|
Post by PaulsLaugh on Mar 20, 2023 4:09:47 GMT
He doesn't have one, even though he likely agrees with it being progressive and all.... Violent criminal behavior and sexual abuse are a social issue that breeders largely create. Bart linked me a Korean article and thinks its relevant... Actually, I do. Apparently neither you nor Prince Myshkin noticed that PaulsLaugh previously made the exact same slippery slope argument, which I responded to at length. Not that I blame anybody for missing it; most people don't read back through threads. I'm still not going to cover the same ground again in the same thread. I linked you to the National Library of Medicine hosting an article from the Journal of Korean Medical Science. In South Korea, chemical castration for offenders who commit sex crimes against minors has been the law since 2011. That means we can draw conclusions from their research and experience. If you have a specific reason why their findings shouldn't be believed, feel free to offer it. I'll also respond to Prince Myshkin 's argument here to save space. Chemical castration reduces the likelihood of arousal and rape. It doesn't make it impossible; it makes it less frequent. Nothing is ever 100%. If you want to argue that it's useless and impractical, that's one thing and we can do that. But it's another thing to argue that it's cruel or unusual. Most people would agree to give them longer sentences but most people would also agree that violent child rapists should be executed or locked up forever. All ethical considerations taken into account, chemical castration upon release is getting off easily considering what society wants to do with them. I understand why you'd prefer government not do it. It smacks of authoritarianism. What next? Are they going to force every criminal to take drugs that lobotomize them and make them docile? That's always a risk of that. That's why you have to consider these things on a case-by-case basis and know when a case crosses the line and you're approaching that dystopian reality. So why does this case cross the line? Here's my final position: no cruel and unusual punishments, not that I give a shit about this rapist, he can rot in jail and if the Aryan Brotherhood cuts off his dick, tough. This form of punishment is the issue. The best way to reduce the amount of violence against women is the teach the boys to behave and the girls how to protect themselves. They used to punish "promiscuous" woman with hysterectomies. So, no bodily mutilations, even if temporary. Better punishing through chemistry reeks of dystopian sci fi.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Mar 20, 2023 5:57:25 GMT
He doesn't have one, even though he likely agrees with it being progressive and all.... Violent criminal behavior and sexual abuse are a social issue that breeders largely create. Bart linked me a Korean article and thinks its relevant... Actually, I do. Apparently neither you nor Prince Myshkin noticed that PaulsLaugh previously made the exact same slippery slope argument, which I responded to at length. Not that I blame anybody for missing it; most people don't read back through threads. I'm still not going to cover the same ground again in the same thread. I linked you to the National Library of Medicine hosting an article from the Journal of Korean Medical Science. In South Korea, chemical castration for offenders who commit sex crimes against minors has been the law since 2011. That means we can draw conclusions from their research and experience. If you have a specific reason why their findings shouldn't be believed, feel free to offer it. I'll also respond to Prince Myshkin 's argument here to save space. Chemical castration reduces the likelihood of arousal and rape. It doesn't make it impossible; it makes it less frequent. Nothing is ever 100%. If you want to argue that it's useless and impractical, that's one thing and we can do that. But it's another thing to argue that it's cruel or unusual. Most people would agree to give them longer sentences but most people would also agree that violent child rapists should be executed or locked up forever. All ethical considerations taken into account, chemical castration upon release is getting off easily considering what society wants to do with them. I understand why you'd prefer government not do it. It smacks of authoritarianism. What next? Are they going to force every criminal to take drugs that lobotomize them and make them docile? That's always a risk of that. That's why you have to consider these things on a case-by-case basis and know when a case crosses the line and you're approaching that dystopian reality. So why does this case cross the line? I appreciate that you understand my objection to chemical castration. It's about defining the role of government. We don't want the state playing doctor when it comes to the penal system. And it's not really a slippery slope argument. Castration is by itself beyond the pall of acceptable jurisprudence. So this case or any case crosses the line.
And again, there's the issue of whether it's even effective. The story says this criminal will be given the drug before release. Okay, who is that going to protect 10 years from now?
As for capital punishment for rapists and child molesters? The U.S. is the only Western democratic nation which puts murderers to death. I doubt there would be much support to extend that to any crime less than murder.
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Mar 20, 2023 8:24:51 GMT
He doesn't have one, even though he likely agrees with it being progressive and all.... Violent criminal behavior and sexual abuse are a social issue that breeders largely create. Bart linked me a Korean article and thinks its relevant... Actually, I do. Apparently neither you nor Prince Myshkin noticed that PaulsLaugh previously made the exact same slippery slope argument, which I responded to at length. Not that I blame anybody for missing it; most people don't read back through threads. I'm still not going to cover the same ground again in the same thread. I linked you to the National Library of Medicine hosting an article from the Journal of Korean Medical Science. In South Korea, chemical castration for offenders who commit sex crimes against minors has been the law since 2011. That means we can draw conclusions from their research and experience. If you have a specific reason why their findings shouldn't be believed, feel free to offer it. I'll also respond to Prince Myshkin 's argument here to save space. Chemical castration reduces the likelihood of arousal and rape. It doesn't make it impossible; it makes it less frequent. Nothing is ever 100%. If you want to argue that it's useless and impractical, that's one thing and we can do that. But it's another thing to argue that it's cruel or unusual. Most people would agree to give them longer sentences but most people would also agree that violent child rapists should be executed or locked up forever. All ethical considerations taken into account, chemical castration upon release is getting off easily considering what society wants to do with them. I understand why you'd prefer government not do it. It smacks of authoritarianism. What next? Are they going to force every criminal to take drugs that lobotomize them and make them docile? That's always a risk of that. That's why you have to consider these things on a case-by-case basis and know when a case crosses the line and you're approaching that dystopian reality. So why does this case cross the line?
Pull your head in Bart.
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Mar 20, 2023 8:28:02 GMT
Actually, I do. Apparently neither you nor Prince Myshkin noticed that PaulsLaugh previously made the exact same slippery slope argument, which I responded to at length. Not that I blame anybody for missing it; most people don't read back through threads. I'm still not going to cover the same ground again in the same thread. I linked you to the National Library of Medicine hosting an article from the Journal of Korean Medical Science. In South Korea, chemical castration for offenders who commit sex crimes against minors has been the law since 2011. That means we can draw conclusions from their research and experience. If you have a specific reason why their findings shouldn't be believed, feel free to offer it. I'll also respond to Prince Myshkin 's argument here to save space. Chemical castration reduces the likelihood of arousal and rape. It doesn't make it impossible; it makes it less frequent. Nothing is ever 100%. If you want to argue that it's useless and impractical, that's one thing and we can do that. But it's another thing to argue that it's cruel or unusual. Most people would agree to give them longer sentences but most people would also agree that violent child rapists should be executed or locked up forever. All ethical considerations taken into account, chemical castration upon release is getting off easily considering what society wants to do with them. I understand why you'd prefer government not do it. It smacks of authoritarianism. What next? Are they going to force every criminal to take drugs that lobotomize them and make them docile? That's always a risk of that. That's why you have to consider these things on a case-by-case basis and know when a case crosses the line and you're approaching that dystopian reality. So why does this case cross the line? I appreciate that you understand my objection to chemical castration. It's about defining the role of government. We don't want the state playing doctor when it comes to the penal system. And it's not really a slippery slope argument. Castration is by itself beyond the pall of acceptable jurisprudence. So this case or any case crosses the line.
And again, there's the issue of whether it's even effective. The story says this criminal will be given the drug before release. Okay, who is that going to protect 10 years from now?
As for capital punishment for rapists and child molesters? The U.S. is the only Western democratic nation which puts murderers to death. I doubt there would be much support to extend that to any crime less than murder.
They did when it came to experimental vaccines for COVID. They will try to fix what they can, for their own self-serving agendas. The elitist establishment don't want things fixed and they don't care about chemically castrated pedos either. Only to make it look like they do.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Mar 20, 2023 17:19:13 GMT
I appreciate that you understand my objection to chemical castration. It's about defining the role of government. We don't want the state playing doctor when it comes to the penal system. And it's not really a slippery slope argument. Castration is by itself beyond the pall of acceptable jurisprudence. So this case or any case crosses the line.
And again, there's the issue of whether it's even effective. The story says this criminal will be given the drug before release. Okay, who is that going to protect 10 years from now?
As for capital punishment for rapists and child molesters? The U.S. is the only Western democratic nation which puts murderers to death. I doubt there would be much support to extend that to any crime less than murder.
They did when it came to experimental vaccines for COVID. They will try to fix what they can, for their own self-serving agendas. The elitist establishment don't want things fixed and they don't care about chemically castrated pedos either. Only to make it look like they do. I agree on the point that this is all just for show, to make it look like they're cracking down hard to punish child molesters. Chemical castration will not prevent pedos from molesting anyone. They still get erections and they still have sexual thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Mar 21, 2023 1:33:39 GMT
They did when it came to experimental vaccines for COVID. They will try to fix what they can, for their own self-serving agendas. The elitist establishment don't want things fixed and they don't care about chemically castrated pedos either. Only to make it look like they do. I agree on the point that this is all just for show, to make it look like they're cracking down hard to punish child molesters. Chemical castration will not prevent pedos from molesting anyone. They still get erections and they still have sexual thoughts. As you said to Bart, its to make them feel better about themselves due to personal insecurities and need to virtue to others how righteous they are. Common sense went out the window.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Mar 21, 2023 2:28:24 GMT
I agree on the point that this is all just for show, to make it look like they're cracking down hard to punish child molesters. Chemical castration will not prevent pedos from molesting anyone. They still get erections and they still have sexual thoughts. As you said to Bart, its to make them feel better about themselves due to personal insecurities and need to virtue to others how righteous they are. Common sense went out the window. Notice that the case in the OP is in the state of Louisiana. It's not the most educated and secular state in the U.S. It's dominated by Christian fundamentalism. This is just a phony "get tough" scam designed to get votes for Louisiana politicians.
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Mar 21, 2023 6:41:09 GMT
As you said to Bart, its to make them feel better about themselves due to personal insecurities and need to virtue to others how righteous they are. Common sense went out the window. Notice that the case in the OP is in the state of Louisiana. It's not the most educated and secular state in the U.S. It's dominated by Christian fundamentalism. This is just a phony "get tough" scam designed to get votes for Louisiana politicians. And while the herd can go to sleep peacefully thinking justice is done and someone got their just desserts, more and more pedos will still infiltrate the system.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Mar 21, 2023 7:14:44 GMT
Notice that the case in the OP is in the state of Louisiana. It's not the most educated and secular state in the U.S. It's dominated by Christian fundamentalism. This is just a phony "get tough" scam designed to get votes for Louisiana politicians. And while the herd can go to sleep peacefully thinking justice is done and someone got their just desserts, more and more pedos will still infiltrate the system. They'll probably let them out earlier. This thing is a disaster.
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Mar 21, 2023 9:24:33 GMT
And while the herd can go to sleep peacefully thinking justice is done and someone got their just desserts, more and more pedos will still infiltrate the system. They'll probably let them out earlier. This thing is a disaster. As you claimed, it is for political grandstanding only. Most are too dense to see it.
|
|