Snip Snip…
My proposal to neuter criminals in lieu of prison will no doubt be viewed as barbaric by some, ineffectual by others. It deserves further explanation. Here goes…
Castration calms the savage beast. One need only note why ranchers and pet owners neuter males; it makes them tolerable to live with and does no harm. It’s a painless procedure with anesthetics. It does not make one impotent but it drastically lowers testosterone levels, the prime cause of belligerent behavior and explains why 99% of convicts are male. It improves the lives of those neutered but more importantly it improves the lives and safety of everyone who has to deal with them. That’s all of us.
There is a great cost advantage to this alternative to prison, $100 paid once, not $100 paid every single day for decades. We spend more tax money caging up humans than we spend on higher education. Fully 85% of the public safety money goes to this expense, not to police and court costs. Nothing could be more barbaric than locking a person in a cage for years. It does nothing to rehabilitate. It just makes convicts crazier, more belligerent and dangerous. Prison is also is a death penalty for many, 36% with confirmed Hepatitis C. And what kind of dehumanizing job is it to watch over these people? Surely the guards deserve to be set free too.
Loading ...
No, you’re wrong on this one in my opinion.
You may be right but it seems to me like it would be a more effective and less dehumanizing remedy to serious crime than cages. Certainly more affordable to taxpayers.
And if they end up being innocent when evidence is uncovered? Oops…
At least they haven’t been locked in a cage for ten or twenty years at great taxpayer expense, losing their capacity to think. Brains atrophy in such environments. Talk about a cruel and unusual punishment. Neutering does no real harm.
Comparing a man to a beast in that sense… Is nonsense. Where do you draw the line? When does one deserve to be mutilated? I used to support the death penalty, before I found out how easily some courts would throw that punishment out, only later to release the man due to various mistakes.
The same would be true with this subject. If you had a confession then I could see using the death penalty, putting the threat down. Logical and honorable. But this talk about mutilating men to make them safe for society is such a fallacy. Tell me sir, If I were to take your balls, would you not seek out vengeance? Would you not want your pound of flesh? Would you honestly just go back to your life like it never happened?
Oh, yes by the way. My parents and I own German shepards, both males. My parents had them neutered because he was too hyper and was driving them crazy. Didn’t work, hes the same pup he was. How is that possible?
Is this all a joke that I’m taking too seriously? Is this guy really running as our governor? Please say this is a joke…..
Justin, Oregon already has a law requiring chemical castration for repeat sex offenders. Several states require actual castration for repeat offenders. It is very effective and would also work for other violent offenses – much more cost effective and humane than caging people for decades.
Appreciate it! Yet a typical teriffic way of seeing things, this is exactly why we arrive to your blogging site time and again.
Bless you. Yet another wonderful entry, it’s the reason I arrive to your web log generally…
“But this talk about mutilating men to make them safe for society is such a fallacy. Tell me sir, If I were to take your balls, would you not seek out vengeance? Would you not want your pound of flesh? Would you honestly just go back to your life like it never happened?”
“Justin, Oregon already has a law requiring chemical castration for repeat sex offenders.”
I LOVE it when someone who shoots his mouth off about an issue he knows NOTHING about gets SCHOOLED by someone with the correct information.
You have my vote, Mr. Wilson.
Thank God Justin’s not running for public office. We’d all be screwed.