• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Polish president signs chemical castration law

kaya'08

kaya'08

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
Messages
6,363
Reaction score
1,318
Location
British Turk
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Polish President Lech Kaczynski has signed a law making chemical castration compulsory for adults who rape children or immediate family members.

The introduction of the law means that Poland is now the only country in Europe where certain sex offenders will be forced to undergo the treatment.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk proposed the law in the wake of several high-profile paedophile cases.

The practice has been tried elsewhere but usually on a voluntary basis.

According to its politicians, Poland now has the toughest legislation towards paedophiles in Europe.

Popular support

Under the law, adults convicted of raping a child under the age of 15 or committing incest will be forced upon release to take drugs to reduce their libido - a practice commonly referred to as chemical castration.

Other European countries have experimented with the practice, which can produce unpleasant side effects such as breast growth, but only as a voluntary option to try to prevent people from re-offending.
Click to expand...

The Polish law was drafted following a case last year in which a 45-year-old man repeatedly raped his daughter and fathered two children by her.

The law has been criticised by human-rights groups, but it enjoys widespread public support, with one survey saying close to 80% of people here support the measure.

Are the effects of this drug permanent?

BBC News - Polish president signs chemical castration law
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, they are not permanent. They require a regular dosage schedule to maintain their effects.
 
Do you have a link to a news story? The OP link is to wiki

[/ot]
What safeguards are there in the application of this sentence. IMO the law should be as strict as death penalty laws
 
It makes sense to make this a contingency of parole for sex offenders who are shown likely to repeat their offense. But that makes it optional.. they can either choose the drug or prison. If you make it mandatory and the person refuses are you going to forcibly inject them or something? That part I don't agree with. And there is probably no way to monitor that they take the drug every day, they shouldn't make laws that are impossible to enforce.
 
Wow, really? If they're still so much of a danger then keep them in jail. That's cruel and unusual punishment.
 
phattonez said:
Wow, really? If they're still so much of a danger then keep them in jail. That's cruel and unusual punishment.
Click to expand...

If it were up to me I would use a knife instead of a drug that isn't permanent.

Rape, be it of a child or an adult, is the one crime that does not ever have an excuse. Murder, theft can at least have a valid excuse. Rape never does. For that reason (among others of course) I think that it should have the harshest sentence possible.
 
Get knife, chop off balls, dose em with a **** ton of estrogen, set em loose in prison.

Punishment. Administered.
 
Kal'Stang said:
If it were up to me I would use a knife instead of a drug that isn't permanent.

Rape, be it of a child or an adult, is the one crime that does not ever have an excuse. Murder, theft can at least have a valid excuse. Rape never does. For that reason (among others of course) I think that it should have the harshest sentence possible.
Click to expand...

So a rapist can never be rehabilitated?
 
phattonez said:
So a rapist can never be rehabilitated?
Click to expand...

Lowest rate of rehabilitation for any serious violent crime. Child rapists are even worse.

In any case, I do not support castration, chemical or otherwise. Either fix what's wrong with them-- castration is no guarantee-- and release them intact or put a bullet in them. Our legal system should stay out of the business of crippling people.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Lowest rate of rehabilitation for any serious violent crime. Child rapists are even worse.

In any case, I do not support castration, chemical or otherwise. Either fix what's wrong with them-- castration is no guarantee-- and release them intact or put a bullet in them. Our legal system should stay out of the business of crippling people.
Click to expand...

Castration is better than a bullet for rapists...We need to bring back shame and truly make punishment inconvenient or a pain in the ass instead of just "bearable" or "rehabilitative" >:D
 
phattonez said:
So a rapist can never be rehabilitated?
Click to expand...

- castration could be a part of the sentence
- castration could be made only to recidivists
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Lowest rate of rehabilitation for any serious violent crime. Child rapists are even worse.

In any case, I do not support castration, chemical or otherwise. Either fix what's wrong with them-- castration is no guarantee-- and release them intact or put a bullet in them. Our legal system should stay out of the business of crippling people.
Click to expand...

what about "mechanical" castration (removal of the balls)?
 
EpicDude86 said:
Castration is better than a bullet for rapists...We need to bring back shame and truly make punishment inconvenient or a pain in the ass instead of just "bearable" or "rehabilitative"
Click to expand...

I don't believe in punishment. It has no deterrent value and only reduces criminals' ability and willingness to be lawful, productive members of society.

Rehabilitation or a bullet. Those are the only options I believe our legal system should offer for criminals, and anything which does not contribute to criminals receiving one or the other is extraneous and should be removed.

bub said:
what about "mechanical" castration (removal of the balls)?
Click to expand...

That would be the "otherwise" in "chemical or otherwise". Castration simply isn't that effective in preventing re-offense amongst the people who volunteer for it to help control their impulses; it certainly isn't going to work for people who have it forced upon them.

If it provides just that little bit extra for someone trying to give it up, and they and their doctor agree, I'll support it. It shouldn't become policy.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I don't believe in punishment. It has no deterrent value and only reduces criminals' ability and willingness to be lawful, productive members of society.

Rehabilitation or a bullet. Those are the only options I believe our legal system should offer for criminals, and anything which does not contribute to criminals receiving one or the other is extraneous and should be removed.
Click to expand...

I actually kind of agree with a fascist on this, though obviously not on the bullet part. I say leave those in jail who are a threat to society and that's it. We are not so infallible as to punish people.

For all those in support of castration: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. "
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I don't believe in punishment. It has no deterrent value and only reduces criminals' ability and willingness to be lawful, productive members of society.

Rehabilitation or a bullet. Those are the only options I believe our legal system should offer for criminals, and anything which does not contribute to criminals receiving one or the other is extraneous and should be removed.



That would be the "otherwise" in "chemical or otherwise". Castration simply isn't that effective in preventing re-offense amongst the people who volunteer for it to help control their impulses; it certainly isn't going to work for people who have it forced upon them.

If it provides just that little bit extra for someone trying to give it up, and they and their doctor agree, I'll support it. It shouldn't become policy.
Click to expand...

I would LOVE to pick your brain over some Corrections based debates, sir. :D While, I don't completely agree with you...I think you and I...could fix the system...
 
phattonez said:
For all those in support of castration: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. "
Click to expand...

Ahh but when looking from the Victim's point of view, which people who are against this sort of punishment would most likely not do, one will notice that a Cruel and Unusual punishment has been inflicted upon them for no crime. Therefore, you'd be hard pressed to find a punishment for Rape that isn't cruel and unusual.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I don't believe in punishment. It has no deterrent value and only reduces criminals' ability and willingness to be lawful, productive members of society.

Rehabilitation or a bullet. Those are the only options I believe our legal system should offer for criminals, and anything which does not contribute to criminals receiving one or the other is extraneous and should be removed.



That would be the "otherwise" in "chemical or otherwise". Castration simply isn't that effective in preventing re-offense amongst the people who volunteer for it to help control their impulses; it certainly isn't going to work for people who have it forced upon them.

If it provides just that little bit extra for someone trying to give it up, and they and their doctor agree, I'll support it. It shouldn't become policy.
Click to expand...

You are brutal, I like it, and I agree, do the world a favor, and off these animals!
 
phattonez said:
I actually kind of agree with a fascist on this, though obviously not on the bullet part. I say leave those in jail who are a threat to society and that's it. We are not so infallible as to punish people.
Click to expand...

To me, the bullet isn't about punishment. It's about removing someone from society permanently that we have determined we have no further use for. I think keeping someone in a cage for the rest of their life-- because we can't let them out and we're too squeamish to kill them-- is cruel and unusual. You're right that we can't undo a bullet, but we can't undo the effects of years of prison, either.

Either way, our mistake was caught far too late. Instead of focusing on the fact that we can't undo our mistakes, we should focus on making fewer mistakes in the first place.
 
I've always been a supporter of the dealth penalty for instances like this. And I like the bullet, because it is economically sound.
 
EpicDude86 said:
Ahh but when looking from the Victim's point of view, which people who are against this sort of punishment would most likely not do, one will notice that a Cruel and Unusual punishment has been inflicted upon them for no crime. Therefore, you'd be hard pressed to find a punishment for Rape that isn't cruel and unusual.
Click to expand...

I never knew that our justice system was based on an eye for an eye.
 
I haven't read any posts on this thread, but I thought I would put in my 2 cents.

If castration is effective in stopping a rapist from raping again, then I think a convicted rapist should be give a choice. Either serve out his full sentence, or he can opt for castration and half his sentence.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

.
 
Oh, I thought chemical castration was when they let your nuts hang in a cup of acid.
 
If it's a pedophile, set em loose in C block. The convict's fellow imates will take good care of the f*ck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom