Is chemical castration an acceptable punishment for male sex offenders?
Resources used to support "yes"
Sex offenders, such as rapists, pedophiles, and exhibitionists, are among the highest reoccurring offense populations in the United States probation system. These offenders commit crimes that put fear into the general public and pose a threat to people that live in their neighborhoods. These offenders should be punished and not let off or forgiven of their crime(s) just because they have gone through a treatment program, most or which cannot show a significant success rate.
Chemical castration is an ideal punishment for sex offenders. When Depo-Provera is administerd, recidivism rates fall to 5%. Their sexual fantasies are lessened as a result of the reduction of testosterone levels. Although men administered this drug are capable of having sexual intercourse, many people argue that chemical castration is cruel and unusual punishment. This argument is countered by the fact that sex offenders are required to get injections only once a month. What is "cruel and unusual" is allowing sex offenders to attack innocent women and children.
This effective therapy will protect future victims. It is an "offender friendly" way of reducing sexual violence.
I watched a psychologist being interviewed on one of the networks who was asked if "chemical or surgical castration" would help. He emphatically said no - the problem's in the brain, not south of there.
My vote for the perp's fate is that, if he's found guilty, we borrow one of Saddam's grinders.