Castration for sex offenders?

I do see both sides here and agree that due to the sheer amount of false imprisonments it's not a good idea people in prison can be let off if wrongly accused but if castrated what would happen.

"sorry sir we castrated you 6 months ago but we found out xxxxxxxx was lying would you like some false ones"
 
shoes said:
And you've just identified exactly why we have such a pathetic and backwards judicial system in the UK.

Saying that, if someone raped my mother/wife/daughter then chemical castration would certainly be well worth taking up, and preferably before I got to them with the angle grinder.
Click to expand...

We have a very forward and progressive legal system in that it's not based on the backward idea of "an eye for an eye".

Punishment should remain standardised in the sense that breaking the law should equal one punishment (prison) and the offence only dictating the time in prison.

Having specific punishments for certain types of crimes (no matter how emotionally provocative they are) creates a joke of a legal system as no punishment can then be seen to be "proportional" to a crime. So mutilating someone's body because of a rape conviction is barbaric and invalidates the rest of the law's the state dishes out.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Not really, end of the day if I was found guilty of a murder I didn't commit, would I prefer to go 60 years in jail, potentially getting raped or beaten up on a regular basis, or just have it end in a few years... killed, hopefully painlessly, or 60 years of basically physical and mental torture...... yeah the death penalty is really cruel.
Click to expand...
I don't even know where to begin - too many errors & unfounded assertions to bother replying.

I respond using the same level of intellect you did (and just mash the keyboard with my fist).

DFGJASD%£"£$"ff123FGJIOAGPOJARGJIPAJAF!"£$%GJIADRT23459U7235.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Not really, end of the day if I was found guilty of a murder I didn't commit, would I prefer to go 60 years in jail, potentially getting raped or beaten up on a regular basis, or just have it end in a few years... killed, hopefully painlessly, or 60 years of basically physical and mental torture...... yeah the death penalty is really cruel.
Click to expand...

lol i bet you would change your mind fast once you are being strapped to the lethal injection table.... most people would choose any kind of survival over death..
 
elmarko1234 said:
Actually it's easy to police, as it requires injections (performed by a doctor) on a 6 monthly basis - you can quite easily tell by who misses the appointments.

(according to a few sources I just read up on).
Click to expand...

And how long would it take to catch up with someone who decided they did not wish to have their injections? Would this even be a priority for a stretched police force? Chemical castration is an interesting theory but the impracticality makes it more than a little risky.
 
pingwing said:
We have a very forward and progressive legal system in that it's not based on the backward idea of "an eye for an eye".

Punishment should remain standardised in the sense that breaking the law should equal one punishment (prison) and the offence only dictating the time in prison.

Having specific punishments for certain types of crimes (no matter how emotionally provocative they are) creates a joke of a legal system as no punishment can then be seen to be "proportional" to a crime. So mutilating someone's body because of a rape conviction is barbaric and invalidates the rest of the law's the state dishes out.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good if the "standardised punishment" is effective which is difficult to argue for imprisonment. There are many arguments for a wider introduction of restorative justice which would lead to a far less standardised approach but has many positive effects.
 
bledd. said:
Chain gang, to improve our road system.

Problem solved
Click to expand...

Agree with this, all prisoners should be put to hard work for their crimes, instead of being locked up in a cell, or sitting in a room earning a degree.

Castration for sex offenders is a non starter for me as it just opens the door for all other crimes, like chopping off offenders hands for theft, etc.... :(
 
Not sure about this for a couple of reasons.

1. The desire to cause harm may not go away as it may have become more a desire for sadism that has developed in the offender and they may continue there escapades despite no longer being actually aroused.

2. Counter agents - What if offender takes stimulants legal or illegal to negate the effect of the chemical castration.
 
DanielMMS said:
And how long would it take to catch up with someone who decided they did not wish to have their injections? Would this even be a priority for a stretched police force? Chemical castration is an interesting theory but the impracticality makes it more than a little risky.
Click to expand...
Risky compared to what?, these are people who choose it once they have done the term.

Is it better to just "let them out" even when they know they are a risk?.

Also, tagging ins't that difficult - If they are willing to be injected (castrated by choice) I'm pretty sure they would wear a small tag also.
 
Alphane said:
Not sure about this for a couple of reasons.

1. The desire to cause harm may not go away as it may have become more a desire for sadism that has developed in the offender and they may continue there escapades despite no longer being actually aroused.

2. Counter agents - What if offender takes stimulants legal or illegal to negate the effect of the chemical castration.
Click to expand...
You make it sound like we wouldn't have "choice 1" once they had done there time.

This is an addition for after they are let out, not as a alternative to prison time.
 
Deadbeat said:
Castrating a sex offender doesn't stop them raping someone? :confused:
Click to expand...

Nope.

elmarko1234 said:
Are you sure about that.

Chemical castration (not permanent type).

"When used on men, these drugs can reduce sex drive, compulsive sexual fantasies, and capacity for sexual arousal"
Click to expand...

Col_M said:
My understanding of it is without any sex hormones, sex drive is non existent and the offender would get no desire to commit any of these offences in the future. It will also reduce their aggressiveness due to the lack of testosterone.
Click to expand...

You're over way simplifying why people offend. People do it for the power trips, because of social reasons and many others. Lack of testosterone doesn't stop this, and the adrenal gland also produces the hormone.

This problem is much more complicated than most people here seem to think.
 
I don't disagree with castration per se, however it would be horrific if someone accused you of rape (but it clearly wasn't rape), and you were convicted and castrated (wrongly) as a result.

On that basis, for practical reasons ie. the law doesn't always get it right, I would have to oppose castration.

It's a bit like the death penalty. What happens if a few years later it turns out someone else did it? Oops?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Nope.





You're over way simplifying why people offend. People do it for the power trips, because of social reasons and many others. Lack of testosterone doesn't stop this, and the adrenal gland also produces the hormone.

This problem is much more complicated than most people here seem to think.
Click to expand...
Who said it as that simple?

All that's implied is that a NUMBER of cases, voluntary chemical castration could reduce the chance of re-offending - once a rapist has been let out & they wish to take the chemical castration option I fail to see how anybody is MORE at risk than if they are just simply let out.

Clearly what's lacking is concrete evidence to say either way, but nobody is suggesting that giving somebody an injection & letting them go after committing rape (without going to prison) is a good idea (as some here seem to taking it as that).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom