Sat down to eat lunch just now and read the Saturday paper. Oh boy.
So there’s this convicted rapist here on page 3. He raped two women in our area back in 1991 but wasn’t caught that time. Five years later he raped someone else in another county, they ran his DNA through the computer and linked him with us, which was enough to get him seven (7) whole years in prison. He got out on parole last year, and recently forced a 4-year-old child (gender not specified in the paper) to perform oral sex on him. A jury has just convicted him of predatory sexual assault. The state’s attorney is asking for a sentence of natural life without parole, but I say that’s too good for him. I say castration’s starting to sound better and better all the time.
What say the Teeming Millions? (pardon me, I can’t stick around to hear your answers, I have to go lie down and be sick for a while, the mental image of somebody forcing a baby to perform a blowjob is just too much for me to handle right now.)
I’m a big fan of castrating rapists. Some people have pointed out it’s not a sex thing, it’s a power thing. So? They can’t exert power via sex if they don’t have the appropriate organs. IMHO of course
Yes they can. A man does not need a penis or testicles to exert power via sex. Foreign objects work quite well for damage-infliction. Much better than a penis, in fact.
True Seph.
Ok, how about this. It’s not to stop them for potentially raping again. Rapists take away something from the women they rape. So they should have something taken away from them that’s just as important. I can’t speak for all men, but the men I do know place a pretty high regard on their testicals.
Well, someone can’t perform a blow job on a foreign object. Takes all the fun out of it.
But it is true. These twisted bastards will assault and rape their victims with whatever - a broom handle, anything. So castration won’t necessarily stop their urge to dominate and terrorize.
So I say, castrate them - take some of their fun away. And then lock them up for life. For LIFE/ - no possibility of parole.
Why not cut his hands off? I don’t mean that as flippantly as it may sound. If you’re in favour of some form of mutilation then why not go for one that reminds him all the time of what he did? It doesn’t sound as though you all are talking about chemical castration in this thread - only physical punishment (although one with a specfic purpose), and that opens up a whole big can o’ worms.
Locking him up forever sounds fine to me, if you aren’t in favour of just having him put to death.
I prosecute guys like this on a regular basis, and I occasionally have some sympathy for them, as it is quite clear that some of them are ill, but then I think about the effect on the victims and get confused again. Those offenders that are just plain evil, I have no sympathy for.
BTW regardless of whether I think they are ill or not, I still go for them in court. Their ‘illness’, assuming it does not amount to insanity, only becomes relevant for sentencing.
Jesus, you guys are bloodthirsty! I know this is more of a rhetorical discussion, but still! Just thinking about it makes my balls cringe!
I agree with Iguana Boy. Sure, some jerks deserve to be castrated and worse, but I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a country where prisoners are tortured or mutilated. We’re civilized human beings — let’s not stoop down to the level of the rapists and murderers we’re trying to punish!
While the idea of castrating rapists sounds nice in many people’s minds, there are problems with it. I’m going with sailor on this one in that I’m a little suprised at you pepper. Imagine if we accidentaly castrated an innocent person.
Now I have no problem with a woman who was raped turning on her attacker with a big pair of sicsors and doing a little cutting. That seems perfectly reasonable to me. It’s just not something we want to institutionalize.
Iguana Boy, the cutting off of the hands was something that had occurred to me as well. I actually think cutting off the arms and legs would be a little better.
As for the OP, well, forcing a 4-year-old to perform oral sex…well, I’m pro-death penalty, and that sick f***** seems richly deserving. I’ve got a three year old child myself. If I ever found out that someone forced my kid to do that, said someone would never go to trial. I might, for homicide, but I’d make it real easy for the prosecution. “Yeah, you bet I cacked him.”
The man’s life will still go on. It’s not over. He couldn’t have kids, but he could adopt. He could continue to work. He could continue to go out and drink with his friends. He could see the sun rise in the morning. But if you kill him, well, then you take his life away.
Taking a man’s balls=justifiable
Taking a man’s life=unjustifiabe
Now. are you saying that it is justifiable to take an innocent man’s balls? And if we start castrating rapists why not cut the hands off people convicted of domestic abuse? Or why don’t we just chop off the hands of convicted murderers? Sure, some innocent people will get their hands cut off, but it will send a strong message to those that would think about murder.
I don’t care what people want to do to convicted murderers. Unless it’s extreme torture, the person WILL CONTINUE TO LIVE.
Life to me is more important than balls, hands, legs, noses, fingers, whatever.
Life=good
Death=bad
It sucks that anybody has to die. It is even worse when INNOCENT people have to DIE. But I am advocating aboloshing the death penalty because the State shouldn’t get to decide who lives or dies, whether the person is innocent or not.
Ok. Let’s try a little game of what if.
Let’s say the state decides to start physically castrating people.
Now let’s say that you are a 20 year old, below poverty line, black man.
You are accused of rape. You are given a sub-par defender. He shows up to court drunk and frequently falls asleep during trial. You are found guilty. You are sent to jail and you are castrated.
Two years later it is discovered that you are innocent.
You are released from jail but you are currently a eunuch.
Would you say to yourself “Well at least I have a fun and exciting life ahead of me as a eunuch” or would you say “This is a barbaric country with a disgusting sense of justice. I can’t believe the state castrated me just because I’m poor and couldn’t afford a proper defense. I’m going to see to it that we abolish this system of castration.” I would think that you would choose the later choice.
Well, there’s got to be a balance between “cruel and unusual punishment” and “let the punishment fit the crime”. It can be argued that putting men in cells is cruel and unusual. It can also be argued that caning and torture and dismemberment are perfectly suitable and justifiable punishments.
I would support the castration of sex offenders, but not as a standard punishment. I would allow convicted rapists the option of castration in exchange for less jail time.
I think this is something of a trick question. Of course I would rather live sans balls, I would also rather live sans left leg, or right ear. However, that is not the choice. We are talking about locking up rapists or locking them up and castrating them. Any civilized society is going to choose to just lock them up. I would also recommend more treatment programs.
Ideally, we’d have plenty of money available to lock up everyone for the full amount of time, wouldn’t have to worry about corrupt prison guards, and have the ability to treat all prisoners with mental illnesses.
Check that. Ideally, we wouldn’t have to worry about crime.
But, anyway, seeing as how we can’t do everything that we want to do for criminal rehabilitation, we have to do what we can. I like the idea of a flexible justice system… not one that has a personalized ruling for each individual offender, but more options to shorten jail time. Caning, castration, loads of community service, and the like, can provide an opt-out for criminals who wouldn’t mind shaving an easy five years off their sentence.
I know it sounds cruel, but so is forcing a toddler to give head. Compared to that, does it really sound so “unusual”?
The only problem I currently have with the system is the state’s ability to decide who gets to live or die. However, if we were to implement some of Spoofe’s ideas, it could possibly act as a deterrence. AND the community service could really come in handy.
Of course treatment for the mentally ill should also be an option.
I would perfer the system to be about rehabilitation and deterrence, not necessarily about punishment.