velox
Retired
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4125566.stm
Good on them. But you'd want to make sure they'd get the right person.
Good on them. But you'd want to make sure they'd get the right person.
In other worlds the authoritarian nutcases want a bill that will never go through.Italy's far-right Northern League has presented a bill to castrate convicted rapists
If there was sufficient evidence I think it's a brilliant idea.Xayma said:I'm against it, possibly if it was only used on serial rapists (of multiple women) purely to stop any vendettas from women. There have been numerous cases where men have been convicted purely on a woman's testimony, even if there was no DNA evidence to link the man.
I was under the impression castrating removed the penis???? maybe I'm wrong?withoutaface said:Don't they still have a penis? What's to stop them reoffending?
sufficient evidence for what? that they are guilty of rape?iamsickofyear12 said:If there was sufficient evidence I think it's a brilliant idea.
Castration removes the testicles.sarabeara said:I was under the impression castrating removed the penis???? maybe I'm wrong?
I don't think it will, humans are more complex then bulls. Rape is a social constraint, for instantence in the pre industrial years of human development there wasn't much idea of rape.Castrating a male makes him less aggressive in the case of bulls and things. It should be the same for humans.
Yes (10))))spell check said:sufficient evidence for what? that they are guilty of rape?
That's why I said only if there is sufficient evidence.spell check said:what happens when ten years later someone else confesses to the rape and you've already maimed an innocent person?
oh you're funny aren't youspell check said:they wouldn't have the balls for it