What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

alabama castration (1 Viewer)

grateful zed

grateful zed

Footballguy
https://tribunist.com/news/alabama-gov-signs-sex-offender-castration-law-video/?utm_source=charlie

Sex offenders, especially those who target children, are widely considered the lowest of the low when it comes to criminals. Even in prison, child sex offenders are targeted and attacked by other inmates for their despicable acts. Kay Ivey, Alabama’s governor, signed a bill Monday that will require certain sex offenses to undergo “chemical castration” as a condition of parole.
Click to expand...

 
I'm not too bothered by this, although I'd be interested in knowing which private company will be receiving the $1000 per month that each offender will be required to pay.

 
[scooter] said:
I'm not too bothered by this, although I'd be interested in knowing which private company will be receiving the $1000 per month that each offender will be required to pay.
Click to expand...
Always good to know what private company/political contributor has the inside money grab on some dude losing his balls.

 
And if we get a wrongful conviction or people want to diddle with age requirements once the book is written.

#### that. I can't believe this would have any support and I've been close with those who have been sexually abused as kids. Still wouldn't wish this on anybody, and it goes against historical tide when it comes to justice, too. We tend to have an agreement not to cut ##### off.

 
Forced sterilization is in fact a violation of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly Article XVI, which states: “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. […] The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.” According to the United Nations, measures disrupting the reproductive acts of a group can also be considered genocide.
Click to expand...
Related

 
DocHolliday said:
I like the idea.   At least try it.  
Click to expand...
It doesn't work.  The presumption that child sexual abuse has anything to do with sex is just wrong.  It's all about power.  If raping a child is your jam, you don't need a penis to do it.

 
Does the law only apply to new crimes, or will it be retroactively applied to those who were already convicted?

Imagine if you were an innocent person who took a plea deal because you believed that you only had to spend X amount of time in jail before moving on with your life...

 
rockaction said:
And if we get a wrongful conviction or people want to diddle with age requirements once the book is written.

#### that. I can't believe this would have any support and I've been close with those who have been sexually abused as kids. Still wouldn't wish this on anybody, and it goes against historical tide when it comes to justice, too. We tend to have an agreement not to cut ##### off.
Click to expand...
Just curious.  What do you think they mean when they say "certain sex offenses"??

Also, do you know what chemical castration is?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123 said:
Just curious.  What do you think they mean when they say "certain sex offenses"??

Also, do you know what chemical castration is?
Click to expand...
So certain sex offenses are immune to wrongful convictions?  Or is this a you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet type situation for you?

 
ghostguy123 said:
Just curious.  What do you think they mean when they say "certain sex offenses"??

Also, do you know what chemical castration is?
Click to expand...
I don't know what they mean by that. I'm sure hoping they mean rank pedophilia. Even then, who knows with these people?

I am slightly aware of chemical castration and assuming we weren't lopping off appendages, but the whole thing strikes me as crazily intrusive and unfair and unjust and cruel. If we're going to stop pedophilia we must stop the urge, not the result of any other urges. Chemical castration is mere deterrent. It is not preemptively deterrent nor rehabilitative for the urge. 

 
rockaction said:
I don't know what they mean by that. I'm sure hoping they mean rank pedophilia. Even then, who knows with these people?

I am slightly aware of chemical castration and assuming we weren't lopping off appendages, but the whole thing strikes me as crazily intrusive and unfair and unjust and cruel. If we're going to stop pedophilia we must stop the urge, not the result of any other urges. Chemical castration is mere deterrent. It is not preemptively deterrent nor rehabilitative for the urge. 
Click to expand...
That's a great idea.  We should just stop the urge.  Problem solved.  

 
rockaction said:
I don't know what they mean by that. I'm sure hoping they mean rank pedophilia. Even then, who knows with these people?

I am slightly aware of chemical castration and assuming we weren't lopping off appendages, but the whole thing strikes me as crazily intrusive and unfair and unjust and cruel. If we're going to stop pedophilia we must stop the urge, not the result of any other urges. Chemical castration is mere deterrent. It is not preemptively deterrent nor rehabilitative for the urge. 
Click to expand...
By all means use whatever resources you need to figure out how to curb the urges of the diddlers.  Until then, what, we just keep letting them diddle?  Keep letting them ruin lives, only to have those lives end up ruining even more lives?

I doubt once they start doing this they will just abandon any and all research.

 
DocHolliday said:
That's a great idea.  We should just stop the urge.  Problem solved.  
Click to expand...
Well, how to do that without intrusiveness and the possibility of wrongful conviction? Are you okay with innocent people dying over a.deterrent that does little to stop the actual feelings?

 
coyote5 said:
So certain sex offenses are immune to wrongful convictions?  Or is this a you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet type situation for you?
Click to expand...
Not sure the last time someone with multiple counts of diddling was wrongfully convicted on all counts.  

 
rockaction said:
Well, how to do that without intrusiveness and the possibility of wrongful conviction? Are you okay with innocent people dying over a.deterrent that does little to stop the actual feelings?
Click to expand...
Lots, and I mean LOTS wrong with this comment.  

For one you are assuming some dude who get convicted on one count would automatically be castrated.  I would think no, that would not be the case.  

As for innocent people, I am certainly not okay with innocent people's lives being ruined by these animals. 

As for the feelings, diddling isnt rape.  Diddling isnt about power.  Diddling is about a sexual attraction to the little ones.  If it helps any, I am all for it.

As for the overall theme here, not, this probably is not the end all be all solution.  To that I say SO WHAT!!!  

Frankly I just rather they all die. 

 
rockaction said:
I'm very bothered by this.

Like insanely bothered by this. This couldn't be in clearer violation of the 8th Amendment. It's as if it was never written. Who are these sick ####ers?
Click to expand...
The article reads as if written by a Yeti, but the original quote states the use of chemical castration (CC) as a condition of parole. Does that make a difference where the choices are either finish the sentence and be released without the CC requirement or early release with CC? I don't read this as extending CC past the parole period, nor do I read this as returning people to jail who have served their max sentence and refuse CC.

If an inmate agrees to CC to gain early release through parole, is the imposition of another parole requirement a violation of the 8th? I agree that refusing to release after serving the max sentence or forcing CC on those who have served all their time is a violation of the 8th, but I'm not sure that merely adding a parole requirement violates any right.

 
I read about this and not sure why they call it "castration"   It is a drug that has to be taken to lower libido and sexual fantasies, much like people who need to take drugs for other mental issues that can`t be controlled without medication.   The effects are reversible with discontinued use. They do not just butcher your balls.

 
If it’s a condition of parole I don’t have an issue with it.  Nobody has the right to get out of jail early.  If there is legitimate fear that a pedo will go back to sexually assaulting kids and they refuse to undergo the mandated treatment they can simply finish out their sentence.

 
jonessed said:
If it’s a condition of parole I don’t have an issue with it.  Nobody has the right to get out of jail early.
Click to expand...
In some states, "parole" is mandatory even when you're not released early. The article in the OP does not specify if this law only applies to those who get out of jail early.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
781
Joe Summer
J
gianmarco
Oldie but goodie -- Republican Alabama Sherriff "legally" made $1.5M to buy a home
Replies
6
Views
613
sho nuff
sho nuff

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top