I think this is great news. Rapists need to be severely punished. Their lives should be made to be almost unbearable. It is just too bad Louisiana did not pass a law that requires physical castration on the first offense. It is nice that the judges can sentence the rapists to physical castration, but I wish this was mandatory. Is there anyone that thinks this law is not a great step in the right direction?
It depends when the state is bankrupted by its first huge lawsuit by a wrongfully convicted man. Because it WILL happen sooner or later. There are just too many cases tried every day for it to NEVER happen.
Yes, it’s a fantastic idea - after all, if anyone is wrongly convicted, we can just sew some new balls on them before we send them home.
States have sovereign immunity. Barring special legislation, Louisiana cannot be sued for a wrongful conviction.
OK, taking it seriously for a moment. What will it actually achieve?
The rapists will not like being castrated. It is retribution for their horrible crimes.
Ah, revenge. Anything else? Anything… useful?
So they’ll get away with castrating innocent men? Well, that’s OK then.
Perhaps we should cut off the hands of thieves? Somebody, somewhere, had that idea. Maybe it could work.
Sew the balls off the rapists onto the faces of thieves.
Retribution is not the same thing as revenge.
It will also make it less likely they will rape again.
I’m always concerned when governments cook up new punishments like this. Rational or not, I can’t avoid wondering if the interest of justice is being served rather than a politician’s desire to appear tough on crime and the voters’ interest in punishment. I don’t see this preventing crimes and I’m not sure about the justice angle either. And with all due respect to children who’ve been abused and the parents of children who’ve been abused, I think their plight is being used by legislators to score easy points with the public, regardless of the necessity, sense or constitutionality of the laws being signed.
Yeah, but what do we do with the adulterers?
That can be achieved more effectively by locking them away for ever. As I understand it, it’s quite possible to commit many forms of rape and sexual assault without the use of testicles.
Weird. We incarcerate for murder. Castrate for rape. Shouldn’t we be amputating for theft?
Yah, we live in Leviticus. Or something.
Good grief. Here’s the real problem.
The sentences to rapists have never really
been enforced. I have not heard of a convicted
rapist ever spending their entire sentence in jail.
The appeals process for rape seems very loose.
When we say ten years, we need to stick with it.
No paroles after three.
Come on, people, I want the rapists punished too,
but this is barbaric. The only difference in this
is the chemicals, no Ali Baba yelling “Hassan chop!”
as he swings the sword at Johnny.
I mean, seriously, what the fuck has to be going on in your head to think such a thing is nice?
Great. Rip their balls out. That’s a solid, sophisticated plan you’ve got there. I don’t quite know where to start. It could be the irreversible nature of the punishment which has already been mentioned. Perhaps it’s worth pointing out that even physical castration doesn’t simply remove all sexual thought from a person. It’s quite possible that the huge frustration which would be a result of this could feed into unwanted behaviour, especially if there’s problems already which haven’t been dealt with.
But still, anyway, rip their balls out. As others have said, the occassional victim of a miscarriage of justice won’t care, as long at it’s for the greater good. I could carry on with other relevant cases, but I can’t be bothered.
And just to be safe, rip their balls out anyway.
It also fails to comprehend the dynamic of rape. Rape is seldom about sex so much as power and dominance. A rapist denied his preferred apparatus has not, by any stretch of the imagination, been rendered harmless. Likely worse, since his resentment is…enhanced.
I’m aware that they’re different words, but what you’re advocating is in fact revenge, so the distinction is moot.