Alabama Lawmaker Proposes Castrating Sex Offenders

Posted on: 2:55 pm, October 15, 2013, by

prison

MUNFORD, Ala. (WHNT)– An Alabama lawmaker is proposing chemically castrating those convicted of sex related offenses.

The Times Daily in Florence reports that Representative Steve Hurst of Munford will propose a bill again in 2014 that would require those convicted of sex crimes against children to be chemically castrated before being released from prison.

Hurst’s bill would apply to those over the age of 21 who’s victims were 12 and under.

 

 

10 comments

  • I think it should apply to all sex offenders regardless of age and age of victims

  • I 1 million times agree with this!

  • Tina says:

    I totally agree 100%

  • I would say yes, but most children that are molested , are molested with parts of a molesters body that cannot be castrated . If they could find a drug to castrate the part of the brain that makes them perverted , that would be wonderful.

  • Lisa says:

    It’s about time! I’ve been saying this for years.

  • GlennNomad says:

    I think the death penalty should apply to all crimes no matter how serious. I think sexism in any form should be a crime. If we’re to castrate male sex offenders, then female sex offender (yes, they’re out there) should have their ovaries ripped out.

  • mary says:

    I agree! And let this include the teachers both male and female that are having sex with our kids/students!

  • kevin wangbickler says:

    I think Alabama Lawmakers should be castrated.

  • While castration may be gaining a new round of attention, it should not be seen as a viable solution. Castration harkens back to historical controversies like genocide, ethic cleansing, and Eugenics, laws that were not completely overturned but fell out of favor as Draconian measures. Short-term “cost-saving” would simply be countered by
    long term health problems associated with castration without guaranteeing elimination of motivation for committing sex crimes in the first place. Moreover, men can restore natural testosterone levels with pills or injections,allowing them to still have sex because castration does not prevent an erection. The practice also raises a number of constitutional issues, such as cruel and unusual punishment, lack of equal protection, and double jeopardy. Does representative Mumford advocate female sex offenders getting hysterectomies or a similar procedure before release? I doubt it. The rights to procreate and refuse medical treatment are also considered fundamental rights. Castration appeals to our basest desire for revenge, but it still does not address the root causes. If anything, castration has proven the fact there is more to the root cause of sexually deviant behavior than the simplistic notion of raging hormones and testosterone.

    The bottom line—Castration is more about revenge and less about prevention and treatment.

Comments are closed.