kouriichi said:
Why do you think the prison populations are getting so high in the United States?
Because your prison system is a huge privately run corporate machine makes enormous amounts of money for its investors and beneficiaries by exploiting convict labour and your legal system is happy to procure it for them?
kouriichi said:
The threat of, "Were gunna give you food and shelter for free, because your a human and we dont want to harm you" doesnt stop violence from happening. It doesnt stop rape, murder, theft and arson.
Neither does the death penalty.
Many countries without the death penalty (or with extremely limited use of the death penalty) have much lower crime rates than countries with the death penalty.
Also, if you think prison is easy then I can only suggest trying it.
kouriichi said:
An eye for an eye doesnt make the whole world blind. A person only has 2 eyes to poke out. YOu poke my eyes out, i poke yours, cycle ends. Everyone sees how much being blind sucks, and they stop doing it.
And where has this happened? Where is the perfect crime free utopia where people are still hung drawn and quartered in the square?
The purpose of punishing criminals is not spectacle but control and behavioural reform. You can question whether the prison is succeeding in that task and why not (my opinion, not listening to Jeremy Bentham enough) but don't try and pretend that public executions lower crime rates.
Finally, I'll ask again.. what could you learn from testing on a tiny, incredibly methodologically unsound sample?
Agayek said:
The latter involves grabbing random people off the street and fiddling with them.
Therumancer said:
Josef Mengele or the Japanese "Unit 731" didn't perform their experiments on condemned prisoners.
Menegle, I'm not sure. Nazi law was screwed up enough that it's likely many people in the camps were guilty of it.
Also "seditious activities" was a capital offence in occupied China and South East Asia at the time. Almost all of those people unit 731 experimented on would have been executed even if they had not been sent for experimentation. If people were 'dragged off the street' it's because the Kempeitai were deliberately arresting people under false pretences, something which there is no guarantee would not happen in this case as well. Arguably, similar practices already occur in the US prison system because, as mentioned, convict labour makes a fuckton of money.
Why should the procurement of research subjects be any different? Don't beat around the bush.. medical experiments nowadays are conducted by corporations. There would be no rosy cheeked scientist advancing human progress and getting a honest cheque from the government. You'd be selling human life to a corporation
for money. The more people you could provide, the more money, in fact an order of magnitude more money because, as mentioned, scientific studies need a lot of people in order to work. If you can provide two people, noone cares. If you can provide 500 or 1000, corporations will fight tooth and nail for contracts.
Do you think the justice system is above being bought? Do you even want to find out?
National law does not supercede international law. Nuremberg articles, again. A person committing a crime under national law does not vindicate violating international law by abusing them. Seriously, it was a truly admirable American who made this case and he specifically said that all nations, including his own, should be held to the same standard.. how easily that has been forgotten.