Should violent criminals be castrated?

[The Grand Nudger]

What a foolish point of view and series of questions.

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.

Yes, because goodness knows a perpetrator who was fit to be found guilty in court needs two decades and more to find evidence that proves that evidence in court wasn't enough to find them guilty the first time.

It' been known to take decades, yes, and of course we've executed innocent people (whose innocence has been made very plain) on the grounds that they were found guilty by a jury of their peers. So...yeah, if we're dead-set on executing people.....no amount of time is enough time. Said it before, I'll say it again. Execution is something which, once done, cannot be undone.

There may be more out there! Hey, even when the convict was found carrying the dismembered body they'd just raped and murdered, let's give them 20 years of appeals because you know...they just might not have done it.

You assumed their guilt in the statement. They were found carrying a dismembered body which had been raped. Whether or not they did the raping, murdering, and dismembering is what must be established and cannot simply be taken for granted. To be fair, it wouldn't look very good for the accused. In compromise, if we're going t do anything quite so permanent as castration or execution for this or that then I would demand more than the consensus of a jury of ones peers to be the justification for it. Even then, I'd suspect the system to be open -somewhere- to fraud and manipulation -given enough power or authority- one could still be railroaded.