Lousiana OK's Rapist CastrationFollow

Governor Bobby Jindal today signed the Sex Offender Chemical Castration Bill, SB 144, authorizing the castration of convicted sex offenders.
[...]
SB 144 by Senators Nick Gautreaux, Amedee, Dorsey, Duplessis and Mount provides that on a first conviction of aggravated rape, forcible rape, second degree sexual battery, aggravated incest, molestation of a juvenile when the victim is under the age of 13, or an aggravated crime against nature, the court may sentence the offender to undergo chemical castration. On a second conviction of the above listed crimes, the court is required to sentence the offender to undergo chemical castration.

This bill also provides that a court may instead order a physical castration instead of the chemical castration. Convicted sex offenders who undergo castration must still serve their full sentence, as their treatment will not affect their sentencing. Under the bill, if a convicted sex offender fails to appear for their chemical castration, they will serve an additional sentence of three to five years.

Under the bill, if a convicted sex offender fails to appear for their chemical castration, they will serve an additional sentence of three to five years.

I voted no, for other reason. Aren't most rapes about power and not about the sex itself? What good is castration for stopping that? They just find a new way to hold power over their victims.

Dunno about that, Ugly. Louisiana still has work details out on the roads and what not, I believe. In summer.

In Louisiana.

Does this fall under cruel and unusual? The vindictive part of me, that thinks of the victims and the lifelong scars they will carry, thinks this is great. But the part of me with justice in mind is horrified by the thought. Granted, wrong convictions will be tougher, since they must do this for the second conviction, not necessarily for the first.

No. It's eye-for-an-eye, and I don't think it's right. A good part of me, however, thinks it's better than having repeat offenders, but not the majority of me.

If you castrate a repeat child rapist he's going to have a rather difficult time raping children. (Not impossible I know, but the desire will be lessened and there will be no release) Frankly though, I think we should just shoot them and remove the threat entirely.

If you can find one statistic somewhere that suggests that harsher punishments equals less crime, I'd like to see them.

It's troubling to me too that many people just assume that this is what the victims and/or victims' families would want. Same with the death penalty.

Most victims want to feel safe, which is never going to happen again regardless of the conviction of their assailant, and to move on with their lives. What they don't need is a continuing media circus. What many of them don't need is the guilt of being the means of another person being put to death.

You guys are being pu55ies about this. The truth is castration is far too easy on the perpetrators of these crimes. The death penalty is a much more appropriate response to such evil.

Totem