Bobby Jindal signs a bill allowing castration for rapists

[Kuya]

What a fool. After he castrates them, does he intend to release them afterwards? Since he's so sure that it will prevent them from raping children in the future. Or maybe, he just did it to be a twat, so now instead of just holding them in jail for life, now you can get some more revenge by castrating them to. Idiot, idiot, idiot, idiot.

I'd like to see the research that absolutely proves that those who rape children would be stopped by castration.

[Tyche]

Like Alleya said, the popular belief is that rape is for power/control. Maybe the thought of having nothing down there some how alters the thought process of rapists and makes them feel like shadow of ones self. Again, impossible to test.

@ Beckwin. I didn't want to elaborate because it would be as stupid and absurd as your hypothetical. I feel bad for people who get behind the wheel of a car drunk and end up smashing into a minivan and killing three kids. What they did was stupid and entirelly their fault, but it's not something they wanted to do and I'd be pretty damn confident they'd live the rest of their life in as much anguish as I. They just did the wrong thing at the wrong time. I'd be more sympathetic to that person than I would the person who raped my daughter. Yes. I threw the "to an extent" in there for a reason. Murder can be as gray as rape.

[Beckwin]

Well gee, I guess I'm stupid for thinking we should be comparing first-degree murder with the kind of rape that you would be ok with the offender being crucified in the middle of the desert :/

You weren't talking about manslaughter, that's for damn sure.

[Tyche]

There can be first-degree murder charges against a drunk driver where someone is killed, really really rare. Murder in that case itself is rare, but that decision has been concluded several times. My post did indicate "child rapist", but I really didn't try to setup "murderer" with any kind of context ofther than "to an extent" which should of flagged immmediatly that I was talking about some of the lesser degrees.

[Khamsin]

I don't have to rethink it at all. I know exactly what I mean.

So you'd rather have your wife/mother/sister/child be murdered rather than raped, and consequently you could feel some kind of pity for the murderer over the rapist?

It's a real shitty question I know, but the fact that you mentioned the possibility of a right being removed by rape only solidifies that murder is the more severe crime, as it absolutely strips someone of their rights.

I know this was to him, but personally, I'd rather have my loved ones be raped rather than murdered, and the rapist castrated. Given that the death penalty is the bigger punishment, the rapist would then be encouraged to keep it only to rape and not commit murder (lest they get the chair after being castrated).

As for people nervous about the government having the power to forcibly alter our bodies, how is that a problem when it only applies to rapists who are proven without the shadow of a doubt that it was a nonconsensual violent crime? Don't rape, and the government won't have the power to forcibly alter your body. It's not as if they'll make it ok for rapists, and then slippery slope their way down to making it ok in the interest of national security or something.

[thestalkmore]

Major lols at 90% of the posts in this thread.

[aurik]

I think we should enact hand dismemberment as a punishment for muggers.

As for people nervous about the government having the power to forcibly alter our bodies, how is that a problem when it only applies to muggers who are proven without the shadow of a doubt that it was a nonconsensual violent crime? Don't mug, and the government won't have the power to forcibly alter your body. It's not as if they'll make it ok for muggers, and then slippery slope their way down to making it ok in the interest of national security or something.

[Zanz L. Barre The 3rd]

We will all die someday and it won't matter.

[aurik]

I think we should enact lobotomies as a punishment for perjurers.

As for people nervous about the government having the power to forcibly alter our bodies, how is that a problem when it only applies to perjurers who are proven without the shadow of a doubt that it was a nonconsensual crime? Don't perjure, and the government won't have the power to forcibly alter your body. It's not as if they'll make it ok for perjurers, and then slippery slope their way down to making it ok in the interest of national security or something.

[Tomk]

Why don't we identify the area of the brain that causes rape and remove it from all babies at birth? Or find the gene and engineer it out of humans in general?

[Senoska]

I think we should enact anal rape as a punishment for farting wrong

As for people nervous about the government having the power to forcibly fuck our pooper, how is that a problem when it only applies to people who fart wrong who are proven without the shadow of a doubt that it was a crime? Don't fart, and the government won't have the power to forcibly fuck your pooper. It's not as if they'll make it ok for people who fart, and then slippery slope their way down to making it ok in the interest of global warming or something.

[Rhinox]

There can be first-degree murder charges against a drunk driver where someone is killed, really really rare. Murder in that case itself is rare, but that decision has been concluded several times. My post did indicate "child rapist", but I really didn't try to setup "murderer" with any kind of context ofther than "to an extent" which should of flagged immmediatly that I was talking about some of the lesser degrees.

I disagree, Murder is when someone Has a motive and sets out to kill someone or tells someone they are going out to kill someone and actually go out and do it. You're describing Manslaughter. trust me if someone like Hulk Hogans son was charged with Murder there would be a shit storm from the ACLU and the like.

But yea everything I wanted to say was pretty much summed up nicely by Aurik.

[Khamsin]

Well, the beauty of it is, if it really does make you that nervous it'll be applied in other areas of the law that make you feel uncomfortable, then just restrict it to rape and no other crimes. Not mugging, perjury, etc.

Although I don't know the last time I ever heard of a violent armed perjury case. In the case of chopping the hands off muggers and such, it sounds like the biggest argument is merely about maintaining our society's image. We don't want to appear barbaric. It doesn't really even come down to a cruel and unusual punishment argument, because we don't have to worry about ourselves or loved ones having their hands or genitals chopped off (unless they are muggers and rapists, in which case, fuck them). It's just about whether you want to be associated with a society that does that, and perceptions about how unacceptable, crude, and outdated those forms of punishment are. It's all about image.

[Kuya]

In my case, i just think it's something total morons who don't care the slightest about finding out what leads people to do these sort of things and act purely out of rage do.

[Tyche]

There can be first-degree murder charges against a drunk driver where someone is killed, really really rare. Murder in that case itself is rare, but that decision has been concluded several times. My post did indicate "child rapist", but I really didn't try to setup "murderer" with any kind of context ofther than "to an extent" which should of flagged immmediatly that I was talking about some of the lesser degrees.

I disagree, Murder is when someone Has a motive and sets out to kill someone or tells someone they are going out to kill someone and actually go out and do it. You're describing Manslaughter. trust me if someone like Hulk Hogans son was charged with Murder there would be a shit storm from the ACLU and the like.

But yea everything I wanted to say was pretty much summed up nicely by Aurik.

Unfortunately, you don't know me, so may not realize how absurd it is to link wiki when it comes to laws. We'll just say I know a little bit. None-the-less, you can disagree all you want, people have been tried as murderers for exactly what I described.

Edit: This is why I was so vague in my first reply to Beckwin. I fucking knew it would end in some absurd derail. I took the bait with his second reply. Fucking ignorant on my part.

[Maguspk]

I agree with the whole strain of thought that castration won't stop sexual crimes including rape. It's not about sexual desire a majority of the time it's more about control. Most cases of rape involve the party knowing the rapist and even having trusted them. It's not the rape most of us associate with the word which we see on television or in the movie where a random guy comes out of a dark alley and picks the closest target since he's so overwhelming driven by his need to sexually spread his genes.

[Tomk]

I can honestly say that I am not worried about how our society is viewed. My problem is with the precedence. Unless this law is questioned in court, or a specific line is drawn in the law stating what can and cannot be regulated (I seriously doubt it) the line between castration and anything worse hasn't been simply moved. It has been completely removed.

Any consideration for future laws will look at whether anything says it cannot be done, and whether laws of this type exist anywhere else. So the Government can make any law they want until it's challenged.

Edit: And what Kuya said.

[skurlover]

Tyche, I have only seen you and I talk about our children, so I'm going to assume we are the only 2 in this thread (that have replied) with children.

With that being said, although everyone is more than entitled to their opinion, I not sure most of you have any idea where we are coming from with our thoughts. I do believe that your train of thought changes the moment you have a child. If any of you end up having children, I am confident that you would change your thoughts on this more towards Tyche's position.

As for this being the end all, be all solution to the problem, not a fucking chance. Do I know what would stop people from being rapists (and more importantly child rapists)? No. But do humans have a track record of making a law that seems just/good at the time, only to rethink it later? Yes. It may not be the best decision, but it is a decision that has been made at the time, and I am curious as how this could possibly affection the disgusting act.

[aurik]

Yes, actually, having children has a biological effect on your brain. In some sense, you will have a harder time thinking rationally about things when your child is potentially impacted / involved. Which is why I'm more likely to dismiss your opinions

[Tomk]

Samantha she is 4 and I love her to death.

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...k34/sammy3.jpg