English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

John Reid is considering this for repeat offenders - but it won't be compulsory...!

In America, several states have compulsory chemical castration for paedophiles - surely this is far more sensible than what we might end up with, voluntary castration?? Nobody will opt for it.

What do you think?

2007-06-12 21:41:02 · 43 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

MIKE - don't know why you've added that link here, it's not relevant; the case you are referring to is nothing to do with paedophilia. My question mentions 'repeat' offenders.

2007-06-12 21:54:36 · update #1

43 answers

As far as I can see it is just another quick-fix scheme to get the public on side.

Yes the majority of people would he happy to see these chemically castrated (however that happens) and a lot worse, though castrating a male would stop him being sexually active? No, not unless it also plugs a bung up his backside? Does it chop off his fingers? His feet? Any external part that could be used for sexual gratification?

So thesepaedophiles could just as easily go out and commit sexual acts and abuse children.

Also this is voluntary, so the people who opt for it are going to be in my mind at least the ‘safer’ variety of paedophiles, the type who -know- they’re doing wrong and realise how wrong it is, they wish to change but for one reason or another has no will power to stop themselves.

2007-06-12 21:57:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

I can't remember where I read an interesting article regarding chemical castration ( if I remember I'll be back with a link ) but the men who had taken advantage of the pilot scheme in Canada proclaimed it had changed their lives, for the better. They felt more able to control their demons. But that in itself is the crux of castration by pills, they have to want to change if they don't. Neither chemical or surgical castration will make any difference. In fact it could lead to a change in paedophiles nature as they seek out more apt ( yuk I hate to think about it ) approach to reach their goal. So do I think it's a good idea? Yes. Made compulsory? No. Forcing them to comply will tire an already straining under the weight of criminals human rights. Voluntary? Yes. A better idea than doing nothing & expecting the paedophile to control themselves, some don't, some can't & some don't want to. It's changing the mind-set of a habitual, predatory pervert is where the real challenges are. Crack those nuts & I think everyone would feel a lot happier. Or better still lock them all up & throw away the key. Some pervs cannot be cured. Wasting time, money & effort into another one-size-fits all treatment which may or may not fail. Is it worth the risk? Might be less cost affective but to ensure the safety of children, lock them up for life.

2016-05-19 00:14:30 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

I asked this same question twice & got into no end of trouble I got a violation notice & the question taken off I'm giving you a star for getting there
In America 7 states voluntary castration with 3 being compulsory

2007-06-16 08:24:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

On the face of it i would say yes, they should be chemically castrated. But what concerns me is the same point made by others on here. Sex crimes are more to do with wielding power over their victim, does that apply to paedophiles too?
If so, perhaps they would still find a way to harm kids. If that were the case, then they wouldn't be "Safe" after all.
I've heard of this being used in the USA, anyone know exactly how effective it is?

2007-06-12 22:46:58 · answer #4 · answered by Jason 3 · 2 1

Hi all. Ok. I'm in the Boston area. Remember when we made all the front pages with our Catholic Priest Scandal? Father Porter, Father Geoghan etc...

Unfortunately, this phenomenon, was not (is not) isolated to Boston.

I'm not condoning any behavior of men (women) that sexually abuse children, but Priests? This was particularly heinous to me.

These men have given their life to God. Why do they need testicles? It only led them into temptation, messed up a ton of lives, and cost the Church a lot of respect, and millions of Benjamins.

If I were in charge they would have been the first group to be denutted. It really is a simple operation. Outpatient, actually. Takes about 90 minutes. I wish I had first hand experience, but alas, I just Google alot.

A little incision here, snip and tug there, repeat. All done. Your fixed. Next.

Oh, one more thing. Please control the human population. Have your exes spayed or neutered.

2007-06-16 09:56:35 · answer #5 · answered by Asia 2 · 0 1

convicted pedophiles shouldn't be let out of prison, and yes, chemical castration sounds like a good idea as well. I think though, that even a person who's been castrated can still be a pervert, and abuse in other ways. Thats why I dont think those types of people should get out of prison. Is it possible for these people to ever be rehabilitated?

2007-06-12 21:54:52 · answer #6 · answered by Penny P 5 · 1 1

i hope this is the beginning of what is to come.

finally, the government is at least heard to be thinking about this.

unfortunately, in the age of pc and human rights, this will never be compulsory, and in my opinion, if an offender refuses then a more adequate punishment should be used.

it still doesn't seem appropriate punishment but at least something new may be put in place, personally i would like to see them suffer a hundred times more then each victim has but the way the our country is run, that wont happen

2007-06-12 22:13:04 · answer #7 · answered by michelle l 4 · 2 1

Sigh, why wait for them to become "repeat" offenders. What, are they giving them one for free? Whoops, just molested a child. Sorry, won't happen again. If someone is twisted enough to violate a child, I don't care if they're drunk, drugged, or temporarily insane, they should be locked away from society forever. No second chance to screw up another innocent life. I don't care about castrating them, lock 'em up and let them molest eachother. That's the end.

2007-06-12 21:56:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

I don't think they should be chemically castrated, I think they should be properly castrated, without pain relief or warning - then put the sick bastards in a room with the parents of the children they have hurt - and let them deal with the sick f******

2007-06-15 01:22:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I don't think it will be normal because I don't ever see myself being okay with an old man telling me my son is beautiful (and my son isn't due until September)!! I don't believe castrating them would do anything because think of it like this...the penis is not the largest sex organ...the brain is, so to speak. Mentally, these people are attracted to children. If someone kept pointing at you with their index finger and you removed it, wouldn't they start pointing at you with another one? It is a double-edged sword that humans evolve....

Lol, it's late and this baby is kicking me so!!!

2007-06-12 21:55:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers