ForumTouchy Subjects ► Testing on Criminals
Well, I saw it in the Animal Rights thread, so I thought it would be appropriate to move it here.

Is it ever permissible to have preliminary testing of drugs on humans, specifically criminals?
  
Testing on criminals over other groups suggests that criminals are subhuman. That is not acceptable.
  
Agreed.
  
I'm waiting for a specific person to re-present their argument. I want to hear their full reasoning.
  
Woah--wait, why does performing testing on them mean they're subhuman?
  
It would infer that they are expendable, and that their lives are of no worth.
  
They gave up their rights when they victimised another person. If you can subject animals to testing without permission, then I honeslty think you should be able to do it to people too. It's far too unrealistic, not all crimes equate to the same punishment so there'd have to be a cut off point and I don't see where you'd draw a line, and then there's miscarriages of justice and the human rights people. It'd never happen but I still think, in theory, it's not a complete no...
  
What kind of crimes would select humans for testing? Also, we have an amendment preventing cruel and unusual punishments. I think this would qualify as one.
  
Agreed.
  
Better to put a criminal that has a life sentence to use than to let them be useless in a prison.
  
If I were a criminal, I wouldn't mind being chemically tested and drugged up! I might get mutated into a giant beast and break out! :P


On the serious side, now. I believe that they ought to be put to some use, such as maybe training them for war and sending them to fight, or maybe turning them into labor and give them jobs, or if they are willing, educate them. Drugging them up, though, no. Maybe if they were willing to volunteer, yes, but other than that, no.
  
"They gave up their rights when they victimised another person."

This bullshit is a large reason why criminals reoffend. They might have suffered a momentary lapse of judgement, made a huge mistake or whatever, and now for the rest of their fucking life all of society is going to treat them like shit. Sub human.
Monsters aren't real. Turning complicated humans into two dimensional strawmen that you can stick on the fire and blame for society's problems doesn't work. It just makes shit worse.
  
Also I want to point out that prisoners don't often just sit in prison doing nothing. They are often made to do manual labour while in prison. So the argument that testing on them would make use of someone who is not contributing, doesn't really work.
  
They test on prisoners in North Korea and China (not the best examples of human rights to follow). Testing on humans and animals is wrong IMO. That being said an animal is better than a human because the human knows how to learn from the results to save both people and animals down the road.
  
You see if a drug is being produced for humans I'd prefer it be tested on humans.
  
Io said:
You see if a drug is being produced for humans I'd prefer it be tested on humans.

Agreed, but I don't think it should be forced. It should be a choice.
  
Does 'criminals' include POW's? (prisoner of war)
  
Another problem with this senario is that there are simply not enough prisoners. Millions of lab animals are killed every year in order to perform proper testing. There simply aren't that many violent criminals around here.
  
Io said:
Better to put a criminal that has a life sentence to use than to let them be useless in a prison.

Which is why we need to reform the prison system so it favors rehabilitation over punishment.
  
Prisons are a joke. They spend more on prison food than they do on hospital food. I think they just need a whole new prison system. I'm just mad with the system and I hate how some people chose to hurt others, you can have a biological disposition to be evil but it doesn't mean you have to chose to act that way. I do strongly believe that if you victimise another human you abuse their rights so automatically lose your own.
  
Regardless of what they've done, they're human beings. They have rights. We have protections in place to prevent anyone from losing their rights. There's a reason for that. Taking away rights is a slippery slope, and it never ends well.
  
I know, like I said you can't draw a line with it... It's too grey. You can't go torturing them but I suppose that contradicts forcing them into drugs testing.
  
Io said:
Better to put a criminal that has a life sentence to use than to let them be useless in a prison.


I hope that if this is your opinion that you are then aware of the "Three Strikes" law that is in place in a lot of states where if you are arrested three times you can and will be put a way for life regardless of what your crime was eg, burglary, rape, murder, trespassing, parole violations.
  
Prisons are a joke. They spend more on prison food than they do on hospital food. I think they just need a whole new prison system. I'm just mad with the system and I hate how some people chose to hurt others, you can have a biological disposition to be evil but it doesn't mean you have to chose to act that way. I do strongly believe that if you victimise another human you abuse their rights so automatically lose your own.

Thats just bullshit. Prisoners have feelings, cthey are people they can be nice, they can be loving, they can be caring; they are not the devil. They are just trying to get ahead in life, like everybody. You are just an ss who never learned to forgive.
  
Biological disposition for evil? What you smokin, yo?
  
Forum > Touchy Subjects > Testing on Criminals