Should violent criminals be castrated?

[Vera]

Was that Bulgarian?

[Nobody]

Pedophiles and rapists should be executed in an expedited hearing that gives them no longer than one week of reprieve for appeal of their sentence.

That is a statement made from complete and utter ignorance.

I have had the occasion to know a number of convicted sex offenders. By and large, they are average people who have made some bad choices and done some bad things. THIS DOES NOT MAKE THEM BAD PEOPLE.

Look at you!
I notice you didn't say those sex offenders you're praising were wrongly convicted and were later exonerated.

Sex offenders! They made bad choices! They chose to offend innocent people sexually!
But...they're not bad people. Which would be the same as saying, they're good people.

Do you know any of their victims?

Sex offenders! They freely chose to use sex as a weapon of choice!

Yeah, you preach to me about my being ignorant because I have no patience nor respect for sex offenders! Meanwhile you defend ex-convicts who used sex as their weapon of choice!

Meanwhile, I'm sure you'd let one of those many convicted sex offenders that you know babysit your child.

Right?
Good people.
Bad choices.

---

You realize it's not all that uncommon for innocent people to be found guilty in court? Sometimes they are dead before they are given a "not-guilty" status. Even after decades of appeals it was still missed.

Of course I do. I'm well aware of the Innocence Project also. Which is interesting in that all the publicity that surrounds their activity denotes they thus far seem to focus on exonerating men who are wrongly convicted. I've noticed there are no women making the news owing their thanks for freedom to IP. But that's neither here nor there.

Per your observation, that's why those who are responsible for the wrongful conviction, after that particular type of convict (wrongly so) is executed, should be held accountable.
They should be tried, and if found guilty incarcerated in a labor camp for life without parole. So that they work and pay a civil judgement no matter how small the rate of income, to the victims of their wrong doing.
No matter who those who are guilty of contributing to an innocent persons death are. Judges, DA, defense attorney, cop(s), even lying witnesses.

Justice is blind, so they say. But when's the last time we saw a cop go to prison? Especially when the evidence was so overwhelming there's no way they could have been exonerated but somehow when a jury of 12 realized imprisoning one(or 3 as is the case in an old NY trial) guarantees they'll have to live with those convicted cops blue buddies who can find out their names, on the streets for the rest of their lives, it somehow never happens.

Then I did it right, bonus points if you can draw an inference as to how they relate to your own statement and why I chose such "foolish" questions.

Aw, now you're going to give a reason why you intended to look foolish on this subject?
How cute.

[Baalzebutt]

Look at you!
I notice you didn't say those sex offenders you're praising were wrongly convicted and were later exonerated.

Sex offenders! They made bad choices! They chose to offend innocent people sexually!
But...they're not bad people. Which would be the same as saying, they're good people.

Do you know any of their victims?

Sex offenders! They freely chose to use sex as a weapon of choice!

Yeah, you preach to me about my being ignorant because I have no patience nor respect for sex offenders! Meanwhile you defend ex-convicts who used sex as their weapon of choice!

Meanwhile, I'm sure you'd let one of those many convicted sex offenders that you know babysit your child.

Right?
Good people.
Bad choices.

---

Praising?? Defending??? How, exactly, do you get any of that from what I said?

And saying that their offense does not make them bad people IN NO WAY is the same as saying they are good people. You need to go work for the fucking whitehouse as a spin doctor.

Given the VERY narrow definitions of consensual sex, I suspect you, yourself, are guilty of a sex offense. For instance, have you ever had sex with someone who was drunk? If so, congratulations, you ARE A SEX OFFENDER.

You spout off your bullshit under the assumption that all sex offenders are people who hide behind trees and jump out and forcibly rape little children. They snatch them off the street and brutalize them and then kill them. You, my arrogant little friend, are plain ignorant. You need to find out what the fuck you are talking about before you open you shitty little pie hole.

[Nobody]

Funny, I was thinking by excusing the behavior of those who use sex as a weapon that you'd be the ideal Republican obstructionist leading the House media office when they try to fathom an excuse for the reprehensible behavior of their worst members.

Having sex with someone who's drunk does not automatically make someone a sex offender. That's a lie, that's a damn lie.

I notice you're not speaking about the victims yet, except to imply they're to blame in the scenario of drunken sex.

And now you're resorting to asking me about my personal consensual sex life?
That not only is none of your business but, consensual sex , has nothing to do with what you were and continue to excuse.

And by the way, there are two kinds of people dear. Good people and bad people.
Sex offenders aren't good people.
Doesn't matter if you refuse to accept that.
The many convicted sex offenders you know are your responsibility, your choice, for your life. One is known by the company they keep.

Good luck with that.
By the way, violent language speaks of someone who has a tendency to violent action.

Look at you!
I notice you didn't say those sex offenders you're praising were wrongly convicted and were later exonerated.

Sex offenders! They made bad choices! They chose to offend innocent people sexually!
But...they're not bad people. Which would be the same as saying, they're good people.

Do you know any of their victims?

Sex offenders! They freely chose to use sex as a weapon of choice!

Yeah, you preach to me about my being ignorant because I have no patience nor respect for sex offenders! Meanwhile you defend ex-convicts who used sex as their weapon of choice!

Meanwhile, I'm sure you'd let one of those many convicted sex offenders that you know babysit your child.

Right?
Good people.
Bad choices.

---

Praising?? Defending??? How, exactly, do you get any of that from what I said?

And saying that their offense does not make them bad people IN NO WAY is the same as saying they are good people. You need to go work for the fucking whitehouse as a spin doctor.

Given the VERY narrow definitions of consensual sex, I suspect you, yourself, are guilty of a sex offense. For instance, have you ever had sex with someone who was drunk? If so, congratulations, you ARE A SEX OFFENDER.

You spout off your bullshit under the assumption that all sex offenders are people who hide behind trees and jump out and forcibly rape little children. They snatch them off the street and brutalize them and then kill them. You, my arrogant little friend, are plain ignorant. You need to find out what the fuck you are talking about before you open you shitty little pie hole.

[Question Mark]

I really don't see how castrating criminals helps in any way. The science of eugenics is essentially debunked.

[Cinjin]

Castration would be a monumentally poor choice in punishing violent criminals.

Can you imagine how angry an already violent offender would become after having his genitalia removed??
Good god, talk about creating lethal angry vengeful killing machines. Now instead of raping women and children with his penis, he now is forced to use some other horrific tool and has 10 times the amount of anger and vengeance in his head.

[paulpablo]

i think if we ever get to a point in techology where people can be sure without a shadow of doubt wether someone is innocent or guilty and the legal system is flawless then castration would be an excellent idea, but even with the technology we have now people are sentenced to being guilty for murder while they are innocent, and if someone chopped my cock or balls of or whatever and i was innocent, trust me id be bombing government buildings in revenge.

[Baalzebutt]

Funny, I was thinking by excusing the behavior of those who use sex as a weapon that you'd be the ideal Republican obstructionist leading the House media office when they try to fathom an excuse for the reprehensible behavior of their worst members.

Having sex with someone who's drunk does not automatically make someone a sex offender. That's a lie, that's a damn lie.

I notice you're not speaking about the victims yet, except to imply they're to blame in the scenario of drunken sex.

And now you're resorting to asking me about my personal consensual sex life?
That not only is none of your business but, consensual sex , has nothing to do with what you were and continue to excuse.

And by the way, there are two kinds of people dear. Good people and bad people.
Sex offenders aren't good people.
Doesn't matter if you refuse to accept that.
The many convicted sex offenders you know are your responsibility, your choice, for your life. One is known by the company they keep.

Good luck with that.
By the way, violent language speaks to someone who has a tendency to violent action.

I have excused no behavior. I was very clear in stating that they should be punished for their actions. You can try to put all kinds of words in my mouth but the fact remains that, in spite of the bad things they have done, they are not necessarily bad people.


Now, lets clarify sexual assault. Consensual sex occurs when both parties are of a state of mind to give informed consent to a sexual act. Alcohol impairs ones cognitive ability, thereby diminishing their capacity to give proper consent. Therefore, if you have sex with someone who is drunk, they are not able to give consent and you are sexually assaulting them. (and just to be clear, this is YOUR fault, not theirs). This is not shit I just made up for my convenience. This is the definition of sexual assault.

Implying they are to blame in scenarios of drunken sex??? Where did I say ANYTHING that says the drunk person was to blame for anything?? You are a spin doctor of EPIC proportions.

As for the victims, I feel greatly for them. They did not deserve what happened to them in any way and I would never suggest otherwise. However, the families of drug addicts, the women who are beaten by their husbands, the kid whose mother was killed by a drunk driver... they are victims as well but you don't seem to be terribly concerned about them. You are not advocating death penalties for these offenders. No, you have a special little slot carved out for crimes you find particularly distasteful based on complete ignorance and media hype.

If you honestly believe there are good people and bad people, your delusions go far deeper than mere susceptibility to media sensationalism. There are few people on the planet that could stand up to any scrutiny if they were being classified as good or bad and their lives were being looked at with a microscope.

The truth is, there ARE two kinds of people: Those who have been caught and those who haven't. People do bad things. Even good people do bad things. Like it or not, that is how the world operates.

Lets take a quick look at one scenario. You tell me what you think of it.

A man goes to a bar with some friends after a long week of hard work. He drinks to excess and gets rather drunk. A cute young waitress passes by his table and he reaches out and slaps her on the butt. The next day, he is arrested for sexual assault. He is convicted and is put on the sex offender registry.

Gosh, what a horrible person he is!!!! WE MUST KILL HIM NOW!!!

BTW, this is a real situation. I knew the guy.

Oh, and thanks for the sneaky little ad hominem arguments. Please keep to the topic at hand and refrain from personal attacks.

[Nobody]

Oh, my. Now you're resorting to the accusation of "ad hominem" argument?
The Fallacy of "Personal Attack"
It's interesting that you repeatedly throw the victim card while being the aggressor. If you're fond of citing the 'ad hominem' charge perhaps you'll cease and desist in exampling that tactic yourself.

There's nothing you can say that revokes your defending in any capacity convicted sex offenders while claiming they are not bad people and that they simply made a bad choice.

What you clearly miss, either by intention or out of ignorance opposed to correction or education, is one key word. "CHOICE!"

The convicted sex offenders you know are so because they made a choice!
The subsequent excuse alluding to 'drunk', etc... is untenable. As a jury of those sex offenders, the plural as in many sex offenders that you know, duly noted.

And for the record, people who have sex when they're drunk are not sex offenders!
Your attempt to make that blanket charge tantamount to imply everyone is subject to the label sex offender if they've been drinking and engage in sex, is egregious.
There's such a thing as,
That fact makes your blanket indictment untenable.

I don't know any sex offenders. I would not continue to remain associated with someone I did know, once they were convicted as a sex offender.
I do not associate with convicts or sex offenders.
They are not good people, despite the fact they offend people using sex as a weapon.

And I certainly don't make arguments for why they should be considered "OK" despite their criminal conviction. Morals and personal standards are never something one has to apologize for.
And that's it.

Funny, I was thinking by excusing the behavior of those who use sex as a weapon that you'd be the ideal Republican obstructionist leading the House media office when they try to fathom an excuse for the reprehensible behavior of their worst members.

Having sex with someone who's drunk does not automatically make someone a sex offender. That's a lie, that's a damn lie.

I notice you're not speaking about the victims yet, except to imply they're to blame in the scenario of drunken sex.

And now you're resorting to asking me about my personal consensual sex life?
That not only is none of your business but, consensual sex , has nothing to do with what you were and continue to excuse.

And by the way, there are two kinds of people dear. Good people and bad people.
Sex offenders aren't good people.
Doesn't matter if you refuse to accept that.
The many convicted sex offenders you know are your responsibility, your choice, for your life. One is known by the company they keep.

Good luck with that.
By the way, violent language speaks to someone who has a tendency to violent action.

I have excused no behavior. I was very clear in stating that they should be punished for their actions. You can try to put all kinds of words in my mouth but the fact remains that, in spite of the bad things they have done, they are not necessarily bad people.


Now, lets clarify sexual assault. Consensual sex occurs when both parties are of a state of mind to give informed consent to a sexual act. Alcohol impairs ones cognitive ability, thereby diminishing their capacity to give proper consent. Therefore, if you have sex with someone who is drunk, they are not able to give consent and you are sexually assaulting them. (and just to be clear, this is YOUR fault, not theirs). This is not shit I just made up for my convenience. This is the definition of sexual assault.

Implying they are to blame in scenarios of drunken sex??? Where did I say ANYTHING that says the drunk person was to blame for anything?? You are a spin doctor of EPIC proportions.

As for the victims, I feel greatly for them. They did not deserve what happened to them in any way and I would never suggest otherwise. However, the families of drug addicts, the women who are beaten by their husbands, the kid whose mother was killed by a drunk driver... they are victims as well but you don't seem to be terribly concerned about them. You are not advocating death penalties for these offenders. No, you have a special little slot carved out for crimes you find particularly distasteful based on complete ignorance and media hype.

If you honestly believe there are good people and bad people, your delusions go far deeper than mere susceptibility to media sensationalism. There are few people on the planet that could stand up to any scrutiny if they were being classified as good or bad and their lives were being looked at with a microscope.

The truth is, there ARE two kinds of people: Those who have been caught and those who haven't. People do bad things. Even good people do bad things. Like it or not, that is how the world operates.

Lets take a quick look at one scenario. You tell me what you think of it.

A man goes to a bar with some friends after a long week of hard work. He drinks to excess and gets rather drunk. A cute young waitress passes by his table and he reaches out and slaps her on the butt. The next day, he is arrested for sexual assault. He is convicted and is put on the sex offender registry.

Gosh, what a horrible person he is!!!! WE MUST KILL HIM NOW!!!

BTW, this is a real situation. I knew the guy.

Oh, and thanks for the sneaky little ad hominem arguments. Please keep to the topic at hand and refrain from personal attacks.

[Baalzebutt]

Oh, my. Now you're resorting to the accusation of "ad hominem" argument?
The Fallacy of "Personal Attack"
It's interesting that you repeatedly throw the victim card while being the aggressor. If you're fond of citing the 'ad hominem' charge perhaps you'll cease and desist in exampling that tactic yourself.

There's nothing you can say that revokes your defending in any capacity convicted sex offenders while claiming they are not bad people and that they simply made a bad choice.

What you clearly miss, either by intention or out of ignorance opposed to correction or education, is one key word. "CHOICE!"

The convicted sex offenders you know are so because they made a choice!
The subsequent excuse alluding to 'drunk', etc... is untenable. As a jury of those sex offenders, the plural as in many sex offenders that you know, duly noted.

And for the record, people who have sex when they're drunk are not sex offenders!
Your attempt to make that blanket charge tantamount to imply everyone is subject to the label sex offender if they've been drinking and engage in sex, is egregious.
There's such a thing as,
That fact makes your blanket indictment untenable.

I don't know any sex offenders. I would not continue to remain associated with someone I did know, once they were convicted as a sex offender.
I do not associate with convicts or sex offenders.
They are not good people, despite the fact they offend people using sex as a weapon.

And I certainly don't make arguments for why they should be considered "OK" despite their criminal conviction. Morals and personal standards are never something one has to apologize for.
And that's it.

I have excused no behavior. I was very clear in stating that they should be punished for their actions. You can try to put all kinds of words in my mouth but the fact remains that, in spite of the bad things they have done, they are not necessarily bad people.


Now, lets clarify sexual assault. Consensual sex occurs when both parties are of a state of mind to give informed consent to a sexual act. Alcohol impairs ones cognitive ability, thereby diminishing their capacity to give proper consent. Therefore, if you have sex with someone who is drunk, they are not able to give consent and you are sexually assaulting them. (and just to be clear, this is YOUR fault, not theirs). This is not shit I just made up for my convenience. This is the definition of sexual assault.

Implying they are to blame in scenarios of drunken sex??? Where did I say ANYTHING that says the drunk person was to blame for anything?? You are a spin doctor of EPIC proportions.

As for the victims, I feel greatly for them. They did not deserve what happened to them in any way and I would never suggest otherwise. However, the families of drug addicts, the women who are beaten by their husbands, the kid whose mother was killed by a drunk driver... they are victims as well but you don't seem to be terribly concerned about them. You are not advocating death penalties for these offenders. No, you have a special little slot carved out for crimes you find particularly distasteful based on complete ignorance and media hype.

If you honestly believe there are good people and bad people, your delusions go far deeper than mere susceptibility to media sensationalism. There are few people on the planet that could stand up to any scrutiny if they were being classified as good or bad and their lives were being looked at with a microscope.

The truth is, there ARE two kinds of people: Those who have been caught and those who haven't. People do bad things. Even good people do bad things. Like it or not, that is how the world operates.

Lets take a quick look at one scenario. You tell me what you think of it.

A man goes to a bar with some friends after a long week of hard work. He drinks to excess and gets rather drunk. A cute young waitress passes by his table and he reaches out and slaps her on the butt. The next day, he is arrested for sexual assault. He is convicted and is put on the sex offender registry.

Gosh, what a horrible person he is!!!! WE MUST KILL HIM NOW!!!

BTW, this is a real situation. I knew the guy.

Oh, and thanks for the sneaky little ad hominem arguments. Please keep to the topic at hand and refrain from personal attacks.

And for the third time, you spin and put words in my mouth. What this comes down to is that, in spite of your misguided, vitriolic rant, goodele do bad things and that does not make them bad people.

Arguing this point with you is absolutely pointless. So, you win. Congratulations. I am a complete scumbag for believing that people can be good in spite of the bad things they sometimes do.