Flip through the latest issue of Gulf Weekly.
It was great to get some feedback on my castration of paedophiles piece and I agree with much of what Pascale has to say on the matter (see letters page).
Although I accept that castration can’t guarantee offenders will stop what they’re doing, I can’t help thinking – perhaps somewhat naively – that once you’ve lost such an important (if not technically vital) part of your anatomy, you might not be willing to risk losing anything-else and, therefore, abstain from repeating the offence.
For the sake of playing devil’s advocate for a minute in reference to Pascale’s tongue-in cheek-suggestion of chopping off an offender’s hands, why not? Is that so much worse than cutting off their genitalia?
As you say, paedophilia is a serious illness. In much the same way as cancer is and when you have cancer, you chop it out.
I can think of no worse crime than that of sexually abusing a child and with that in mind I don’t think there can be any punishment too great.
Paedophiles are rarely given life sentences and are often let off early for good behaviour – and it’s hardly surprising that their behaviour is going to be good behind bars because there are no children in prisons for them to misbehave with.
Statistics in the US show that 75 per cent of convicted child molesters are convicted more than once.
With this being the case, and to take the debate to the extreme, one could argue that the death penalty for such a crime should be mandatory.
Why should tax payers have to pay to feed and keep these people behind bars if repeat offence is likely?
I have never been a proponent for the death penalty but I have to admit in this case I find it hard to think of a reason why not.
