One strike rule for sex offenders
It’s a warm spring afternoon; your 16 year old daughter goes out for her normal afternoon jog. On this day she does not return. Seconds turn into hours and hours into days. Suddenly there is a break in the case, your precious baby girl is found dead, raped, and mutilated in a shallow grave. The culprit, a two time convicted sex offender that has served his time, worked through therapy, and is now walking freely amongst us is ready to attack at any moment.
Unfortunately, this is a scenario we often see too much of. Although there are current laws in place to protect society from these wild animals, it takes the cooperation of the offender to follow and obey such laws when released. Like wild animals, life is not about following rules but how to stalk and attack their prey. Wild animals are not meant to be tamed. Methods in place such as Meagan’s Law and mandatory therapy upon release are merely band aids to a problem that cannot be fixed. There is only one clear cut way to protect our children and society from becoming the prey of these wild beasts; one strike and its life without the possibility of parole.
If an adult rapes another human being, whether it be another adult or a child or causes other bodily harm such as torture, kidnapping and brainwashing this person should be given life in prison and be surgically castrated. If an adult molests any child under the age of 14 the same sentence should be given. If an adult molests anyone over the age of 14 they should serve life without the possibility of parole. Crimes against sexual deviants need to be stricter and harsher to scare these individuals from committing their crimes.
In a perfect world, pedophiles and sexual offenders would not exist. Unfortunately, for the millions of men, women and children living tortured lives and some not alive at all, these vermin are still given human rights. There are laws in place that protect their identities, they are given free relapse prevention therapy, and offered employment assistance. What about the wounded prey they left behind? There are no government funded programs to help them rehabilitate back into society, no one to stand with them and take the fear away. Sexual offenders are offered all of these things, costing millions in tax payer dollars.
While incarcerated, sex offenders are mandated to attend weekly offender treatment sessions and in most states, are required to participate in some form of therapy upon their release. This is a waste of time and money for a program that is failing miserably at achieving what it was intended to do. In a recent legislative audit of the sexual psychopath program of the state of Washington, it was confirmed that the rate of recidivism is about the same for offenders who participated in therapy and those who didn’t. A sex offender is not any different than a recovering alcoholic or addict. Anything can set them off to commit their crimes again. It is not a matter of if but of when.
The first time a person rapes another human being or molests a child, their right to be a contributing member of society needs to be stripped away from them with no question. Why do we have to wait for someone to be killed before we can sentence someone 25 years to life? The average rapist is sentenced 8 years but rarely serves over 3 years. They are placed back into communities with the “hope” that they will not act on their animalistic instincts again. A perfect example is of Lawrence Singleton who only served 8 years of his 25 year sentence for raping a 15 year old girl, cutting her forearms off with an ax and left her for dead. Six months after his release, he heinously raped, tortured and murdered a woman in his home.
Almost every state has some sort of law similar to Meagan’s Law, which orders released sex offenders to register every year to a sex offender data base and a community notification is sent out. Some may argue that this is enough humiliation for the sex offender, that we are already invading their privacy by knowing their crime and their place of residence. When a little boy has been raped and had his penis cut off, or when a little girl has been raped and murdered, worrying about humiliating the beasts who obliged in these crimes is ridiculous. These criminals are more likely to move to areas that do not have such laws or do not enforce them. Large cities and inner cities are particularly enticing to them because “law enforcement in these areas lack time and resources to enforce community notification laws”. Having your name on a data base will not prevent them from attacking again.
Boundaries are also set in place to prevent offenders from getting too close to children or living near schools. Most of these boundaries are set at 1000 feet, what is going to deter these individuals from walking a couple extra blocks to find a new victim? The only boundaries that should be given are that of a jail cell. These boundary restrictions only work if the criminal is willing to cooperate. Another option could be a surgically implanted microchip in an area that could not be removed (i.e. kidney or brain). This would surely help regulate where they were at all times. Law enforcement could be alarmed if the offender crosses his boundary line.
If we must allow these criminals to be released, another option that has had a very high success rate is chemical castration. Some states have ordered chemical castration to those they feel are extremely violent and unable to change. Injecting the offender with synthetic female hormones reduces the production of testosterone thus lowering sex drive. The problem with this is again, the cooperation of the offender. Once the treatment is stopped, the testosterone levels rise and the animal is reborn.
We live in a democratic society where the voice of the people is meant to be heard. If every citizen signed a petition, wrote a letter to their government, protested and found other ways to bring attention to this issue, the laws would change. Some people might believe that the surgical castration of the offender’s entire organ may seem cruel and unusual, but the only concern a community should have is for the victims of these untamable beasts who must live with this for the rest of their lives. If an individual is a threat to society, it is the duty of those responsible for the safety of the public to keep these people away from the community. There is no philosophical argument to oppose this proposal. Children are not capable of taking care of themselves; if we do not stand against this, who will?