ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: July 20 – Berkeley, August 17 – San Diego, September 21 – Phone meeting details

Emotional Support Group Meetings: Los Angeles – July 27

National

AL: House passes chemical castration bill

[alreporter.com – 5/23/19]

 

 

NOTE: PLEASE MOVE DISCUSSION TO AN UPDATED ARTICLE WITH A QUOTE FROM JANICE:

AL: Alabama’s state legislature just passed a bill to chemically castrate child sex offenders

 

The Alabama House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday requiring that child rapists be chemically castrated for the rest of their lives once released from prison.

House Bill 379 is sponsored by State Rep. Steve Hurst, R-Munford.

Hurst said his original idea was for surgical castration, but after much research of the issue, he instead opted for chemical castration, which involves requiring felons to take medication that inhibits their sex drive. The felons would be given the first dose of medication prior to their release. As a condition of their parole they would have to go to the Health Department for follow up doses, either through injection or orally. They would have to take the medication for the rest of their life. Failure to do so would be a parole violation and a class C felony under this legislation.

The perpetrator would have to be 21 or over and the victim between the ages of 7 to 13.

Hurst said he has already passed legislation that prevents child molesters who rape a child 6 years old and younger from getting parole.

The treatment is chemical not surgical. Child molesters would have to take hormone treatments to limit their sex ability and drive for the rest of their lives. It is reversible simply by stopping taking the medication. That would be a felony, unless the felon was pardoned or later had his conviction overturned.

State Rep. Merika Coleman, D-Midfield, asked how they could track that the medication was actually working. Hurst admitted that would not be 100 percent effective as some people might molest the children with object, but he said if it helped prevent some children from being molested, then it would be worth it.
Advertisement

Hurst said the bill was amended in committee to require them to take the medication for the rest of their lives. In an earlier version of the bill, the medication requirement would have simply been a parole violation.

Hurst said the offenders would have to pay for the medication unless they were indigent, and then the state would pay. The state would also have to pay for the treatment prior to their release from prison.

“I am not for hurting anyone, but if they hurt a child, they need to be marked for life,” Hurst said.

Read more

 

Join the discussion

  1. K

    I am at a loss for words. Janice, somebody, please stop this.

  2. Harry

    This guy has no proof that the “sex drive” is causing kids to molested. Than what about the female SO? I suppose the ACLU will let this go, like all the other civil liberties of RCs

  3. NorthEastPENN

    Really?!!!!

    Well this is the ultimate in ——– !!!!

    Sorry!

    I can’t think of a good enough word or phrase to describe this law!!

  4. troy

    not 4 anyone doing harm to a child,but how bout we pass a law chopping off politicians arms caught stealing or cutting off their tongue when lying

  5. Mp

    I can’t even begin to understand anymore what is happening. The amount of stupid is overwhelming. This has to stop.

  6. TS

    This is a seriously misguided policy trying to be passed. Since everyone’s body chemistry, e.g. body processing of and reaction to the meds, is different, there is not going to be a one set solution that is going to provide a solid line of same effects. If this got passed, I could see it being challenged in court upon signing by the Govnuh and an injunction being slapped on it pronto. At the same time, the negative side effects of it beyond the intentional purposes better be explained with the state held responsible because this is not a voluntary taking of the meds, but forced. See more here on this process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_castration

  7. mikey r

    “I am not for hurting anyone, but if they hurt a child, they need to be marked for life,” Hurst said.
    That and $ is what it is all about..

  8. Jack

    They’re nazis….And that’s a lie about the chemical castration being reversible by the way. If you’re on these medications for a long enough time you become sterilized. I mean I suppose the sex drive would come back, but they’d be infertile.

    • Brian

      Not only 8th amendment but it violates ex post facto laws as it is increasing punishment retroactively to people who have already been sentenced. Courts are already ripping g apart sex offender registries for the monstrously horrible government over reaches they are and for the constitutional violations they are.l

  9. bob

    Wanna make a TON of $$ ? come up with a medication that instantly reverses this ! same as the antidote called narcan that reverses opiates ! Parolee’s on this FORCED drug (this is basically forced shock therapy) !… Simply put this is a barbaric person that wants to alter peoples physiology for his own excitement to cause harm ! Maybe the bill producer needs to be forcefully hooked up to shock therapy for his own STUPIDNESS !!

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      bob, unfortunately, I don’t think that such a drug WOULD make that much money. It’s the same reason why these psychopaths can pass such laws in the first place: those forced to undergo such a ghastly injustice are a very small market, utterly devoid of influence.

  10. John

    Good old usa huh:/

  11. Dustin

    I don’t see how this could pass constitutional muster. The 8th Amendment and whatever Alabama counterpart specifically forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Even if they don’t consider it cruel (and many don’t), there’s no way to claim it’s not unusual, in that it’s not proposed as a punishment for any other offense.

    Granted, the Constitution doesn’t seem to apply to registrants, but still…

    • TS

      @Dustin, et al

      Read the Wikipedia page I referenced above (See more here on this process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_castration) and your argument is listed there as unconstitutional as well as the ACLU, et al, not in favor of it. This is a feel good measure for political reasons. I still don’t see how the other states get away with it now, but WTF do I know?

      • Brian

        Not only 8th amendment but it violates ex post facto laws as it is increasing punishment retroactively to no people alr eww day sentences. Courts are already ripping g apart sex offender registries for the monstrously horrible government over reaches they are and for the constitutional violations they are.l

  12. Bluewall

    The spirit of Eugenics lives on

  13. AJ

    ” if it helped prevent some children from being molested, then it would be worth it.”
    —–
    Ahh, the good old “if it saves one child” argument. Careful, legislator, that can be used in any number of places and instances.
    =====

    If I were subjected to this chemical reincarnation of Plessey v. Ferguson, I would 1) sue to be removed from ML because the State says this is a solution to my problem (and if it’s not, it has no purpose), and 2) sue for the taking of my familial rights without Due Process.
    =====

    Doesn’t this turn on its head the long-held statement that rape isn’t about sex, but about control? If it’s about control this will do nothing. Can’t have it both ways, you chucklehead legislators.

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      Yes, it was all about “power.” Susan Brownmiller’s contribution to old wive’s, er “womyn’s” tales. Now it refuses to die a gracious death. The problem is, the “it’s all about the power” argument applies to psychopathic rapists and serial killers, rarely to those simply enamored of the young. Gacy and Ted Bundy come to mind.

  14. FinallyOffTheReg

    This strikes me as one of the most PROFANE and DISTURBING reports I have ever read or reviewed.
    Involuntary Chemical Castration?

    Correct me if I am wrong (and that’s 49.9999% of the time LOL) But doesn’t this “smack” of some form of Eugenics? I mean, it’s not that hard to see how it does. I didn’t see how there is a review of risk versus Therapy and so on based on the old model line. But that how I read it is that its going to be mandatory without review for a particular class of “offender”. Moreover, within ten years of the age of the alleged victim? What the heck?

    OMG NARSOL, ACLU, everyone should join in an immediate filing to block this monstrosity. What the hell is going on with States like this? Forced Chemical Neutering of Humans? Every Registered Citizen in Alabama and those Incarcerated should join a class action something….Just some kind of yelling from the Soul.

    I am floored. Chemical Castration. And the person for the state treats the process as though we Registered Citizens are “Frogs” going to the lab. Or “Mice” being tested for Cancer Research. Or Monkeys being assessed for testing with a new drug.

    Involuntary Human Castration? That’s Eugenics. Plain and simple.

    Cheers,

    • Bluewall

      yes Eugenics.. the south has been holding on to the ideas that crimes are genetic and gives a good excuse to limit race types .. I bet that politician that is pushing it forward has many skeletons in the closet and I bet it’s all incest

  15. kat

    Maybe Hurst needs a dose of his own prescribed medicine!

  16. Mike G

    Unbelievable! So help me out here:

    Would this be retro-active (as usual), all convictions for the past 70 years would qualify?

    “…child rapists be chemically castrated…” and “Child molesters would have to take hormone treatments…”

    So which is it? Oh wait, all child molesters are child rapists, right?

    By the way, try asking 100 normal people what constitutes child molestation and see if you get less than 90 different answers, none of which might be what you did to get convicted. Oh wait, they will know it if they hear about it. Whether it is the coach that pats his player on the butt as she runs onto the field, or the little girl dragged into the bushes and assaulted in every available opening, all the same definition, right?

    “…hurt a child…”
    Who decides what hurts a child? Oh wait, I forgot, any action with a child, no matter how remote the connection is with sex, automatically hurts a child, whether the victim is screaming in unbearable pain and terror or laughing her head off begging for more. It is all the same hurt, right?

    “…they need to be marked for life…”
    So how does this work? Tattoo on the forehead, or forced to wear testicles outside the clothing so the public can watch them shriveling away?

    No sexual abuse is ever acceptable. But isn’t it convenient that in the US, a state can solve all its sex related crime problems with one simple solution, and to hell with individual assessment.

  17. Bo

    Will they be chemically castrating females as well? If not, gender discrimination…

  18. USA

    I fully support this new law. If it saves one child, it’s well worth it. Furthermore, it’s clearly going to hinder anyone thinking about making poor decisions and will assist those on parole from making poor decisions. Truly a victory for All!

    • SR

      Not sure if you’re serious, or sarcasm isn’t getting through well enough.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.