Would you support physical castration for sex offenders?

[JacksSmirkingRevenge]

It would have to depend upon the specifics of the case, to me.
A sex offender isn't necessarily violent...A 16 year-old lad having sex with his 15 and 3/4 year-old girlfriend is technically a sex offender here in the UK, is he not?

[Tyrannical]

Violent criminals should be quickly and efficiently executed when undeniable evidence is presented.

[FBM]

Well, I guess I should've known there would already be a study on it: http://www.jaapl.org/content/33/1/16.full

Long story short, it works most of time.

Summary
A summary of the sexual recidivism rates for the European and U.S studies is depicted in Table 2. The overall rate of sexual recidivism following castration is very low, ranging between 0 and 10 percent. Parenthetically, the 10 percent rate occurred in a small sample (n = 21) after both of the reoffending castrated persons were given testosterone injections. The low sexual recidivism findings remained consistent across the studies, even though they varied in methodology and had a variety of limitations. Many of the studies were hampered by the following: no pre‐surgery base‐rate risk for sexual recidivism, lack of a true comparison group, no baseline data regarding pre‐intervention offending and offense types, or small sample sizes. Further, there was a lack of post‐surgery corroboration of deviant sexual interest via use of penile plethysmography, a method useful for assessing sexual deviant interest among those seeking community release.36

[Pappa]

Violent criminals should be quickly and efficiently executed when undeniable evidence is presented.

I don't think there are that many cases which are so clear-cut. The Innocence Project in the US highlights just how many miscarriages of justice are made, and they're only scratching the surface with cases in which they have very robust evidence to prove innocence.

[Woodbutcher]

I think amputating their legs would work better.

[rainbow]

It would have to depend upon the specifics of the case, to me.
A sex offender isn't necessarily violent...A 16 year-old lad having sex with his 15 and 3/4 year-old girlfriend is technically a sex offender here in the UK, is he not?

Does having coffee with a Skepchick count?

[Tyrannical]

Violent criminals should be quickly and efficiently executed when undeniable evidence is presented.

I don't think there are that many cases which are so clear-cut. The Innocence Project in the US highlights just how many miscarriages of justice are made, and they're only scratching the surface with cases in which they have very robust evidence to prove innocence.

I think just the opposite, that it is clear cut in many, many cases.
But even if not, just concentrate on the speedy executions when we do have incontrovertible evidence, such as videotape and a wounded criminal found still at the scene. What good reason is there for not already executing the Batman movie killer?

[rainbow]

What good reason is there for not already executing the Batman movie killer?

The investigation isn't complete.
What about if he was not acting alone?
It's a bit difficult to interrogate a corpse.

[Audley Strange]

Some people over here would. They just recently approved chemical castration after a spate of particularly gruesome attacks on children. I don't know the recidivism rate on sex offenders, but I think it's pretty high. I'm OK with cutting the 'nads off of repeat offenders if they've proven to be resistent to therapies. Or if it's particularly gruesome, maybe after the first time.

Lawmakers Seek Physical Castration of Sex Offenders

Lawmaker Park In-suk of the ruling Saenuri Party on Wednesday proposed a bill authorizing physical castration of habitual sex offenders who are highly likely to reoffend.

The bill was signed by 19 lawmakers from the Saenuri and main opposition Democratic United parties.

It would allow courts to order the operation at the request of public prosecutor, for habitual sex offenders who are deemed to have no chance of rehabilitation and a high likelihood of recidivism.
englishnews@chosun.com / Sep. 06, 2012 13:48 KST

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/htm ... 01352.html

What an astonishingly difficult topic. Good one.

I AM NOT CONDONING SEX WITH CHILDREN OR THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN...

but it seems to me that what we are suggesting is torture of an individual because their sex drive transgresses our laws.

I AM NOT SAYING THOSE LAWS ARE WRONG.

However we used to have laws against homosexuality. Some people still really have the bit in between their teeth about that, seeing it as abhorrent. I would loathe to think that a society would condone the torture or killing people because of something they can really do little about.

In the case of child rapists that transgression seems so inimical to us that our automatic response is to react violently towards it, completely understandable but not entirely helpful. Not that we can just shrug such off either. It seems unjust to sustain such an aberration at all, to do so almost seems like feeding the parasite so to speak, perhaps we would be better off terminating them rather than torturing them, I can't see that sustaining their existence is good for anyone, including themselves. However that does then lead us down paths we might have difficulty coming back from.

Is it better to consider that now or do away with them and worry about it when it happens. I don't know. It seems to me like a predatory pathology, we should keep them locked up until we can fix it, not for the benefit of the child abusers, but for our own benefit in the long run. We can be smart enough given time to figure this out.

[Sean Hayden]

I'm for long prison sentences. I read somewhere that on average they get away with it for at least 10 years before they are caught the first time. Yet I bet most of them do less than 2 on a first offense.

[Rum]

I think proposing barbaric sentences for barbaric acts of crime and/or violence is simply barbaric.

I agree with Sean. Long terms in gaol are the answer.

Incidentally Tyrannical, new DNA testing methods have freed 17 people on Death Row so far in America in the last few years. People who were convicted and were waiting in the barbaric way America does it, for months and years on end to be legally killed by their government.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content ... enalty.php

[Kristie]

I know that if someone touched my child, I wouldn't care if their punishment was barbaric or civilized. I'd want the fucker dead.

[Rum]

I know that if someone touched my child, I wouldn't care if their punishment was barbaric or civilized. I'd want the fucker dead.

That surely is why we make laws in the way we do.

[Kristie]

I know that if someone touched my child, I wouldn't care if their punishment was barbaric or civilized. I'd want the fucker dead.

That surely is why we make laws in the way we do.

The child and their family have to live with it for the rest of their lives, the offender shouldn't get the chance to. That is, if the child isn't killed. In which case, the parents should get to inject the damn needle.

[Rum]

I understand the depth of feeling, but one of the reasons justice is 'blind' is so that emotion and revenge aren't part of the calculation. If everyone got the outcome they wanted emotionally from the wrongs done to them and their loved ones we would live in a pretty bloody state of affairs.