The subject of legal punishment for sex crimes has long been debated, with some arguing that the laws are not strong enough and others claiming they are too harsh. Increasing numbers of politicians are pushing for adjustments to sex crime legislature, including state Sen. Emmett Hanger, R-Va., who is backing a bill that would require the state of Virginia to research the effects of physical castration on convicted sex offenders.

Castration of a sex offender is sanctioned in eight states, including Texas, which is one of two states that allow physical castration. The more widely-used method, chemical castration, merely inhibits testosterone production.

The long-term effects of castration have already been studied and have been shown to speed up the process of criminal rehabilitation in some cases, but not all, Hanger said.

Hanger also claims that these criminals are driven to commit sex crimes because of their body chemistry and hormones, which is a gross generalization as some sex offenders have been rehabilitated strictly through therapy and civil commitment.

Many believe castration is a cruel and unusual punishment, thinking of it as purely retributive justice without much reasoning behind it. It is not primarily a means of punishment, but a way to reintegrate sex offenders into society in a cost-effective manner. This leads to the question of whether or not we want sex offenders reintegrated into society at all.

I truly believe that castration shouldn’t be used to assimilate ex-convicts who have committed acts of sexual violence or abuse back into the general public. It should be used as a formidable punishment for those who have terrorized, victimized and raped innocent people. Sure, there are levels of severity to be considered when assessing different sexual crimes, but it certainly cannot be cruel or unusual to eliminate the source of a serial rapist’s criminal activity. Does any person who has ever forced someone to engage in sexual acts, never showing any kind of mercy, deserve mercy as well?

Leniency in legislation pertaining to sex offenders only makes the crimes seem less important to curb. And now, in addition to Hanger’s castration research bill, we have many politicians supporting a bill that would try to redefine rape so that the term no longer carries the repulsive connotation unless preceded by the word “forcible.”

Our government should focus not on the rights of criminals but on those of the sufferers. It is unjust to the victims of such heinous crimes to use anything less than the most effective way of deterring these crimes from happening again or in the first place.