When someone commits rape they've totally ruined someone else's life. Their victim will never recover from the trauma, and the punishment they receive should accurately fit the crime. The criminal has given up his human rights by totally disregarding the human rights of others. I actually think rapists should be executed. But castration is second best - at least that way they'll never be able to have children and inflict themselves on another generation.
Rape is the worst of all crimes; worse than murder in my opinion, and at the moment the law's response is pitiful. No mercy for those who show us none!
When castrating these criminals you make sure that these kind of sick people wont reproduce. They shouldnt be allowded to ever have children. When eliminating their chance of reproducing you are lowering the chances that more rapists are being created. Or you could give them the choice, castration or death penalty
A primitive punishment for a primitive crime. Obviously false convictions would be a huge concern, but perhaps that might encourage the courts to take rape a little more seriously. Male rapists would never be able to repeat their crime, and hopefully seeing as they have no dangling baguette women or men, depending on preference, will take the hint and stay away. It's literally the safest option for any future and past victims. Don't forget these could be men, women and children. I'd rather have one man castrated to save them than let the guy rot in prison for three years and learn nothing. Plus, male rapists know the punishment. If they rape knowing they could be castrated then they're practically asking for it.
When someone attacks another person, and they use a weapon, that weapon is taken away. The weapon rapists use is their penis, and castration could be a major deterrent to several rapists. You wouldn't let a convicted murderer keep his weapon, you shouldn't let a rapist keep his. Castration should only be done when there is evidence, but it should still be done.
I deserve it, a minor case of assault but it was not pleasant for her. It would have saved her ordeal, and stopped me sending vile texts to another woman, just wish I could find someone to do it in the uk but what are the chances of that ?
Rapists do not only destroy a woman's life but her family as well. The rapist's life needs to be similarly destroyed. He needs to also suffer for the rest of his life. I believe rape victims should be able to participate in the actual castration. Like being able to pull the switch. Goodbye rapist goodbye!
In a study conducted on several rapists it shockingly found that most rapists believe that rape is a normal thing in society and that rape is just kept quiet for most people. Would someone who thinks rape, a crime often compared with murder, really be allowed to reproduce and teach their children the same thing?
'Hey son, you can rape someone as long as you don't get caught.'
Yes, yes, and yes.
Rape is traumatizing and brutal. It leaves a life-long effect on its victim. But yes, it might be difficult for a man to understand what rape is, and sometimes even for those who have never been raped.
However, once someone has been undoubtedly proven to be a rapist, he should be castrated so that he can never force himself on another person. Laws make a lot of trouble for the raped victims; at least when the guilt is proven, it should support the victim and let the rapist see how the world looks like when he is robbed of his most precious possession. Imprisonment, or even death is not enough.
I see a lot of comments comparing guns and weapons to the perpetrators sexual organs. I feel that this is a strong and compelling argument that warrants further investigation. Just as we implement gun control today, I do believe that it therefore makes sense that we would implement a type of gun control on men. It has certainly been presented before that mass castration for men would be beneficial for society, and I would certainly support that. I realize that it won't happen today, but we need to at least keep that conversation going. As women gain more power in our institutions, I am confident we can keep the idea alive to be put into practice in the future and us making the world a far safer place!
I am a man who supports compulsory castration of male infants at birth. It will mitigate sexual assault, violence, competition and lead to a quick dwindling of the virus of humanity. We have overstayed our welcome, anyway. Each and every undesirable man who engages in sexual activity has committed rape. Since desirability is subjective, every man is someone's potential rapist. Our mere presence is an ideological assault-if not a physical one- to some woman. Castration at birth would diminish this fear culture, and bring about a quicker end to humanity; win-win.
Castration is a brutal way to punish someone.An adequate and reasonable punishment should include lessons to be learned and understanding what was done wrong and try to have a way forward.And by the way if someone is raped and hurt the solution should not be a permanent hurt but rehabilitation
Would castrating them prevent them from attacking more women? They still can beat them, kidnap them, and mistreat them.
Legal punishment is there to keep people from stomping in others rights. Castration of rapists is plain and irrational revenge, as the only achievement here would be... What, exactly? To please feminazis?
Everyone has no doubt heard many stories about people being wrongly convicted of murder based on false testimony. A much larger number of women falsely accuse men of rape and convictions can be made with very little evidence. If a wrong conviction is made and the man is castrated, later to be found innocent, what are you going to do? Glue his penis back on?
Castrating rapists sounds like a great way to punish them, but what happens when you have a conviction based on bad evidence that is later overturned? You can release a man from jail, but you can't uncastrate someone. Castrating an innocent man that was wrongly convicted would be extremely immoral.
You should note that your suggestion in itself is animalistic in nature bordering on savagery. If we all played your an eye for an eye game this we will be an uncivilised society. The best option would be rehabilitation for the victim and imprisonment for the criminal (plus monthly payments towards the victim's rehabilitation). How society reaches the point of consideration for such an issue is a step in the devolution of our species.
Their lives should be destroyed too. When a person violates another person, I say they lose the right to their own genitalia. They've shown that they can't use their junk responsibly, and they deserve the same pain and humiliation that they gave to their victim/s. Also, some people argue that we sholdn't do castration because of the chance that the person is inncocent. So should we give out light sentences for all crimes to account for the off chance that the person was actually innocent?? It's a dumb argument. Besides, it's extremely hard to convict someone for rape. Like seriously. They have to be really obviously guilty to get convicted. Tons of rapists get away.
No because they might be innocent i think its actually worse to castrate some one than the crime to begin with its more life changing and to someone who might not even have done anything that the woman or police say he did it would be unethical and just plain stupid
If you castrating should be a punishment for rapists, why not amputate the hands of thieves, cut the tongues of liars, mutilate the genitals of prostitutes, or chop off the limbs of people who beat others up? In the end, we have to make sure they wont do it again right?
Unless the man mutilated the woman's genitals to the point where having a child was impossible, I see no moral in humanity to ever think of such a thing. What gives anyone the right to take away anything from your body? 2 wrongs don't make a right. I'm not saying they should get off likely, I'm saying that women usually recover from such cases within 8months+ whereas castrating is literally taking away what makes a man feel like a man (for life). It would be emotional torture, he'd have to give himself injections for the rest of his life... I believe that rapists SHOULD have longer jail sentences but castration/death/lethal injection is just a way of showing how lazy we are as a species.
We come up with all these excuses and because of that ONE moment in their lives where did they something wrong, you spend 28 days debating whether he should live/die/be castrated... For all people that voted yes, you're just sick. "Appropriate punishment" Jesus Christ, we treat life like a game nowadays and it's horrible to think that paper we call money determines whether a criminal has enough space to stay in a maximum security prison or be sentenced to castration as a way of 'speeding up the sentence' - just like the lethal injection.
And here I was thinking we were getting smarter by the day...
It's estimated that 4.1% of those who were executed after 1977 were falsely convicted. Based on these statistics, the simple idea that in the justice system there has to be human error and bias to some extent is already an indication that humans have no place to be judging the crime of another to such an extent that results in physical mutilation or death. If the government were to falsely convict someone and they were castrated, and it was later proven to be a false accusation, the government is not subject to punishment. In that sense, castrating someone should be considered a crime as well if done falsely by the logic of an eye for an eye, but somehow if done through a trial of your peers, it's not a crime.
It's never an honest mistake to mutilate someone when there is an obvious chance for error in judgment.
At least with life imprisonment, there is room for cases to be retried, but once a person has been castrated or killed, it's irreversible. Even with overwhelming physical evidence, jury by peers means that there is an underlying assumption that the people selected to try a case are going to do it fairly, but that is also subject to human error. Physical evidence has it's flaws as well. If a person were to be accused of rape by a person with physical evidence of "sexual assault" such as DNA, whose to say it really wasn't consensual if no other person witnessed it and it's merely word of mouth?
The justice system is also controlled by money and how well a lawyer can represent you, so it is not always honest or fairly represented.
It's also not hard to imagine that if rape convictions led to castration, how much more would false rape accusations go up?
It's not to say that people who rape others shouldn't be castrated assuming they actually committed the crime, it's simply that our justice system is not capable of coming to conclusions with completely infallible accuracy. If there is the slightest chance that a person could be physically harmed based on false accusations, it's simply not a good idea to implement such a law.