Turkey On The Brink Of Chemically Castrating Paedophiles and Rapists

Quote:

---

ANKARA, Turkey – Turkey's ruling party has proposed legalizing chemical castration as punishment for repeat rapists or pedophiles in a wide-ranging overhaul of sex abuse laws, according to a draft seen Thursday by The Associated Press.

The controversial proposal is part of a government-backed bill that foresees increased prison terms for sex offenses, especially against children. It was submitted to parliament on Wednesday but it was not known when it would reach the floor for debate.

The bill would require testosterone-supressing drugs for "habitual and persistent" sex offenders and make the procedure a condition for probation for others. Sex offenders would also be submitted to behavioral therapy.

It also would almost double maximum prison terms served for sex offenses to 10 years. Convicted pedophiles would serve up to 18 years in prison while sexual abuse of children by parents, stepparents, siblings or guardians would be punishable by 27 years.

---

Full article here.

Our kuuuuuuuuute Moder4tez Islamz0rz government's scientifically dubious draft law's public-lynch-lusted orientation aside, as most of what is definitely wrong is forced to swallow in Turkey, AKP's (ruling party) sick politicians claim that such sentence is practiced in some European countries as well as in a couple of states of USA.

I'd say "how and under which circumstances" which would change a lot about their claims and I'd like to know what kind of practice is executed in your country, if something similar, how such decision was reached and is being practiced under what kind of conditions ?

Thanks in advance.

I'm not a doctor, but wont castrating them with chemicals only stop them from procreating and not stop them from being able to have sex?

The doctors that tried to shed some light so far practically explained that such treatments which have to be repeated every month will lower their testosterone levels, hence theoretically dragging their lust for sex downwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

I'm not a doctor, but wont castrating them with chemicals only stop them from procreating and not stop them from being able to have sex?

---

Suppressing testosterone levels vastly reduces sex drive - the theory being that while they could have sex, they would have little interest in it.

I'd like to repeat, by the way:

Which States of USA and countries has this as a form of punishment please ?

Hmm... I know I didnt get this from a realy good source, Law and order, but dont some rapists rape more for the pleasure gained by the victims pain than the actual sex? I'd be abit concerned that even without the sex drive they might rape just for that instead of any sexual feelings.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think I saw some research that said this treatment wasn't really effective in stopping any impulse to commit these crimes. I could be wrong though.

Depending on the chemical used (either to competitively inhibit testosterone or kill the cells that make testosterone) the treatment would either have to be repeated or be a once off.

One's sex drive / libido / ability to have erections will dramatically fall without testosterone. But of course if the reasons for the crimes are not merely sexual desire but are a more complicated psychological matter it might not be enough. Some paedophiles / rapists have in some cases have requested surgical castration as they themselves view re-offence as highly likely without it.

Even if one were innocent, one might prefer having a monthly injection and otherwise be free than to languish in a Turkish jail (I stress this is a relative rather than an absolute preference). If the case is won, then they can just stop the injections.

~:smoking:

God.

Which country has such exercise ?

:stare:

Linky

Unless you are expecting country experts int he field, I suggest you use dear old Google / Bing etc...

~:smoking:

I believe we have voluntary chemical castration here.

But the turkish government aren't too far off, because there's a growing demand from the populist right all over europe to make such treatment mandatory. Like most conservative policies, it's nothing more than a quick fix to sate the bloodlust of the population, while accomplishing none of the stated objectives.

It is not used in the United States at all, in any state. The method is available as a means of vouluntary treatment, but not as punishment. ** actually, it looks like a couple of states use it for serious, aggravated offenses, but I seem to recall those laws being challenged

The law has been proposed several times over for a vast number of offenses, and always fails bar the repeat, habitual offenders. Can't give statistics for other states, but Oklahoma last year exonerated something like 12 people after testing DNA evidence, those were all either rapes, murders or both. If states think the financial payouts to wrongly convicted persons are high now, wait until you take their balls, even if only chemically.

All states are behind on DNA test work load, and many old cases that are tested are done with donated funds and manpower by voulnteer groups. LAw enforcementisn't exactly a go-getter when it comes to testing 20 year old evidence that may exonerate someone. This is also the most logical argument against the death penalty. People may argue that we have never executed an innocent person, I will point that that we likely have, it has just never been proven because once the guy is dead, prioroty shifts to exonerating people still alive.

If you take into consideration the shady, ambiguous nature of some of the statutory rape laws and sex crime laws, chemical castration of "sex offenses" must be carefully approached and only used for serious, aggravated offenses. For example, indecent exposure makes one a sex offender, however, that charge can stem from something like pissing in an alley or a stripper showing something she is not supposed to. To give an actual example, my neighbor in Thackerville is a sex offender. The charge and conviction seemd odd, so I pulled his file and what happened is he got into a fight with his heffer wife (she was charged with battery) and while they were throwing punches at each other he punches her in the tit, and it swelled badly and had to be drained, hence a charge of sexual domestic battery. Such a thing does not warrent castration, but this man is now a lifetime registered sex offender for essentially punching an udder.

***After reading the above posted wiki, I may be wrong about its use, although it is limited to very serious crimes

Use a couple of bricks instead to cut costs

Rubber bands would be more humane

...Oh god, the mental images...

Riding the coatails of Poland are we?

I could've sworn there was a study down showing that the rates of recidivsim were nearly indentical for those that were and weren't

Of course no one will beileive my damn sciencing with all the fancy words. Call me a glutton for punishment

Quote:

---

A recurrent pattern of sex offending suggests the ingrained nature of deviant sexual interests. Orchiectomy alone, without attendant psychological change, may be insufficient to mitigate sexual recidivism in a person who is in the community and subject to temptations.

---

http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/16


Does it outweigh the moral and ethical questions? maybe, maybe not

I'm sure it gets whatever Turkeys eqiuivalent to reactionary white trash all hot and bothered though

I believe introducing the death penalty for paedophiles would reduce their rates of re-offending to 0%. However, I do not have a scientific study to support this claim, so I guess it is worthless on these forums..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I believe introducing the death penalty for paedophiles would reduce their rates of re-offending to 0%. However, I do not have a scientific study to support this claim, so I guess it is worthless on these forums..

---

When you make such a claim the onus would be on you to support it

Don't get all butthurt,

The main problem I have with the death penalty is that the incidence of mistrials / abnormal results is too high considering the inability to overturn having someone shot several times through the chest.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The main problem I have with the death penalty is that the incidence of mistrials / abnormal results is too high considering the inability to overturn having someone shot several times through the chest.

~:smoking:

---

So you apply the same logic to this?

If it were permanent, then yes. But as it is reversible if someone is found innocent the treatment can be stopped (if you'd rather be an inmate and a known "kiddie fiddler" be my guest...)

~:smoking:

Well it's not like you can give them the years back they lost either jail/having injectiosn due to wrong convictions either.

No. But assuming you don't want to scrap the whole prison service in case there is occasionally a miscarriage of justice one has to accept that some people will loose some time in their life - but that's better than the rest of their life.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Well it's not like you can give them the years back they lost either jail/having injectiosn due to wrong convictions either.

---

True, but I would think they would be profoundly grateful they still have thier reason to live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

No. But assuming you don't want to scrap the whole prison service in case there is occasionally a miscarriage of justice one has to accept that some people will loose some time in their life - but that's better than the rest of their life.

~:smoking:

---

Equally, you could say you can't just scrap the whole death penalty just in case there are a few miscarriages of justice.

I guess this is where we stop being idealistic and have to balance justice with the limits/room for error in the justice system.

Wherever we draw the line will be somewhat arbitrary. Although personally I still support the death penalty for the worst criminals when the case against them is overwhelming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

True, but I would think they would be profoundly grateful they still have thier reason to live.

---

But it's not about what they want.

Edit: ignore this, I misread the last post.

Due to some high profile cases in New York over the last 15-20 years of convicted & released pedo's repeating their crimes, New York can & does keep some of the worst repeat offenders locked up even after they max out their sentences. As far as I'm concerned if there's DNA evidence linking the perp to pedophilia he should be offered a seat on Old Sparky.

By DNA evidence do you include DNA found at the crime scene or only that found on the victim?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I believe introducing the death penalty for paedophiles would reduce their rates of re-offending to 0%. However, I do not have a scientific study to support this claim, so I guess it is worthless on these forums..

---

You would end up with more than a few dead innocent people.

CR