Prison for child abusers is pretty bad, and doesn’t deter. If you actually castrate a man, you are giving him an incentive to commit more crimes. The point of incarceration is to protect the public from dangerous people. The danger doesn’t go away by chemically or physically castrating a man.
It’s a very rough analog, but this thread reminded me of this story.
High like beyond reasonable doubt, and egregious like those satanic sex abuse cases which turned out to be completely made up? You going to grow back those guy’s balls when convictions inevitably get overturned?
The law can’t even be trusted 100% with murder cases where it’s beyond doubt that someone actually died.
Saying the same thing twice is not a definition-which crimes?
You’re really evading the question. What are the “other sexual crimes” and/or “crimes of such nature”? Before we start making laws permitting the castration of people, I think it’s a good idea to clearly define the crime so that a court will be able to determine whether or not it has actually been committed. You’ve identified rape, but you seem to have a list of “other sexual crimes” in mind that I’d rather not guess about.
Rape and violent sexual actions in general.
Okay, forget rape, we got that. But what are “violent sexual actions”? Would you please be specific? Gah!
OTHER than rape.
Prosecutor: Your Honor, the defendant has been accused of a violent sexual action. The state requests…
Judge: A what?
P: A violent sexual action.
J: What’s that?
P: It’s a sexual crime.
J: What kind of sexual crime?
P: It’s like rape.
J: Is it rape?
P: No, but it is of such nature.
J: What do you mean by nature? Did he have sex outdoors?
P: No, but it was a sexual action that was quite violent.
J: Ah, you mean a violent sexual action.
P: Yes! Exactly!
J: And what’s that again?
And so on.
This language is about as useful as when a mother tells her daughter never to let a stranger touch her “you know where”.
I could see it having some uses.
Convicted violent sex offender, or repeat offender, lifetime imprisonment, no chance of parole.
Eligible for parole, (after X number of years), condition of parole = agree to chemical castration.
Qin Shi Huangdi, why don’t you reread "The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment " by C.S. Lewis The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment <p> C.S. Lewis ? That should clarify in your mind why “curing” criminals is a profoundly bad idea in the long term, regardless of whatever pomps and empty promises it seems to offer initially.
I think violence and control is a huge part of it.
For $30 you could get a prostitute and save yourself the significant criminal charges - if you indeed have an urgent biological need.
Vigorous self-abuse, I suspect, is the idea being danced around.
Chemical castration? Woooah. That’s going a bit far. They just need some graham crackers. That’ll quench those urges to commit violent sexual actions.
I have no cite but I recall reading about a paedophile who requested “Chemical castration”, because he couldn’t help but react to his urges.
It is not permament, so does no long lasting harm to the subject.
It gets the subjects “life back”, he/she can live a normal life from that point onwards.
If they don’t wish to be subjected to it then they can be incarcerated, and in the U.K. be subject to monitoring on release.
(Though this has been notoriously inefficient)
It stops kids/women/men becoming future victims.
If it doesn’t work for all then don’t try it on those whom it doesn’t .
But don’t just say lets not bother.
But how could you determine who it works and who it doesn’t ahead of time? Seriously, until it’s tried there’s no way to be sure.
And I would say, IF we even consider it, that it would have to be something initiated by the sex criminal himself. If we let the legal system start handing out that sentence it’s going to be abused if past history is anything to go by.
Iy may not curb the desire. Ask any guy how they feel when they are horney as hell and can’t get it up. When that happens, there’s is no shortage of other body parts (i.e. fingers) and objects that can be inserted.
And as was stated above, testoserone will negate the effects of chemical castration.
This is already widely used in medicine for repeat sexual offenders. Usually on a voluntary basis.
What you basically do is give the patient anti-androgens to reduce their libido. The effects are reversible wears off not long after cessation treatment. This is usually together with some psychologic training (ex CBT)
People I talked to have been very happy with the treatment partly b/c now they don’t get a raging boner every time they see someone under 10 years of age. It’s easier to not do something stupid.
Technological fixes for existential problems have a habit of not working. Psychopharmacology does not prevent depression and schizophrenia being very dangerous (to the sufferer) illnesses. Depressive suicides are highly common, notwithstanding the best will of those who administer the drugs.
Hormone therapy for sex offenders might work sometimes, but the problem is that unless it is an extremely reliable fix for sexually abberant behaviour, it is unsatisfactory.
And sexual misbehaviour is not penis misbehaviour. It is mind misbehaviour. Making the penis stop working does not change the mindset of offenders. It sometimes makes them worse, in the sense that a person with sexual disfunction not uncommonly requires more and more exotic fantasy (or real) stimulus to achieve their desired outcome (sorry). I have prosecuted people who could prove without doubt, from well conducted tests, that they were impotent - they simply could not achieve an erection, through old age, cardiovascular problems or whatever. Yet they still fiddled little kids.