|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted May 18, 2010 02:02 AM |
|
|
actually death camps are more efficient and draw less debates 
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 06:23 AM |
|
|
@Fontana:
Quote:
I am opposed to the idea. Totally unacceptable. This is the United States and not the Czech Republic or Poland.
This is the United States of SPARTA. The balls go off, followed by the heads of the rapist and his immediate friends & family. I was sort of starting off with castration since it would be more convincing and then I'd wean everybody towards the rest.
Quote:
I'm certainly not condoing these heinous crimes, but the offenders should be subject to the same type of criminal penalties that other criminals are.
Crimes are never dealt with the same. Arsonists don't go through drug rehab, drug abusers do; pickpockets don't get their driver's license suspended, heavy traffic violators do; etc. There are different medicines for different sicknesses. Perhaps even chemical castration is a more drastic measure than those other examples, but rape is commonly perceived as among the most harmful crimes.
Quote:
In some Arab countries, if you're caught stealing, they chop off your hand. We don't do that here because it's considered uncivilized. If you assault somebody with a baseball bat, the punishment is not that you will be hit with a baseball bat.
Somebody robs a bank, they go to jail, and when they get out, they rob another bank. If caught, they get sent back to jail. We don't cut off their legs to lessen the likelihood that they will rob another bank.
So why make an exception for sex offenders? They have to go to jail and therapy. Whether or not they are rehabilitated is irrelevant. The point is that castration is cruel and unusual punishment, which is forbidden by the US Constitution. Castration smacks of barbarianism. What's next? Bring back the rack?
I never said the punishment for rapists should be to have a warden come in, take off his pants, and rape the rapist. Castration is a means to an end. If castration solves the problem, and you're still against it, you have to reconsider which one of us is less compassionate.
I don't believe castration for rapists is cruel in the way amputation for thieves is, nor do they follow the same principle. I feel I sufficiently pointed out the differences with this post:
There's always a slippery slope, but I think there's some key differences between castration on hardcore sex offenders(©) and amputating thieves or fleeing criminals.
Firstly, rape is generally considered more serious than almost every crime, so more extreme measures to prevent it become more worthwhile. Secondly, a castrated person can still go back into society, live, work, and function with daily tasks. Sex is recreation, albeit very highly valued recreation. An amputated person on the other hand (lol) is going to be severely handicapped in their ability to function, and their condition becomes a burden to everybody. Also, on the cruelty issue, a castrated person won't be burning with lust and tormented; they'll be indifferent to sex. An ambulated person, however, will more directly suffer from their limitations.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Father
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 07:08 AM |
|
|
If nothing else ever comes of this debate, it is good to have others feel the same way that I do. It is interesting to note that that seems to be the case for each of us. This is rather split.....
Although at this time I just really don't have anything further to contribute passed what I have said in the previous pages. I do continue to read though and Dom your a sure pleasure to see added to the thread.
____________
Once Bitten,
Twice shy,
Be careful,
This one has sharp teeth.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 07:59 AM |
|
|
cut off their nads like in that one movie where this 16 year old did him when he was awake and tied noose to him with option of explain the evidence to his people or kill himself
i say cut out their eyes and chop off their nads
|
|
Lure_of_Lilith
Adventuring Hero
2nd Level, Expert Blind
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 08:51 AM |
|
|
Quote:
@LOL: Science Fairs? Who goes to Science Fairs? I'm not even sure what a Science Fair is. 
Come out from your cave, then you'll know.
____________
|
|
DomFontana
Known Hero
NY Yankees
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 10:52 AM |
|
|
@blizzardboy: I understand what you're saying, but everything is relative. I do consider castration, chemical or othwewise, to be very cruel. Taking a license away is not doing anything to the person's body.
In Italy, if a man finds his wife in bed with another man and kills them both, he's just given a slap on the wrist. It's considered justifiable homicide. Not so, in the US.
My point is that I consider sex more than simply a great recreational activity. For me, to castrate a man is to take away his manhood, his dignity, and humiliate him. We don't humiliate our other criminals.
I wouldn't want either punishment, but given the choice, I'd probably want my hand cut off before I was castrated. You simply don't do that to a man. I consider it barbaric, whether or not it solves the problem.
@Father: Thank you. I always enjoy your posts, too.
@LOL: I hope you know I was just teasing you.  But seriously, we don't have many science fairs in NY. Where are you from, if you don't mind me asking? I just thought it was funny that you suggested that girls should go to science fairs instead of entering pageants.
____________
The King
|
|
veco
Legendary Hero
who am I?
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 11:13 AM |
|
|
How chemical castration is a humiliation to someone is beyond me.
Maybe the problem is in the name? Maybe it should be called mandatory pharmaceutical birth control for males?
____________
none of my business.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 11:17 AM |
|
|
|
DomFontana
Known Hero
NY Yankees
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 11:49 AM |
|
|
@veco: To take away a man's sex drive is humiliating, demoralizing, and degrading in my opinion. If a man is forced to take an anti-androgen drug, for example, the man is usually incapable of being sexually aroused, which I understand is the whole point. To put it discretely, he can't have an erection. Cruel and unusual punishment. Case closed.
Also, the man can experience feminizing effects, such as abnormally large mammary glands; that is, breast enlargement, like a woman. IOW, you're turning the man into a woman. Cruel and unusual punishment. Case closed again.
Seriosly though, I guess we just have to agree to disagree.
____________
The King
|
|
Badasti
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 12:32 PM |
|
Edited by Badasti at 12:36, 18 May 2010.
|
Depending on the severity of the crime I'd say yeah it's a good idea. If he openly took a stranger and raped her then by all means.
Asides from the trauma and possible infections he took away her free will. After being castrated I reckon he should still spend a good deal of time in prison though. By simply chopping his nuts off and setting him back out on the streets you run the risk of him moving onto revenge.
As for a child rapist say under 15 if he's over 21 then I'd say the death penalty. I know you said that we assume that the death penalty wasn't a question but in a developing child the psychological trauma of something like that can cause a life time worth of damage.
If the victim was 16+ it would have to be studied carefully. Girls are at a flirtatious and adventurous age by that time. They may have instigated the incodent. When I was 16 I knew girls (that were the local bicycles) that flirted with bouncers etc to get into clubs (I live in South Africa, the legal drinking age is 18 and many underaged get away with it). I also know girls that flirted with men to get them to buy a couple of drinks for her then she'd give 1 to her male friend that she was interested in and bugger off laughing. If that were the case he should just go to prison imo. Don't get me wrong there is no excuse for rape, but if she runs around doing that kind of stuff to people then she's asking for trouble. I have scored many drinks with this method back in the day though, my sister used to do it to get me drinks all the time.
If she didn't instigate the event and he just did it because he's a twisted scumbag then he should have his nuts chopped off aswell.
So as I say, 16+ if the girl is completely innocent I'm all up for the harshest punishment that can be given.
If the girl flirted with the dude just to use him and make him look like a tosser then she is causing half the problem. She doesn't know whats going through that guys mind, he may have a load of his own issues only to get screwed over again and be pushed over the edge. She's playing fire and can expect to be burned. However that doesn't excuse the guy in question at all and he should be handed a hefty prison sentence.
Overall I don't know any rapists or what motivates them to be a wart on the ass of humanity. I'm no therapist. Alls I can say is I've seen some really ###chy (it says itchy ) women treating random males like crap aswell to get what they want, so although rape is never justified she is half of the problem. Some males deserve to be treated like that because they are exactly the same. Some dudes are general decent people and just think it's their lucky day. You never know, if he's in a pretty messed place in life this might be the kinda thing that throws him over the edge. Who's to say.
Maybe I'm wrong though, if they are generally a decent person that wouldn't do this kinda thing then maybe they never would have regardless. Even if they were pushed over the edge. If it just takes a certain kind of person who's a bit screwed in some part of his head then I don't believe he should be able to interract with society. If that's the case then maybe it's more of a mental problem and the lowered testosterone may help. I can't say because I don't know anything about it.
In either case I don't write the law so this is just a personal opinion. As with anything it'd have to be looked at pretty carefully.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 12:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@veco: To take away a man's sex drive is humiliating, demoralizing, and degrading in my opinion.
If we are talking about repeat sexual offenders - and we do - then I'd say compared to the humiliation, demoralization and degrading the children and female victims suffer this looks pretty tolerable for me and mentioning these in connection with the offender leaves QUITE a bad taste.
But I suppose, a lot of people will agree with you; just shoot the snows like the rabid dogs they are and be done with it. At least they die with their sex drive intact.
|
|
DomFontana
Known Hero
NY Yankees
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 01:10 PM |
|
|
@JollyJoker: I understand exactly what you're saying and I certainly don't mean to trivialize what the victims go through. I agree with you on that. I agree that a rapist is despicable. Rape is one of the worst crimes and repeated rapists are certainly scum, as you mentioned.
But with all that being said, where we disagree is with the form of punishment. I certainly can understand why the victim and her friends and family would want to castrate the rapist. I probably would, too, if it ever happened to anyone that I knew. Fortunately, it never has.
However, as I mentioned in an earlier post, that's why we can't let the victims make the laws. They can't be objective about what is fair. They, understandably, just want revenge. They might even want to inflict suffering on the offender or even have him tortured for what he did and that's also understandable.
But when you step back and take a reasoned approach to the situation, that's not the way to handle it, in my opinion.
It's a tough problem, without an easy solution, but for me, I think castration is not the way to handle the situation.
____________
The King
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 01:21 PM |
|
|
In all cases, no matter what the state decides, what is decided must be constructive towards the purpose of the state.
If the state has a purpose that allows killing its own citizens under the right circumstances, then my opinion is such a state is suppressing its citizens in this area.
A state that does so makes itself stand on a weaker ground, because it's unlikely people would accept being suppressed. In turn, it means such a state would have a harder time stay in power, because it's people who give power to a state.
Killing can be replaced with any kind of suppression and I believe what in the long run solves all problems of these sorts are to define a purpose that focuses on maximizing freedom of the people.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 01:33 PM |
|
|
But it is no punishment. It's not done to punish the, Instead it's an attempt to integrate a certain type of offender back into society, and you don't have to do it (you can opt to stay in jail).
That's the whole point. It is NO punishment. PUNISHMENT would be to chop off the whole equipment without anesthesia, then feed it to them.
|
|
DomFontana
Known Hero
NY Yankees
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 01:45 PM |
|
|
@JollyJoker: Theoretically, it's not supposed to be a punishment and it's supposed to prevent the rapist from doing it again, but I still think it is punishment.
Now, the other point you mentioned is an interesting one. You're talking about giving the rapist the OPTION to be jailed or submit to chemical castration and be released, right?
I have to think about that one.
____________
The King
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 01:50 PM |
|
|
|
It IS that way in Poland, if I'm not wrong.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 02:00 PM |
|
|
On the matter of punishment. I have always understood that term as inflicting artificially (something that wouldn't happen otherwise) negative consequences upon certain actions to condition people not to perform said actions.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
DomFontana
Known Hero
NY Yankees
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 02:51 PM |
|
|
Very interesting, JollyJoker. There are so many points of view here, that even though I read the thread before I made my first post, sometimes it's tough to remember who said what. If you already mentioned all this, I'm sorry.
@The one and only Pit Lord: Yes, that's the way that I view it, too. Forcing something on someone's body against their will. And yes, I am aware that's what the rapist did, but the rapist is a criminal. The government is not supposed to act like a criminal.
But, JJ makes the point of making it an option to avoid jail time. What do you think of that, Pit Lord?
____________
The King
|
|
Lure_of_Lilith
Adventuring Hero
2nd Level, Expert Blind
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 02:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@LOL: I hope you know I was just teasing you. But seriously, we don't have many science fairs in NY. Where are you from, if you don't mind me asking? I just thought it was funny that you suggested that girls should go to science fairs instead of entering pageants.
Know that I was playing with you too, haha. That was a reference to what you said over at the Music thread. Anyway, I never said that I prefer girls to be going to Science Fairs rather than Beauty Pageants, I just used that imagery to further out my point that, amongst our generation (and probably those that'll follow after ours), education is not as highly regarded and appreciated as it was back in the olden days. Kids' desire in studying is no doubt declining because of, probably, I guess, their exposure to the easier methods of attaining a multitude of cash without finishing a degree, or even highschool a.k.a. celebritism. Thus, Gandhi's viewpoint of educating the youth for a better future, for me, is absolete if the youth themselves never bother wanting to learn, fighting for a change and envisioning a brighter future ahead in the first place.
Not to say that we're headed towards destruction, but imagine a world completely run by celebrities and media. That's a world we're not far away from.
I'm from the States, by the way. Peace out.
____________
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted May 18, 2010 05:17 PM |
|
|
you know... I really shouldn't enter into this...but... I deserve a bit of a break.
this is a very sexist proposition, because this is assuming that all sex offenders are male. what about female rape? It does happen, not often, but it does. are you doing to fill it up with cement?
also, like the death penalty, what happens if we get wrongly convicted person? damage is done, no amount of money get's you're balls back. until they are able to make artificial ones (and not out of newspaper), then it's not a good system.
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
