
Actually I am seeing a lot of similarities between different but similar words these days.
Watch Russian Bootcamp and see how the guys the company commanders literally jump kick the recruits, on YouTube
If we are to build a better smarter army or navy I say we build our society with a more shared goal following ideals like the Constitution creates in the Preamble.
If we built the contracts for federal military service like the FBI that at will contracts then i believe you will create a better military service top down and have a endless supply of people
For some reason people think signing a contract is very risky for a military enlistment.
It is an obligation that you can not leave even if you are assigned to a command that is currently being investigated by the IG for toxic leadership or something similar.
I guess in the end believing you can build a team that is a more shared experience top down without similar threats of some kind of totalitarian flogging to scare people straight or trap them in a contract they can not leave willfully if for example they are in toxic command.
I believe 1000% that you will have an endless supply of recruits if you open up the trust barrier and build it on ideals held in the Constitutions Preamble.
If you read the Preamble it seems to point in a direction against flogging and slavery
If you raise the bar on human development psychologically you will get a better team
In reality there are no slaves. Anyone can stop doing something and run. It is just the consequences you must look at
I believe the military ability to get a bunch of young men and women going in the same direction is a real great format to also inject higher levels of society.
If you read QOL Quality of Life reports or other similar reports that the Navy has put out you will see the intellectuals who created the reports note that Literacy rates in America are not good.
Bootcamp again is the answer.
Maybe they could create a military system that creates a longer remedial education bootcamp for those.
Again I think the military experience has shown you do not need to flog people to win a war. Flogging and other similar things are going out of style. We need to see the future and develop the people with some basic principles found in the Constitution Preamble.
There will be offenders even in this mix but it will be dealt with in a much more I say group way to correct said issue.
The fruits of this labor will bear fruits that are obvious. You will have a stronger society that will defend itself as a whole and not destroy and use itself if we start with fundamentals like that
I did not edit this is a one shot type.
Let me know what you think
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Did you know that when flogging was introduced to the British Navy, it was looked at as Judicial Reform during a time period when people were hanged for relatively minor offenses? The Navy looked at it as a way of punishing wrongdoing/disobedience while allowing that sailor to return to duty within a short period of time, instead of losing that sailors abilities from incarceration or capital punishment. It makes a weird kind of sense.
(2)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
SSG Samuel Kermon - The Royal Navy suspended the practice of Flogging in 1879, but has never banned it. The British Army finally banned it in 1881.
I'm a reader of Horatio Hornblower, Master and Commander and Sharps Rifles. I would not have wanted to be in the British Army or Navy during the Colonial Era.
I'm a reader of Horatio Hornblower, Master and Commander and Sharps Rifles. I would not have wanted to be in the British Army or Navy during the Colonial Era.
(1)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
SSG Samuel Kermon - And by the way, the US Army abolished flogging in 1812, later reinstated it for the offense of desertion only. The act that banned in the the Army did not cover the Navy. https://historyhub.history.gov/thread/6376
Seeking information about flogging in US Army | History Hub
Am I correct that flogging as a punishment in the United States Army was banned in 1812 but reinstated in 1814?
(0)
(0)
SSG Samuel Kermon
CPT Lawrence Cable neither would I. Thanks for the info about the Army's use of flogging. And the Brit's navy flogging until 1879. Wow.
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
SSG Samuel Kermon - The British Navy had two large mutinies in the late 1700's related to the treatment of sailors, so I am not sure that it was an active punishment by 1879, but it was still legal. I think the major difference between the US Navy and the British Navy at the time is that the US Navy did not impress (Draft) sailors off the docks to fill manpower needs. Makes for a different situation for the Ship's Captain if the Crew can get off at the end of a cruise.
The British Navy also had a mutiny over pay cuts for enlisted in 1931 at the height of the Depression.
The British Navy also had a mutiny over pay cuts for enlisted in 1931 at the height of the Depression.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Discipline is meant to be corrective. I don't know if there is still Correctional Custody but that is where troops were sent to rehabilitate the offender. The government pays a lot of money to train military so kicking folks out shouldn't be a first option for minor infractions. There has always been a form of self governance amongst the ranks to help members make corrections or tow the line. Commanders have a lot of latitude on forms of discipline available to them depending on the offense.
Does flogging develop trust in the system or country?
When you take an oath to support and defend the Constitution it doesn't mean one political party over the other.
It's a privilege to serve. Less than half a percent of our population are serving. Thank you for your service.
Does flogging develop trust in the system or country?
When you take an oath to support and defend the Constitution it doesn't mean one political party over the other.
It's a privilege to serve. Less than half a percent of our population are serving. Thank you for your service.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google