I can't believe this is real!

WOW. I need to read more into this before I make a decision.

At first glance, it seems barbaric and archaic.
However, I do think that if a person is a child predator, that no amount of jail time will get this out of their system. There have been far too many cases of repeat offenders.

I don't think our current system does enough, but I think that chemical castration probably does too much. I don't have a good answer to this though....hmm.

he's all sorts of interesting because he believes in God? and participated in an exorcism? wtf?

i mean, really, nothing else?

I find him interesting for hundreds of other reasons... but if we all want to portray him as a crazy for something he wrote in college, then go ahead.

"Governor Jindal is all sorts of interesting" I have to agree with you there. I saw Jindal on Fox not too long ago, he has a pretty unique stance on a few things. Im not sure chemical castration is such a bad idea per say .. these sicko's deserve cruel punishment.

No castration without representation.

Whoa Sy you took the words out of my mouth lol

I'm starting to really like this guy if for nothing else but his brutal honesty!

Cheers to that cab ... have a cupcake on me

ha! janneth! good one!

And .... Hi everyone!!!! Im back for real this time lol

betty! I'm so happy!

Question - so California already does this?

yeppers and Florida....

Georgia Texas and Montana too ...

purely experimental though.

Jindal is better then me, because if it were my child that fell victim to one of this sick nuts I would petition to have their peter axed the f*%$ off. Who are we protecting here ... sex offenders give me a break.

I really don't see anything wrong with this. Call it cruel and unusual if you want, isn't it even more cruel and unusual to let these people out after a few years of jail to rape more people? I agree with Betty. Why protect these people?

The problem with trying to rehabilitate sex offenders is that when they relapse (and anyone fighting an addiction will at some point relapse) they are hurting another human being's life and potentially turning them into a future sex offender (most, if not all, suffered some sort of sexual trauma as children). I don't know, like Jillness I think it is barbaric and archaic, but at the same time it IS a problem and maybe drastic actions are justifiable here.

To me this is a much better alternative than execution. It seems to fit the crime more, I guess.

Hi syako. I meant to convey that I find him interesting for all those reasons, including that his age and background are exceptional.

Oh! And interesting isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I am in favor of chemical castration but I hope that does not lull us into a false sense of security. You take away a burglars lock picking set they're still a burglar. This is a sickness we're dealing with here and forcing a surrender of ones weapon is only a first step.

So once a chemically castrated guy is released, who makes sure he continues the treatment? Does the state pay for a lifetime of chemical castration? If the guy can be treated medically so that he doesn't rape, was he a criminal to begin with or was he sick? And if we castrate men who rape children, shouldn't we castrate anyone who rapes a grown-up? Certainly some of those attacks are horrific and life-altering. If we can chemically alter a person so they don't rape, why don't we cut off the hands of people who beat brutally beat their victims so that they can't do that again? Can we chemically alter every criminal with a history of violent criminal behavior? Do we have any idea where we're going with this?

Since I've learned on here that rape isn't about sex, castration would seem to be to be ineffective.

Dave I think I agree with you. I think they'll find other ways to abuse their victims. Or are the proponents of chemical castration suggesting that this will elimanate the impulse to commit rape?

"If the guy can be treated medically so that he doesn't rape, was he a criminal to begin with or was he sick?"

I believe this is our greatest dilemma and fear stephley. If pedophilia which leads to child rape is found to be something as simple as a chemical imbalance or mental defect a fact such as this would show that these individuals which have long been referred to as monsters are indeed clinically sick. This is something we (society) does not want to hear because we need our outlet for rage in this matter.

actually they had a former child molester on tyra...he got castrated as part of a treatment. he said it helped him with some of his urges

Have any of these laws, or something like them, gone to the Supreme Court yet? (Anyone sentenced to take an alcohol-avertion drug sue?)
I don't see how this fits as punishment, or if it is punishment how it doesn't become an excessive punishment once the criminal has served his sentence. It'd be like making someone wear an ankle-bracelet for the rest of their life.

"they are hurting another human being's life and potentially turning them into a future sex offender...but at the same time it IS a problem and maybe drastic actions are justifiable here."

Good point. That is one of the things that make this type of crime so especially hideous, the abuse tends to cycle into more victims.

"You take away a burglars lock picking set they're still a burglar. This is a sickness we're dealing with here and forcing a surrender of ones weapon is only a first step."

Very good point!! I wish I could see some stats from the states that already have this law.

"Or are the proponents of chemical castration suggesting that this will elimanate the impulse to commit rape?"

You guys bring up many good points! So much to consider!

In my opinion I don't believe the chemical castration is intended as punishment. It is inteded as security.

Sounds like a legal stretch then to legislate it.

Yes, there are definite shades of grey on that point. The bill on the surface appears to be a punishment however what fly's in under the radar is added security for any potential victims.

Just to play devils advocate, what about people who are found guilt but are actually innocent? Isn't that the biggest argument against the death penalty, couldn't it apply here?

It's all a lot of legislative nuance but of one hand covering the other to get something done but in this case I do agree with the outcome.

I can think of a couple undesirables I'd like to not be able to procreate.... Paris Hilton I'm talking about you!

Which makes me wonder, how do they do this to women?

Absolutely cabaker27 my my you've got your thinking cap on tonight my dear.

I don't see any mention of women, but they can be sex offenders too.

Hey hypno it had to happen eventually right??

Although it is a possibility the chance is very slim in light of DNA and other biological record testing that is involved in rape cases. These days to be convicted on just the word of a child not backed up by such evidence increasinly rare.

We'll I hate to leave this conversation but I must run home and whip up some vittles for the boy. I may pop in later.

This is like all the issues that come up with the death penalty: not actually guilty, applied with bias... it doesn't seem like a really well thought idea at all.

What about women offenders is a really good question - if there's nothing chemically done about them then the punishment/treatment is applied unfairly.

Good questions, Cabaker.

I have really enjoyed this brainstorming style conversation about the pros and cons of this policy. Ya'll have really got my brain pondering things. Love it!

"SB144 now applies to aggravated rape, forcible rape, second-degree sexual battery, aggravated, incest and aggravated crimes against nature."

Aggravated crimes against nature??????
WTF?

Does that mean beastiality?

I have no idea, but that sounds like it could be right. As long as it isn't peeing on a tree or something.