Relook need for corporal punishment

I disagree with the letter “Review age limit for caning sentences” (Jan 6).

Even disregarding the culprit’s age, caning is an excessive punishment for offences that neither involve bodily harm nor are violent, including vandalism or overstaying, much as they are crimes and deplorable.

How is it logical to impose physical punishment for an act of touching without lasting damage, but not for the non-seizable offence of voluntarily causing hurt by punching somebody’s teeth out or giving him a split lip that requires stitches?

Such hurt is significant, even if not grievous. And what does it say of gender equality when a penalty exists to which one side is immune? The punishment of caning should itself be reviewed.