Should convicted rapists be castrated

beer enigma

Yeah you're right about the chemical part Sliabh - wasn't aware of that.

I'm only advocating its use in cases where guilt is beyond doubt or where the guy/guys admit to the crime such as the recent case.

sliabh

Andip wrote:

I'm only advocating its use in cases where guilt is beyond doubt or where the guy/guys admit to the crime such as the recent case.

They may be slower to admit to it if their dangly bits are in danger!

pretty-in-pink

ok lets keep this brief as my first post got lost as I got logged out............grrrrr

1) an eye for an eye would be:

anal rape......he gets raped with a dildo
vaginal rape......he gets raped with a penis
oral rape.......he has to suck some guy off
use of drugs....he gets drugged
use of violence.....he gets the same treatment

it would not be castraton.

As much as I would have loved to have seen my attacker getting that humilation, pain, grief etc, I now dont think I could. Thats not cause I forgive him but rather because nobody deserves to feel like that

2)society and our justice system weighs in on the attckers side.....cause the poor lamb
a) didnt mean it
b) was drunk r on drugs
c) missunderstood
d) didnt know better

Only a tiny minority would lie bout being attacked, and the ones that lie should get nearly the same treatment as an actaul rapist/sex offender

I say NAME AND SHAME let the consequences be felt.

Sex offenders go on the list permently, have regular photots taken, and whereever they live is told that they are living near a twisted sicko.

Those that falsely accuse get named and warnings are given about being with them anywhere not public........as all complaints must be taken seriously just in case an actual attack takes place.

lets see what happens then.........................

MiCr0

the entire world will get over taken with poster's of people who've commited crimes.......
i'm assuming this would be true for all crimes, not just emotive one's like rape etc.

drivers who've crashed their car, reversed into some one when parking etc, would have to have warnings on their car.

Any one who speeds should be restriced from going above 25mps at anytime, anywhere ever?

In fact, why stop there....

Sleipnir

How many rape convictions have been overturned?
Would some innocent man losing his balls be an "acceptable mistake" ?
Would it be if you were the one wrongly convicted?

What you're asking is "should we torture criminals?"
No, of course not because in doing so you degrade yourself, your system of justice and you make yourself as bad as the criminal.


Those animals who gang-raped that girl should be thrown in the worst prison we have for the remainder of their days but they shouldn't be maimed as
that is something the likes of Saddam would do.

vibe666

repeat offending rates are exceedingly low for those who've been chemically 'castrated', which is just an injection which i believe needs to be done every 6 to 12 months to be effective, and diminishes all sexual desire (and hense ability to get an erection) to practically zero.

if someone is wrongly convicted then 6-12 months down the line they get the use of their love spuds back, end of story. seems fair to me.

the man who raped my fiancé only ever went to court to see me convicted of setting fire to his house, funnily enough.

we went to the police and were told that because of a lack of physical evidence (3 weeks after the rape, because she was in denial and didn't tell me) it would be her word against his, and could take over a year to go through court, with her entire sexual history laid bare (while his was safely tucked away, out of sight) etc. etc.

we tried to get on with our lives, but things went a bit pear shaped and i ended up finding out where he lived and going to 'pay him a visit'. he wasn't there, and i snapped and tried to torch his house, failing miserably, thanks to his house alarm and a squad car 2 streets away.

anyway, he moved away from where he lived because my g/f's friends worked in the same place as him, and he was forced out, but he's now living in a new town and getting on with his life.

anyway, 3 strikes and they're off seems like a fair deal to me. minimal chance of getting the wrong guy that way.

Specky

Andip wrote:

I'm only advocating its use in cases where guilt is beyond doubt

erm...hold on a sec, if the crime is not proven beyond doubt they shouldn't have been convicted, that's quite fundamental to our system of justice. So ALL convictions are based on this fact, even the incorrect ones.

love spuds

That's a new one on me, but I like its Irishness and shall hereafter always refer to my testicular dangleages in such terms.

Those animals who gang-raped that girl should be thrown in the worst prison we have

That particular case was very disturbing on a number of levels. The perpetrators were, in my opinion, very young. I don't know about other people here but at that age although I was actively shuffling the old pocket poker pack on a regular basis, I was still a spotty, giggling schoolboy with little prospect of physical contact with third parties beyong the field of sport.

To do something so....self destructive just poses so many questions about the perpetrators. I am not sympathising with them before I get accused of such, but I think anyone would be drawn to try to understand their motivation in order to try to avoid the same situation recurring. I have a daughter, and my natural protective instincts automatically make me want to stand between her and any threat.

They obviously weren't going to get away with what they did. It was so obviously wrong that no defence could deny it, two eye witnesses, etc. Did they believe they were going to get away with it? It they did, what does that say about the perception of our country's law enforcement services?

Was it, on the other hand, a purely self destructive act? I believe that the four youngsters involved were a self contained crime wave guilty of everything imaginable in the local area. Did they do it because they knew they would get caught for all the other stuff so why not go out with a bang (no pun intended)?

If that is true what does it say about our penal system where the penalties are so leniant that if you are about to be caught for shoplifting you might as well shoot someone on the way out because it won't really make much difference to your sentence but it may add a few kudos points to your criminal persona?

I don't know...

Any crime inflicted upon the person is deeply disturbing. Some people who are victims of muggers or even burglers are deeply traumatised by their experience and may never recover. My grandmother suffered three heart attacks as a result of repeated burgleries and eventually died of a heart attack that maybe she would have survived if her heart hadn't been so weakened by her previous experiences.

I have never been raped and cannot begin to understand the trauma such an event must leave on a person. However I do understand what it is like to be the victim of personal crimes against myself, my family and my friends. I feel very angry sometimes when I think about these events, at other times I remember how powerless I felt at the time, and how frustrated I felt at some of the responses I received from members of the law enforcement services. Unfortunately we all descend into statistics for these people and the responses we receive from them often reflect this. Perpetrators also are statistics and that's also often the way they are treated. It isn't always appropriate or effective but I suppose we have to believe that in many cases it is.

Being qualified in criminology and having worked in the security industry for a sizeable chunk of my career I would have to question the continued optimistic stance put on crime figures by the police service here and abroad. I think things are worse than they were, and just because numbers on crime reporting analyses say otherwise does not make it any different.

But that's not the subject of the thread.

I say leave the luv spuds in place...but maybe poke them with a cattle prod every now and then as a reminder.

Wacker

One thing that I'd like to ask (please bear in mind that I am both against capitol punishment and castration of sex offenders): if you're prepared to castrate sexual offenders, why not just finish the job, so to speak, and execute them?

Seriously, castration is a massive step. That is denying the guilty party the chance of ever having children of their own. It would probably reduce the risk of them ever carrying out a sexual assault again, but execution would definetly prevent them from ever csrrying out ANY crime again.

What I'm really asking is, is castrating a criminal of this nature really more tolerable than executing one?

Silent Bob

I have a question for those advocating castration.

One of the fundamental tenets of our legal system is that when your debt to society has been paid you are once again considered a full citizen of the country with all the rights that that entails.

If you castrate somebody then that is (as far as I am aware) permanent and for life. Are you then proposing that their debt to society will never be paid until they are dead? Who are we to mess with someone's entire life, beyond that period that is required in order to pay for the debt to society?

Specky

Seriously, castration is a massive step. That is denying the guilty party the chance of ever having children of their own.

actually it's bigger than that, you are effectively denying the person the possibility of enjoying any form of sexual relationship with anyone, which may, in some cases, mean that you are denying them the chance of any intimate personal relationship.

The knowledge of this may be enough to push the victim of castration in another direction, bitterness at their loss leading to violence, crime or self destruction. Perhaps.

In a similar way to how some women find themselves de-feminised by mastectomy or hystorectomy (sp?), men would be likely to suffer similar psychological trauma if their masculine trouser handbags were removed. Let's not make the criminals into the victims here but surely the purpose of punishment ought to be to make things better not make things worse?

pretty-in-pink

We need more punishing punishments............our system is like a smack on the wrist.......and te scummier someone is the more they get away with. I deeply sympathise with the guy who got in trouble for doing what the police should have. There is NO SUPPORT AT ALL FORM THE LEGAL SYSTEM for the victim.........its just more trauma and "are you sure, cause guys r just so horny, why were u there, why were u wearing that". Its criminal. Put more women in power cause the law is essentially a boys club.

women do not exist to be degraded and i fail to see why we should be super careful when dealing with the "rights" of the brutes who hurt people for fun. They dont stop to give a blind hoot about who r what they destroy. I reckon they deserve all the bad karma they get. Its not natural to kill, rape or maim for fun. In nature animals that kill for sport are isolated and despised. they are well known. but if a human does it then we assume they can change. we are bringing our own demise about by letting crimanals do what they like. evil doesnt change....and anyne who has said they can possibly repay their "debt" and be normal, that they deserve a family and to have sex and so forth......

how would you feel if your daughter or son was going round to the house of a convicted rapist? murderer? if the person showed no remorse, did it on purpose? name and shame the lot of them. it might be the only deterant.

to quote a very apropriate song "if you tolerate this then your children will be next"

the less our justice system works for us the greater the risk of having vigilante groups.....but at least some justice would be done then.

Sleipnir

naughty_girl wrote:

We need more ounishing punishments............our aystem is like a smack on the wrist.

Move you keyboard slightly to the left.

Zulu

naughty_girl wrote:

We need more punishing punishments
....its just more trauma and "are you sure, cause guys r just so horny, why were u there, why were u wearing that". Its criminal. Put more women in power cause the law is essentially a boys club.

:rolleyes: ....give us a break, willya. Putting more women in power will do what exactly? All of this is because of men is it? Why not just lock men up altogether?

naughty_girl wrote:

women do not exist to be degraded and i fail to see why we should be super careful when dealing with the "rights" of the brutes who hurt people for fun.

Because if we degrade them, we are NO better. It is important to lead by example. There was a time when we punished such crimes brutally, but, thankfully, we've evolved into a civilised society.

naughty_girl wrote:

In nature animals that kill for sport are isolated and despised. they are well known.

<sorry, I can't help myself here!>
By whom exactly? Is their an animal Interpol? Perhaps an animal UN? We'd better be careful - if they catch on to our eating them, they mightn't like it, and start a trade embargo!

naughty_girl wrote:

but if a human does it then we assume they can change. we are bringing our own demise about by letting crimanals do what they like. evil doesnt change....and anyne who has said they can possibly repay their "debt" and be normal, that they deserve a family and to have sex and so forth......

Rehabilitation is exactly what separates us from animals

naughty_girl wrote:

the less our justice system works for us the greater the risk of having vigilante groups.....but at least some justice would be done then.

ahh yes, justice "mob style". Super! Reminds me of the Paediatrician who's house was attacked and who's family was chased out of town when they "named and shamed" the paedophiles. ....but at least some justice was done then. :rolleyes:

Specky

Hell hath no fury like a woman's scones....

...and if we implement a system of more sever punishment and the crime continues, then what do we do?

In some parts of the US the death penalty is still exercised, yet people still commit horrible crimes. So can a deterant actually work? I don't think it can, there will always be situations where all rationale goes out the door and the criminal does what he wants in the heat of the moment.

Deterants only work on the un-motivated criminal, for those with motivation they must make a decision and their own ability to retionalise or their knowledge of the facts regarding the potential of receiving a particular punishment may be limited. In which cases, the deterant will have no meaning.

If, on the other hand, you REALLy want more harsh punsihments as revenge (and I have to be honest and believe that many people do want this more than anything) then I don't think that's entirely constructive as it just drags you in to a sort of tit for tat psychological merrygoround that neither victim nor perpetrator may be able to get off easily.

With any punishment you have to ask yourself "and then what?" Whatever you do to the perpetrator there is a future beyond this and you have to be looking at a way to make that better for everyone than the past. Sometimes the only way to achieve this might be to incarcerate the perpetrator for the rest of his/her natural life, sometimes it might be placing that person on the sex offenders register and having them electronically tagged, but in some cases this wouldn't be the best for everyone (this is where I started, my opposition was to the "black and white" approach advocated by so many people here. By categorising all perpetrators into the same scumbag pigeon hole you are in some ways doing the same as they are claimed to do by categorising all women as weak, to be dominated, treated as sex objects etc.

To paraphrase your question about whether I want my daughter to grow up in a wolrd like this, it's too late, she will. The world will not change for the better for a long time, if ever. You want to break gender stereotypes? Well try stopping all the crap that goes along with bringing up kids (blue for a boy, pink for a girl, ribbons in their hair, dolls and prams and actionman, toy guns and toy shopping trolleys.....)have kids, then try it. You'll find it's a little difficult to break the mould. While all of that exists there will always be an obvious definition of male and female roles and behaviour in society, and just like any other prejudice, people will continue to abuse the male/female relationship.

Zulu

What sort of castration do you mean? Chemical?
What about female rapists? How do you propose to castrate them?

Kell

Personally, I would be in favour of chemical castration. While I dont necessarily agree with rapists ever being allowed to function as a normal person based on the fact that they have denied their victim that right, the sway of opinion here might just sway me a little.

By the sounds of it, chemical castration nullifies endorhpins and I would think too that it would nullify testosterone too. Now, before you all assume I am going down the road of rape being a sexually oriented crime which I do not believe it is, surely lowering testosterone levels would lower any form of aggressive tendency in the perp to commit the crime?

Rape is an extraordinarily violent crime whether its in a laneway or in the comfy surroundings of your own bed while being off your head on some date rape drug, and any method of removing such an aggressive streak within a person that would make them commit such a crime has got to be considered.

Having given support to far too many people that have been raped has prompted me to want to want to enter the field of crisis counselling, specifically rape counselling. What it has also taught me is to absolutely despise rapists of all descriptions. While I take on board that there is something seriously wrong with the mind set of the rapist, I still cant find an excuse for it or even bring myself to consider their argument for the crime.

Take on board this for a moment. In some of my counselling literature, reference has been made to paedophiles and the fact that they will not be cured no matter how much money is thrown into their rehab. They wont be cured because paedophilia is their sexuality, just like you and I are either hetero, bi or gay. Consider this for a moment then. Is rape a feature of a rapists sexuality and if it is, is there anything really that can be done about it?

K-

Zulu

Kell wrote:

By the sounds of it, chemical castration nullifies endorhpins and I would think too that it would nullify testosterone too. Now, before you all assume I am going down the road of rape being a sexually oriented crime which I do not believe it is, surely lowering testosterone levels would lower any form of aggressive tendency in the perp to commit the crime?

This isn't true. Testosterone dosen't equate to violence. If you wish to create a more passive person - I would recommend a full frontal lobotomy - it works 100% of the time, but thats no more right than the rape crime in the first place.

Kell wrote:

Rape is an extraordinarily violent crime whether its in a laneway or in the comfy surroundings of your own bed while being off your head on some date rape drug, and any method of removing such an aggressive streak within a person that would make them commit such a crime has got to be considered.

I hope you wouldn't consider a full frontal lobotomy! ...people need to consider the innocient - not just the victim. People get wrongly convicted all the time. If casturation, or any other forced medical proceedure is made available, how would you feel if you were innocient? We must srrive for a less barbaric society.

Kell wrote:

Take on board this for a moment. In some of my counselling literature, reference has been made to paedophiles and the fact that they will not be cured no matter how much money is thrown into their rehab. They wont be cured because paedophilia is their sexuality, just like you and I are either hetero, bi or gay. Consider this for a moment then. Is rape a feature of a rapists sexuality and if it is, is there anything really that can be done about it?

Not all hetrosexual people have sex. Not all gay people have sex. You see, wheither a person is aroused by aggressive sex - that dosen't make them rapists. It takes a very special sick basta*d to commit that crime.

Silent Bob

naughty_girl wrote:

Its not natural to kill, rape or maim for fun.

Are you claiming that dolphins living in the wild are not natural because they rape, kill and torture 'for fun'?

There's at least one counter-example for you. Killing, torture etc. are bad and wrong, but they are not solely a human invention.

beer enigma

Just for info......

ps....for the couple of you who have seen fit to hammer my 'reputation' level for starting this thread - shame on you. I opened this as a genuine & open debate & I think (hope) that has been achieved. Negative reputations on this board should not be used just because you don't agree with me.

NY Times wrote:

HELENA, Mont. -- Hoping to save money on prisons, Montana has become the second state to approve the use of "chemical castration" to reduce the sexual drive of sexual offenders who are about to be released from prison.
A similar program went into effect this year in California, where the law mandates that sex offenders convicted of child molestation for a second time be injected with a drug, usually Depo-Provera, that reduces testosterone levels, which in turn reduces sex drive.

The Montana law, which is to take effect Oct. 1, does not mandate injections, but allows judges to impose them if an offender commits rape or incest for a second time, or if a first offense is particularly heinous.
The injections would begin a week before the offender is to be released from prison and would continue until the Montana Department of Corrections deems them no longer necessary -- which could mean for life. Once the injections stop, the sex drive returns to previous levels.
"It's like a nicotine patch," said state Rep. Deb Kottel, Democrat of Great Falls, who sponsored one of two bills on the issue that passed. "It takes the edge off and allows people to quit."
Officials estimate that the injections will cost $21 a day, while incarceration costs $44 a day.

amp

I don't think reputation has even been implemented fully yet.

Hagar

I am not in favour of this castration idea at all, but how about a compromise? Say loose one ball for a first offence, I know if I was down to just one ball I would learn to behave very quick.

JTPB

Kell wrote:

By the sounds of it, chemical castration nullifies endorhpins and I would think too that it would nullify testosterone too. Now, before you all assume I am going down the road of rape being a sexually oriented crime which I do not believe it is, surely lowering testosterone levels would lower any form of aggressive tendency in the perp to commit the crime?

I suppose you are right, it seems logical that if chemical castration drastically lowered sexual desire, then the would-be rapist would not have any motivation to have forcible sex.

However, most men do not rape, despite their desires to have sex.

KELL wrote:

Take on board this for a moment. In some of my counselling literature, reference has been made to paedophiles and the fact that they will not be cured no matter how much money is thrown into their rehab. They wont be cured because paedophilia is their sexuality, just like you and I are either hetero, bi or gay. Consider this for a moment then. Is rape a feature of a rapists sexuality and if it is, is there anything really that can be done about it?K-

A heterosexual or homosexual man can legally fulfil his sexuality any time he likes - several times a month, if he likes, by having consensual sex with the partner of his choice.

A paedophile, sexually attracted to children, does not enjoy have that massive degree of sexual freedom, and lifelong can never legally or practically have any type of sexual activity with the partner of his choice.

Rapists just don't bother waiting till the weekend - rape is not a feature of the sexuality of heteros, homos, or bi's - rapists just impose their will on people whenever they feel like it although they have alternatives.

beer enigma

amp wrote:

I don't think reputation has even been implemented fully yet.

Lol - just as well amp, I've more red cards from this thread than Roy Keane (not that he posted here - allegedly !!)

sliabh

naughty_girl wrote:

In nature animals that kill for sport are isolated and despised. they are well known.

So you have never owned a cat then so?

Specky

Testosterone dosen't equate to violence.

Perhaps not but there are numerous studies of incarcerated male and female criminals (of various types but mostly convicted of crimes with violence) that show a correlation to increased levels of testosterone. (I don't have the material to hand at the moment to provide references but can do later if it's of particular interest to anyone).

Now, there are also studies that link ADD to violent behaviour, there are other studies that link parental drinking, smoking and drug taking to ADD and there are studies that link childhood abuse to adult substance abuse.....so does rape cause rape????

Probably not, but this really illustrates how complex the whole situation is.

Kell

Zulu wrote:

This isn't true. Testosterone dosen't equate to violence. If you wish to create a more passive person - I would recommend a full frontal lobotomy - it works 100% of the time, but thats no more right than the rape crime in the first place.

Redcued testosterone does reduce aggressive tendencies. All you have to do is look at the previous example cited by a poster re bullocks and think of dogs that have been snipped.


[/QUOTE]I hope you wouldn't consider a full frontal lobotomy! ...people need to consider the innocient - not just the victim. People get wrongly convicted all the time. If casturation, or any other forced medical proceedure is made available, how would you feel if you were innocient? We must srrive for a less barbaric society.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I agree that people get wrongly convicted all the time, however, as also pointed out by a previous poster, chemical castration needs to be administered every six months to be successful. If the defendant were found not guilty on appeal, the treatments stop and guiltless person returns to a sexually functioning human being. In the case of clear cut witnessed cases, chemical castration all the way.

I hate this defend the perp crap. The perp, as far as I am concerned, gave up their right to rights on committing a crime of that magnitude. In clear cut cases, I would actually like to see public execution. Might make the fúckers think twice before pondering the crime.

[/QUOTE]Not all hetrosexual people have sex. Not all gay people have sex. You see, wheither a person is aroused by aggressive sex - that dosen't make them rapists. It takes a very special sick basta*d to commit that crime. [/QUOTE]

I didnt suggest the notion of arousal through aggressive sex making a person a rapist. What I did suggest is that maybe, just maybe, being a rapist is a fundamental aspect of a individuals pschy and not some random violent act. BTW, that is pure sense of wondering on my part and is entirely unsubstantiated by any research whatsoever.

K-

JTPB

Kell wrote:

Zulu wrote:

I hope you wouldn't consider a full frontal lobotomy! ...people need to consider the innocient - not just the victim. People get wrongly convicted all the time. If casturation, or any other forced medical proceedure is made available, how would you feel if you were innocient? We must srrive for a less barbaric society.

(Snipped for brevity)

I hate this defend the perp crap. The perp, as far as I am concerned, gave up their right to rights on committing a crime of that magnitude. In clear cut cases, I would actually like to see public execution. Might make the fúckers think twice before pondering the crime.

I don't think Zulu was "defending the perp"; he did not say the perp should get off scot-free with the crime. I got the strong impression, though, that Zulu was worried about the innocent being subjected to forced medical procedures.

As for you wanting to see the perp endure a public execution, :eek: which seems extreme to me, would you not settle instead for the rapist being raped himself, as punishment, or revenge, on "an eye for an eye grounds"?

Zulu

Kell wrote:

I hate this defend the perp crap. The perp, as far as I am concerned, gave up their right to rights on committing a crime of that magnitude. In clear cut cases, I would actually like to see public execution. Might make the fúckers think twice before pondering the crime.
K-

Well the problem is that there isn't any "clear-cut" cases. Also, public executions could very well desensitise a society to violence, and thus making it far more acceptable to the people as a whole.
For instance, places with the lowest rates of crime, tend to be societies where any violence is abhorent. ie: Sweden, where it's been illegal to hit your child. The mentality is that the child dosn't see violence as an option to resolve conflicts.

The emphisis for a society should be on re-habilitation, forgivness, and forward thinking, not revenge, brutality, and violence.

(But I completly understand the urge to lash out at such crimes, they do truly repulse me. I read the paper (about the poor couple in Limerick) and couldn't put it down, the feeling of sheer horror/shock/sickness - it was like a kick in the balls without the physical pain)

pretty-in-pink

The revenge id be most happy with is something fair. say name them. that way people can avoid them, keep save and reduce their chances of being attacked. tag the perp and let the public make up their minds. the reason that there is such a back lash when it gets out that some one is a rapist, or paedeophile is because of the violent, twisted, heinous connections to it. I know that rapists get off on the power they feel when their "chosen one" is begging, struggling, shouting, crying, the usual means of escape. i can fully undersatnd the desire to maim and degrade the attacker, but I dont advocate it. Id rather see them in their own personnal hell, where they klnow its their fault they are there. put them in jail and when they get out they feel that they have "served their time" and deserve all these rights and equal treatment. heck if they really truly regret and repent their actions maybe they do, its so very hard to forgive, harder to forget. Anyone who knows me wants to kill he guy who hurt me, but I dont want that. it will all come right in the end. whoever deserves eternal bliss in the after life will get it, those that dont will suffer whatever punishment god deems fit.

we dont really have the right to hurt someone no matter what. murder is murder even if its legal. in the eyes of the lord we will be judged.

im also not advocating mob justice but it will happen and people will feel somewhat sated in their blood lust for revenge. not saying it should happen, but if things dont change soon it will.

as for my animal analogy, animals dont kill for sport usually, they kill for food. its thir instict. since when is rape an instinct? animals dont rape eachother. there is no solution to keep everyone happy, but there has to be a middle ground that the majority of the system is over looking because criminal rights are given more consideration then civilian ones. they should lose their rights when found guilty and be dragged through the mud like their victim is.


its the lax attitude to justace that has aided in the widespread existence of rape gangs. the guy who did it to me was in one, and i gotta say the memeories that float in every so often are scary and sick. the details that i can kid of remeber are fuzzy, and i know there are big gaps which paraliises me with fear because anything could have happened.

i would never be able to give a "fair" verdict or sentence for murder or rape, i know im biast but heck this is an opinions board and thsi is my opinion. agree or not, its what i feel.

pretty-in-pink

The revenge id be most happy with is something fair. say name them. that way people can avoid them, keep save and reduce their chances of being attacked. tag the perp and let the public make up their minds. the reason that there is such a back lash when it gets out that some one is a rapist, or paedeophile is because of the violent, twisted, heinous connections to it. I know that rapists get off on the power they feel when their "chosen one" is begging, struggling, shouting, crying, the usual means of escape. i can fully understand the desire to maim and degrade the attacker, but I dont advocate it. Id rather see them in their own personnal hell, where they klnow its their fault they are there. put them in jail and when they get out they feel that they have "served their time" and deserve all these rights and equal treatment. heck if they really truly regret and repent their actions maybe they do, its so very hard to forgive, harder to forget. Anyone who knows me wants to kill the guy who hurt me, but I dont want that. it will all come right in the end. whoever deserves eternal bliss in the after life will get it, those that dont will suffer whatever punishment god deems fit.

we dont really have the right to hurt someone no matter what. murder is murder even if its legal. in the eyes of the lord we will be judged.

im also not advocating mob justice but it will happen and people will feel somewhat sated in their blood lust for revenge. not saying it should happen, but if things dont change soon it will.

as for my animal analogy, animals dont kill for sport usually, they kill for food. its their instict. since when is rape an instinct? animals dont rape eachother. there is no solution to keep everyone happy, but there has to be a middle ground that the majority of the system are over looking because criminal rights are given more consideration then civilian ones. they should lose their rights when found guilty and while the case is in the courts they should have their life and their friends lives and their families lives dragged through the mud like their victims life etc is. that or dont drag anyone through the mud, treat them equally until one party is found guilty


its the lax attitude to justace that has aided in the widespread existence of rape gangs. the guy who did it to me was in one, and i gotta say the memeories that float in every so often are scary and sick. the details that i can kinda of remember are fuzzy, and i know there are big gaps which paralises me with fear because anything could have happened.

i would never be able to give a "fair" verdict or sentence for murder or rape, i know im biast but heck this is an opinions board and thsi is my opinion. agree or not, its what i feel.