Should the government test products and drugs on death row inmates rather than animals?

Asked by: jzonda415
  • Pain and Suffering Caused

    Given the average amount of pain and suffering, both physical and emotional, that the average murderer/ rapist/ sex offender will cause, surely these 'people' therefore surrender so called 'human' rights. Of course, as well as saving the lives of many innocent animals who so often never even have the chance to taste fresh air, the taxpayer may be saved a lot of expense which arises through having to keep these people on death row for- I read this online so it may not be accurate- approximately thirteen years. Another reason is the potential deterrent such a punishment may provide- although the death penalty in itself apparently does not lower crime rates, potential criminals are probably going to be deterred if they know the punishment is to serve a very painful procedure which may or may not result in death.

  • They gave away their rights when they broke the law

    Death Row inmates are going to be put to death, why not save their life and help society too? But in my eyes their is fine line with this..Although I think testing on inmates would be helpful I think it should be done in a beneficial way. Not an excuse to torture these inmates who are in fact still human. I want to research this further to see what the pros and cons are to this because I do believe testing on animals is so wrong and testing on inmates could potentially be a better idea..If don correctly.

  • As an option

    If you are going to die anyways and you want to die for a more noble cause/purpose then you should be given the opportunity to do so. "Death by organ extraction" where the organ is donated immediately afterwards should also be considered an alternative sentencing option. I'm against the death penalty because of the risk it poses to innocent people but as long as we have it we should let those who are condemned choose more noble means of going out if they want.

  • They'll die anyway

    The question of wether or not it is ethical is already out of the question considering the fact that they already have the death sentence and will die. If they are already going to die why not make some use of their last days instead of testing on innocent animals.

  • They're not innocent

    Let those who are waiting to die already have an option to help the greater good. The inmates are not innocent in most cases, so cruel testing and prodding should be allowed if they agree. If inmates have diseases like HIV and AIDS or cancer, they should be given the option to join research studies and test medication out. We get better results and they help out the community that they harmed. It doesn't put us on their level because it would be their option to do so.

  • Animals are innocent

    I think that a prisoner , who has taken a person's life, deserve to be tested on , more than an innocent animal, I understand that by letting medical research happen in prisons, it opens ethical questioning and goes against human rights, but personally I don't see why animals are still options. We have made enough medical research, to cure many things, i don't think we should push the boundaries any more. Over population is a problem as it is, curing every health disease will only worsen this. If testing on prisoners, isn't an option, then in my opinion, testing should be stopped altogether, mankind has done enough harm to animals as it is. It is a selfish act , animals feel pain and don't deserve to be put through suffering! Enough is enough

  • As a volunteer

    Some inmates would like a chance to give back to a society that they have wronged. Saving a life (as many as 8 in most cases) would allow these people to die with some peace and some dignity. I am not saying that this would right their wrongs, but it would be a honourable donation to a community that has already suffered.

  • Better out comes

    Animals dont derserve it and death row people clearly do. Plus you'll get better results that are more accurate to the human anatomy! It would save the lives of people because there would be less chance of a medical error based on reactions. So yes I think they should test on death row inmates rather than animals

  • With Inmate's Consent

    Biological and medical research should be an option for death row inmates to choose to participate in, if they wish. The data would also be more accurate than testing on a non-human animal. I believe people are against this subject only because they believe the inmates will be plucked for testing against their will.

  • Utilitarianism- Interests of the whole is more important than interest is the individual

    These people are one death row for a reason they don't put people on death row for not paying their taxes. These people have hurt our community physically, emotionally, and even mentally. Some people don't understand how bad it hurts to lose someone over an act that was unnecessary. 2 wrongs don't make a right is very true but is it right to keep rapist, murders, and notorious criminals that do nothing but harm our community. We can say they hurt our women our young ladies but think how many GIRLS, LITTLE GIRLS have been damaged by these individuals and will live there lives knowing that somewhere he is still alive and you are keeping him alive with your own tax dollars. More efficient results and less animal cruelty can save millions.

  • No. They are humans.

    How is this a debate. Unless consent is given, no way in hell. I mean sure, these people may have killed people and did other terrible things, but these are living, breathing, THINKING HUMAN BEINGS. No mater how terrible their crimes were they still don't deserve to be pumped full of drugs and experimented on. The fact that this a problem makes me sick.

  • They are Human Beings

    Yes, they may have committed the worst crime, but they are still humans, and there are LAWS against cruel and unusual punishments. Too many are too quick to say kill the bad guy, they deserve to sit and think for the rest of their lives about what they did, i support animal rights but going inhumane about it is still not the way to go.

  • They're Human Beings Too

    Why should we kill someone who is still a person? They still have Human Rights, like the rest of us. Are they limited, yes, but that doesn't make them any less of a person. Capital punishment doesn't deter crime or cost less than lethal injection, so what difference would this make? Wouldn't it just cost more of our tax dollars to test these drugs?

  • No, The Worst Criminal is Still a Human Being

    Though they are on death row, prison inmates are still people.
    Society should treat them with compassion, in spite of their crimes. To do otherwise
    would make us despicable criminals ourselves. A much better option would be to develop
    computer models we can use to test drugs and other products. Though such models
    are far in the future, creating them is a far more ethical goal than that of
    experimenting on humans.

  • Don't kill them

    It doesn't make us any better than what their crime was. It seems gruesome and morally wrong to treat people as if animals. Maybe they have done wrong, but they're serving their time behind bars not hurting anyone. So killing them with non approved federal chemicals is brutal. The government doesn't even keep track of the numbers of prisoners they use or harm.

  • Really? Come on!

    Do we never get that doing things to these individuals only puts us right beside them in their lack of human compassion and respect? These people never will get the difference of people who are doing the right things and the bad things if you subject them to this sort of thing......Wake up, be real! They need to understand that we are different and what they did was unacceptable....

  • That is not part of justice

    Justice relative to mortal condemnation should never fall to the element of extended and cruel vengence. Swift excercise of the order in all aspects is not cruel. Accountabiliy is the price of forgiveness. Technologies now also exist to avoid subjecting animals in many instances to uncesssary sacrifice. The whole notion is a ridiculous apples to oranges comparison.

  • No, not at all

    This isn't me putting human beings over animals or anything of the sort. I think testing on any living thing is ethically wrong. As for death row inmates, one thing you have to consider is that they're already on death row and in a living hell. Another problem is that not all of them are guilty of what they've been charged with.

  • No, we should not.

    If testing on animals seems to harsh to some people, why would testing products on living human beings be any better? Just because someone is an inmate or on death row does not mean they should be treated like they are less than an animal. If it is not right to test on animals, it isn't right to test on people.

  • They're still human

    No, I don't believe the government should be able to test products and drugs on death row inmates rather than animals. Inmates are still humans, although their constitutional rights may have been stripped from them. No human or animal should be tested for a product or drug. It's harmful and unsafe.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.