Lawmakers consider chemical castration for pedophiles

Lawmakers consider chemical castration for pedophiles

rt.com

The Investigation Committee of Russia has suggested chemical castration for pedophiles. The Public Chamber supported the suggestion, while expressing indignation over the lenient terms pedophiles are currently receiving.
­Aleksandr Bastrykin, head of the Investigation Committee, stated on Thursday during a Public Chamber session that a respective draft law has already been prepared for consideration. Persons who sexually abuse minors would face the possibility of chemical castration.

“Chemical castration does not make up for the punishment and is not a type of it,” Bastrykin said. �

(visit the link for the full news article)

I apologise if this has been previously posted, a search has yielded no results thus far.
This news is relating to Russia not the United States. However I was interested on what people here on ATS think of this obviously contreversal issue. Would chemically chastrating convicted pedophiles who have served a sentence for sexual abuse against minors be moral or morally justifiable? Is this a good idea or is this an impeachment on the rights of convicts as human beings? I have no sympathy for those who abuse minors. But is this a good idea? Or a bad idea?

rt.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

It's not effective. Men who can't get erections can still become aroused and act on that. It doesn't take away the sex drive, it just removes one way of inflicting it on others. For some who undergo it willingly, it can be very helpful, I've read. But as a "solution" it's bunk.

Physical castration is better.
Execution is the best .

reply to post by sepermeru


The genital area is not the offender. What's needed is some form of mental castration. Either that or an island where they can live without minors.

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by sepermeru

 

The genital area is not the offender. What's needed is some form of mental castration. Either that or an island where they can live without minors.

I believe this too. While at first, the want of vengeance says yes do it, I thought about this and came to the same conclusion. Something seriously is wrong with their heads. I know the saying "a man thinks with his...." but in this case it isnt literal. Why wast chemicals where they arent needed.

reply to post by illuminatitanimulli

Physical castration is better. Execution is the best .

Yup, pair of sledgehammers to crack the nuts. If not effective, involuntary euthenasia.

nah do it like they do with cattle

tie a rubber band around their you know whats and after a little time they just fall off.

pedos are sick sick sick and if we cant shoot em outright then make them pay another way.

I could type forever on this so i will try to make it brief.Aside from moral implications the real issue is human rights.I despise child molesters as much as the next guy but I can't help wonder if it would be right to force any type of operation on any us citizen.In other countries (as you all know) age of consent is as low as 12 that being the norm who would be right when comparing the countries and punishments based on different morals?Very young child abuse(like baby's and toddlers)should be met with the same disregard for human rights as the offender had for the victim.Yes I know pedo's are people to but I have a hard time classifying them as that when they can't control their primal urges.Simply put ....they are beasts in human skin.

Chemical castration isn't nearly enough, but it is also situational. If it is a very young adult doing something with someone who is barely not a young adult, then this could be too harsh a punishment (especially since the kid will be charged with the same crime as a 60 year old man torturing an 8 year-old). But also, I don't know what the laws on being a minor or not are in Russia.

In my opinion, removal of the testes would be an excellent option, as doing that would stop testosterone production and stop the sex drive dead in its tracks. Unless the man is even sicker than one could imagine, he would take up hobbies and other interests rather than look for sexual gratification in a minor. Honestly, I would have surgery done to myself if I ever started having sexual feelings for children. It is just wrong on too many levels.

Well just to show how compassionate I am to these living pieces of waste, I'd be will to side with lawmakers on the chemical castration issue, as long as it was done from the neck down.

reply to post by SpeachM1litant


I don't believe this is morally wrong at all when you take into account what psychological effect these sick perveerts inflict on their victim which stays with them a life time and if not traits of there exposure handed down to there children. Here are some informative facts on what child sex abuse can cause.
www.prevent-abuse-now.com...

Now tell me if chemical or physical chastrating is socially or morally inappropriate.

I have seen first hand the impact these acts cause on the victim, family, social network, and broader close community.

I believe that robbing a child of their innocence is a crime that is heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. The shear amount of psychological trauma that is caused by such an act can very well destroy someones life. Taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for these pieces of human trash to be "treated" and chemically castrated. Crimes against children are the worst kind period. If one of these bastards touched my children they wouldn't live to be chemically castrated. I'm sure a lot of parents out there feel the same way that I do. Pedophiles are absolutely the worst of the worst. If Hell exists I'm sure there is a special place there for them.

Originally posted by thatonedude
I could type forever on this so i will try to make it brief.Aside from moral implications the real issue is human rights.I despise child molesters as much as the next guy but I can't help wonder if it would be right to force any type of operation on any us citizen.In other countries (as you all know) age of consent is as low as 12 that being the norm who would be right when comparing the countries and punishments based on different morals?Very young child abuse(like baby's and toddlers)should be met with the same disregard for human rights as the offender had for the victim.Yes I know pedo's are people to but I have a hard time classifying them as that when they can't control their primal urges.Simply put ....they are beasts in human skin.

To clarify a bit children seem to mature earlier as time passes and you all have noticed i'm sure.tweens look 20 these days and a man finding a 20 year old attractive seems normal to me.A man finding a 9 year old attractive does not.We would have to distinguish the molesters mindset in regards to this before we could justify a proper punishment.Kill em all that would be great but I think this issue can be resolved by we that have evolved beyond our primal urges and can look at things from a less hateful perspective.Hate after all is a primal urge.

We should only castrate molesters if the castrations start with TSA agents.

Another line.

I am a little bit confused here. They want to castrate pedophiles in general or just child molesters? Because chemically castrating someone who never committed a crime sounds cruel as hell.

reply to post by Cricious


A pedophile is a child molester basically, there might be a true difference. From what I've read however is that both are interchangeable terms.

reply to post by denynothing


A pedophile is someone who is attracted to children. A child molester is someone who has committed a crime and deserves to be shot.

Think it this way: You are a heterosexual (and my apologies if you are not, this is just for the sake of example). Suppose you never had sex but loved women, you are a heterosexual. You don't become a heterosexual the moment you have sex with/rape a woman. When you rape a woman, you are a rapist, but you may never do so, and therefore die virgin, while being a heterosexual.

Yeah, both terms are sadly used interchangeably. That's why I always use "Pedophile" when referring to "true" non offending pedophiles, "Child molester" when referring to people who committed the crime, "Heterosexual" when referring to "straight" people, and "Homosexual" when referring to Gay people. I have never liked ambiguous terms so I really always use what may have a more explicit meaning and kinda got used to it... But I just realized that's another story for another time.

It's a stupid idea, and a sign of a very primitive culture.

Pedophilia is a sickness of the mind. A stressed mind, most likely abused at an early age, and grew to be ill and in need of an intervention.

They need to be kept out of society, and taken care of, tended to. It's a perversion of the mind, not the genitals. It's a sickness like many others, no matter how heinous. There are people more tolerant of this than people in this thread, and they work in the medical field and fully understand this.

An individual who actually molests or rapes a child, is more than likely never walking public streets again, some exceptions have been made, but for the most part.. no parole board is going to free a child rapist.

It's always "for the children", isn't it? Yet you people don't really care about the children, to be perfectly honest. You're not concerned with how the child is cared for in such an event, you only want to see blood and more pain, and death.

There is such a thing as redemption, and true justice. It doesn't come from the end of a needle, from the further maiming of a human being, who probably suffered tremendous abuse to be so sick to begin with, and their death doesn't solve anything either.

The sick should be cared for, no matter what. Otherwise we have no right to be calling ourselves civilized. Does no one stop and wonder how certain individuals can become so degraded and ill, to bring themselves to hurting children like this? Do you think it stops when the state is authorized to maim people, along with executing them. Yet no concern is set side, about the particulars of said illness?

Perhaps we should bring back the public squares, with the flowing crowds, everyone with a stone in each hand, ready to dispense their version of justice. Certainly, everything goes away when you hurt it and kill it.. right?

reply to post by Chaser2000au


Wow, that makes me really resent these bastards. I wish them nothing but pain and bad health.
What about a creative punishment? Maybe this but also mandatory tattoo's on their chest or forhead stating the crime they comitted.

ON EDIT: Maybe this isn't such a good idea. I probably let my emotions get the best of me.