Sex offenders, most specifically those who rape, should not only have their testicles removed, but their penis too (if male, and the majority of rape cases are committed by males).
In this case, rape (in the conventional sense) can't be committed by the offender again. It also acts as a deterant to those who would commit it, as the punishment is permanent and well-fitting of the crime committed.
Castration, as put to in other arguments, can be got around, and with a penis still remaining, rape can be committed again. Without a penis, it cannot, not with the same devastating effects.
Various statistics seem to support that removal of the testicles significantly reduces or eliminates a males urgent uncontrolled lust for sexual intercourse to release the need. Records from European and USA historical use of castration seems to make the offenders less aggressive and in some cases castrated offenders feel that they have benefitted from not having testicles.
There is no point housing offenders in prison and costing the taxpayers millions of pounds. Neither is there any point using expensive chemicals which also cost. Surgical castration is the answer. A one off operation that removes the ability forever. However, the offender MUST be absolutely guilty without any shadow of doubt.
As a man who has had both testicles removed, I can say for a fact that removing the testicles removes sexual desire. However if the person has access to testosterone and takes it in large doses then sexual aggression can be increased.
This is an important issue. Just removing the testicles from the male is not really enough. Removing the penis as well probably would not be enough either. If the reason for rape is not strictly based on sexual desire or sexual need then it will not be effective.
Thus likely surgical intervention (bilateral orchiectomy) plus monitoring to ensure no testosterone is taken would be necessary.
There is no known method of rehabilitating rapists, if by rehabilitation you mean altering their state of mind such that they no longer desire to rape. Castration removes the means to rape and sanely ignores their unalterable state of mind. Operate and let them go. The punishment is the cure.
The question is asking about repeat sex offenders. Someone who is a "repeat" offender would not be "innocent." People who argue about rape being about power and control miss the point that taking the offender's power and control (i.E. His sex organs) would remove the perverse sexual pleasure the offender gets from his acts. Finally, when children are involved, particularly involving child porn or admissions or guilty pleas, etc, castration should be the first option, followed by prison.
These people are not capable of true reform. You can't change their twisted desires. Thus, it is only logical to put castration on the table as a fit punishment to protect those who cannot protect themselves. As a parent I will always put the right of my child to be unmolested above any claim to human rights.
These poor people seem to just keep doing the same thing over and over again. Simple quick fix in my opinion. The best way to cure these individuals is to take the gun out of the murderer's hand. No ammunition, no one gets hurt. Too many innocent people and children are affected with this saddening life change that is practicality irreversible. No one should have through what these poor children/individuals have have experienced.
To quote a source "Physical castration appears to be highly effective as, historically, it results in a 20-year re-offense rate of less than 2.3% vs. 80% in the untreated control group, according to a large 1963 study involving a total of 1036 sex offenders by the German researcher A. Langelüddeke, among others, much lower than what was otherwise expected." Clearly, they can't be rehabilitated by any onther means.
I do agree that there are SOME cases where an innocent person is convicted, but the law isn't ever black and white, so arguing that way is rather simpleminded. I rather say that this can be given as punishment, when the evident is very strong, and for repeat offenders.
If sex offenders were castrated we wouldn't have to worry about them continuously attacking. This punishment would also scare other potential sex offenders into not attacking. The way I see it is that if they can make someone feel hurt and pain from such acts, then they should fully live up to the consequences and no other punishment is more suitable.
If we truly want to rehabilitate these men there is no other solution. They are perverting the gift of procreation and using it as a weapon to inflict harm and humiliation on others. Actually for true justice the death sentence would be more appropriate for the lasting emotional, mental and obvious physical harm done. Aids and other STD are a very real possibility for the victims. Castration is a merciful response to a very violent and pernicious behavior pattern that threatens to endanger the most vulnerable people in society.
That'll get him thinking before he takes it out of his pants and assaults someone, especially a child. I have no use for rapists and believe they should be treated harshly, with absolutely no mercy. When will we wake up and start dealing with these animals that these people really are?
Death may be feared by many in the well-developed countries, but it is hardly feared by the poor people in less developed countries. Death may not do much harm as castration to a man's dignity. Without one's ability to perform, a man is shunned by his fellow peers and the women as an impotent. This hurts much more than being dead.
This process may not be reversible, but the victims of his crimes cannot be resurrected also. It is not an eye for an eye, but a warning to all the potential rapists out there. Rape is not tolerated. If you still want to enjoy proper sex in the future, do not engage in rape or you will risk losing it all together. This is just to protect further females from being harmed by their impulsive actions. God gave to them, but they did not know how to use it. Like the parable of the talents, what one cannot make good use of, it is right to take it away from them and the evil that stems from it.
If your small child was raped wouldn't you want the guilty pervert not to be able to do it again to another innocent child? How could any sane person want this perverted person to be able to do this to another innocent child. Only another pervert would disagree with what I just said.
If someone loves to run and you cut off there legs than they can't run no matter how much they want to. Similarly if someone loves sex and you castrate him he will still love sex but won't be able to love it anymore. Now testosterone is also a hormone that makes someone crave power and domination so by removing testosterone you can take away that craving.
As a victim of molestation and now an adult with children I would give anything to have my innocence back, so I feel like taking from such monsters the same thing that was taken from me. For the children, what molesters do to their sense of self worth, there is no amount of therapy that can heal a child from that type of physical and mental tragedy. So yes I say cut it the hell off I made a promise to my self and to God, that if by any chance this was to happen to my children, and I get my hands on that person. My plan is castration all the way
Castration will at least diminish their sex drive. This punishment fits the crime. They should have no rights. It would be interesting to note what percentage of males and females voted which way. I suspect that the majority of the NO votes are males.
These creeps keep walking the streets and no one knows who they are. If they are let out with the general population castrate them. If serving time in jail, don't bother with the expense until they are let out.
The rapists is basically trying to show his masculine power. castration will shame him in the eyes of society. Very effective.
One must understand that this is a deterrent exemplary punishment. It is not meant to reform the rapist. It is meant to humiliate and shame the rapist. This will scare future rapists from committing such crimes.
Repeat sex offenders don't deserve a chance at a normal sex life.
If someone is a habitual repeating sex offender, then yes, we should castrate them. Either that, or do some serious brain surgery on them, so they no longer have any drive to commit sex offenses. I mean, I guess that they still could use objects. But, after one or two public castrations, I predict there would be a steep decline in the number of sex offenses in the U.S., providing that the legal system caught the right person. It would be way worse than the death penalty, in my opinion.
A lot of sex offenders are repeat offenders, not because they are sick, but because they are treated so lightly and can get away with what they do to others. If castration was the punishment for repeat offense, I believe that offenders would think a lot harder about offending a second time.
I think repeat sex offenders should be castrated, especially the ones who abuse children. They would never be able to repeat the crime again. It would also reduce the number of sex offenses entirely. These animals would certainly think twice before committing such a horrible act of violence to anyone.
Sex offenders do not have any rights once they have violated the rights of others time after time. Especially abhorrent are those who are pedophiles. It is widely accepted in psychiatric circles that pedophiles are nearly impossible to rehabilitate because their brains are hard wired for this type of activity. It seems to me that the only way to keep our society and, especially, our children, safe is to castrate them either through a chemical or surgical procedure.
Though not 100% effective in all cases it would significantly reduce the urges in a lot of offenders. Stopping offenders is near impossible but reducing the number of repeat offenders is achievable. The rights of the convicted offender may be violated but the return on investment comes from safety of the community as a whole. The needs of a few outweigh the needs of one.
A repeat sex offender deserves no pity. He should be castrated to prevent him from harming more innocent people. It is the only method that works. He could also be given medication that turns off his sexual urges completely.
I believe that castration is really most logical and good enough punishment for sex offenders.
If we castrate them, we can be sure that they will not repeat their crime. It can be the only punishment that can satisfy the victim of the sex offender. If we start using this method, we can be sure that there will be less sex offenders because they will think twice before they do such kind of crime.
If a sex offender is castrated, it will at least prevent him from committing a sex crime. It may be the only way that a person like this can be "rehabilitated" to the point where he could be allowed back into society without people fearing for the safety of their children or wives or husbands. Some of these people have a sickness that they cannot control, so castration may be their best ammunition to prevent their behavior.
A lengthy prison term is expensive and counter-productive. Some offenders ask to be castrated in exchange for reduced sentencing. In my mind, it's the most logical outcome: justice is achieved, society is preserved from future predation, and the criminal can (hopefully) contribute to the greater good without those sick urges.
If the offenders do it again and again, maybe removing the ding dong will teach them that actions have consequences. Personally castration seems too light and like the against side argues it may not work. Therefore why not just execute repeated offenders, as this way, they don't use tax payers money being held in prison, while it also solves the solution of them raping again.
Arguments that it does not work for every offender are irrelevant. Castrate all and it will prevent some of these sick individuals abusing innocent children again. Arguments that we shouldn't consider doing this in a civilised society beggar belief. These paedophiles are not civilised by the very nature of their perverted behaviour. They therefore need `civilising` surgically because reasoning cannot and does not work. They are driven by their uncivilised urges. You don't let a mad man out with a gun if you know he will shoot someone, for his and everyone elses safety. Common sense and civilised approach
Why? Because if you put man in jail for few years, then set him free and he rapes a woman or a child again how is jail suitable? If you castrate him he can never rape again and he is still alive. In my opinion it would be the best choice.
Yes they need psychiatric help, and they should, but only after they get their weapon taken away.INHumane? Ridiculous-no control is no control-Start with the obvious, then work towards their mental status later. Save the kids! I am tired of hearing excuses for their deviant behavior, it is not a fetish if it hurts someone else.
There have been many cases in which those who have been castrated still commit violent sexual crimes. This is because sex alone isn't the issue, it is powered, fortified, and driven by the desire of power and domination. Let's face it people: sex is affluent to come by in today's society.
There are two problems with this: 1. If we're talking "physical castration" if the person turned out to be innocent we would've done irreversible damage to them.
2. Violent sex offenses are typically about power and control not primarily sexual pleasure. Taking away the testicles isn't going to help if the person has some perverse desire to dominate and control an unconsenting victim.
To take away one's genitals is too much. It is always wrong to take away something irreplaceable. Let's say this man took away one's virginity. Though virginity may not be replaceable, does that mean making it fair by taking away the man's genital is right? Does that mean you should take something away from someone else too? No. If rape is wrong, castration is also wrong. I would suggest, counseling as the best punishment. Make the enemies your friends is the best weapon.
Corporal punishment is inhumane, immoral and just damn wrong in our times. Period. Like many people are saying, there are zillions of factors behind the social phenomenon we call rape, and castrating criminals means little more than circumvention of the true causes while probably forcing rapists into even more horrendous and perverted crime.
Generally, most sexual offenses committed have nothing to do with sexual desire, but everything to do with the desire to have power over women. Chances are, it will just cause them to turn to physical abuse, rather than sexual abuse. Furthermore, one can be raped with objects - it doesn't have to be genitalia.
Realistically the only deterrent that would be effective enough to (hopefully someday) see the eradication of the subhuman, subanimal rapist monster is to have penalties that are so severe that the so-to-speak 'insanity' of the legal repercussion matches that of the insanity of the crime itself. The very least of such penalties, mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole, would help would-be rapists to grasp the insanity of committing such an utterly inexcusable crime. Personally, I am in favor of even harsher penalties, as the deterrent effect of losing your life for failure to comply with the utmost basic and fundamental tenant of civility (i.E. The Golden Rule) would be greater, and thus, more favorable (please note that I myself am male and from what I have gathered such increase in penalties is horrendously overdue; I think it would be best to drown them all at once in a pit by filling it with sand; at the very least I would expect the permanent isolation, sterilization and rendering impotent of their kind), however death is irreversible, adding to the greatest obstacle in the handling of such men that have degenerated into subanimals (fully understanding they would be more than adverse to turnabout in kind upon themselves, and yet the decide to further the systematic marginalization of women in general and sexually abused children, unable to understand why they should want to stop these trends so long as they are not the victim, and it seems obvious that they think they can get easily get away with being a sexual predator, which even most animals are above, but regardless, which no animal makes the conscious and self-aware decision to become, let alone even has the capacity to appreciate why that might be morally wrong) as they deserve to be handled, like bio-hazardous waste (being handled most effectively by quarantine until threat becomes undetectable due to decomposition), is the precedent set in courts surrounding these cases, which has a nasty history of wrongful convictions and has proven inadequate to prevent rape by deterrence, evidencing that punishments are far to small, and it's becoming hard to know which is more offensive, that rapists allowed back into civilization after committing such blighting and barbaric savagery, that the active deterrence following such vastly questionable decisions as unleashing tagged rapists back upon society isn't even effective to prevent repeat offense, or that the scope of the law in terms of addressing rape and rapists within the society as elements that require absolute purging, and not the current febrile-minded recycling of rapists that are still fully capable of raping. Considering the utter ineptitude in gauging sentencing properly has yielded utterly inept deterrence, and legal precedent sees no upheaval to pursue due and effective punishment and deterrence, it seems to me that all these prosecutors have only really been effective at skirting completion of their job, such a job I would absolutely and unquestionably have expected not to be just walked away from unfinished.
Physical Mutilation is clearly Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Enough said.
Others say castration wont affect who folks think and feel, but it will. Hormones do make men aggressive and sexual. That's what they are for. That's the whole point of castration.
But cutting of those little things doesn't always curb someone's desires. And sometimes it causes even worse problems
A lot of anti-castration posts say it's all about power. So, take away the rapist's power. Paralise them from the eyeballs down, turn them into a dribbling human wreck, unable even to sit up in bed, hold a spoon, or speak clearly, and they will never rape, kidnap, abuse or threaten anybody again.
Removing their genitals also stops them from getting their twice-daily hour-long doses of electric shock treatment.
For sex offenders, the loss of liberty from an indefinite prison sentence should be enough. Castration is a brutal, irreversible act that should not even be considered for the very worst offenders. Moreover, if someone has been castrated and they later discover that they were innocent there really is no going back.
First, this kind of leans to an "all sexual offenders are male" vibe. More importantly, castration is physical deformation, and this is not the foundation of a civil society, such as the one we hope to create and sustain. Would killing liars lead to no more lying? Likely. Does committing a crime lessen your individual worth? I don't think so, no matter how terrible the crime.
Even though castration may have the capability of removing a person's sex drive, this is a tortuous and extreme method of doing so that is irrevocable. If there is a way to have sex offenders rehabilitated, while maintaining their normal sex lives, then they still have the possibility of a normal sex life in the future. But, with castration, this would never be possible.
There is a psychological element to those who are sex offenders that cannot be cured by simple castration and studies have shown that castration does not inhibit the desire to offend. For example there are rapists who cannot achieve or maintain an erection but it doesn't stop them from violating their victims with inanimate objects. Unfortunately sex offenders can't be rehabilitated either with counseling or castration. The best way to protect society from these people is to lock them up and throw away the key.
Castration, usually applied chemically, can be an option for treating sex offenders, since some offenders report a decrease in their urges to perform perverted acts after this chemical adjustment, and sometimes even choose the treatment themselves. It is a not a universal option, however, depending on the individual offender. For many, it will not decrease their sadistic urges. These offenders could still commit offensive acts without functioning sexual organs, which are by no means a necessity for violating someone. The applicability of castration depends on the individual case.
Back in the day gay men were counted as sex offenders and some were chemically castrated (look up Alan Turing in Wiki if you don't believe it). I doubt it really made much difference. People always find an outlet for the things going on in their brains. Removing someone's ability to produce sperm and hormones does not lead to instant rehabilitation. To call it a disease is also incorrect. It's a mental health problem which does not require multiple doses of ridiculous medications (most of which are placebos), it requires in-depth psychiatry.
Castrating sex offenders is not a solution to the problem. This treats the symptom and not the disease. The castrated sex offender will most likely turn his anger and need for control into other violent criminal acts. Treatment for sex addiction would be a better solution.
Castration is not a reliable method because first of all, a man can still commit sex offences even though he doesn't have testicles. It gives a false sense of security. A sex offender is dangerous to society because there is more wrong with them then just over-active hormones. Their offense is more than just sex. It is violence and manipulation. Castration is not a solution, it is a punishment.
Any person who has committed a mistake may, at any time in their life, regret it and may repent for it. If a sex offender has already been castrated, and he repents for it and wishes to live a normal life, he cannot. This will cause him undue suffering. God and the law is there to punish such people and try to make them reform. Resorting to such measures is just plain wrong and cruel.
The most logical solution would be psychiatric therapy since the urges of a sex offender start in the brain, usually caused from some traumatic event in their past. It's even possible that they don't even remember the event. The purpose of psychiatrists and psychologists is to examine these kinds of events and try to get to the bottom of things. I remember a time when prisons were called correctional facilities, meaning they were initially designed with correcting wrong behavior in mind. A sex offender fits into a criminal category befitting of such "correction", not castration.
I don't believe it would actually stop sex offenders. I think that some, maybe not all, would see it as a challenge, and they could just be more physical with the victim instead which in the long run means a lot more emotional abuse, as well as physical and substantial long-term suffering for them.
Sex offenders don't behave the way they do solely because of their genitals. Depriving them of their reproductive organs would be inhumane and wouldn't solve the problem, and would only worsen their lives. These people, as immoral as they are, are victims of their own sick desires. They need help achieving self control and controlling their urges.
If you castrate a sex offender, it may take away some of their ability to take advantage of victims. At the same time, it won't take away there perverted thoughts or the fact that they still have other ways of doing things. As disgusting as it is, this really wouldn't help at all because there are so many other ways that they could take advantage of their victims and for the most part these thoughts aren't going to go away with castration.