Should Death Row Inmates Be Used for Experiments?

[SpaceBat]

Absolutely not, unless they themselves agree to it. Though capital punishment shouldn't exist anyway.

 

[Ramzal]

i fail to see why medical experiment = fatal and extremely painful scientific research

Actually, it is. For any results to be reached with lab mice, the ones that are infected and show no satifying results are usually killed by breaking their necks. Do you want to star breaking mens necks for the sake of research yourself? I'm betting half of the people on here supporting the idea have never had to even think about themselves killing someone for results.

so it's fatal because we kill them afterward? alright then

No, it's not. It's fatal because most experiments on a biological level will cause the subject to die. Painfully if left be. Rather than leaving them alive, if there is no results and a new subject is needed, the mouse is killed on the spot. It's not much of a big deal because it's a mouse to people. However, if it's a human than it's different. This is why it's a moral problem.

Allow me to explain. If you want to find an effective cure for MRSA, you have to infect the subject with it, administer product on it and observe their reactions to the product. This usually ranges from dead to dying. MRSA is one of the worse ways to die with infectious boils growing on your internal organs. Extremely painful.

You'd be directly controlling the value of someone's life at anytime you wish. And again, this falls under cruel and unusual punishment. And I will bring up this point again, unless you are willing to experiment on someone yourself and take their life yourself you don't have a leg to stand on. And even if one was willing to do this, honestly they'd need to be put down like a dog.

 

[HasimirFenring]

It's inhuman or perhaps all too human and that's the problem. We simply shouldn't do it. It wouldn't be justice to experiment on the condemned. We have a moral duty. As said before, look at Shiro Ishii

 

[viking97]

i fail to see why medical experiment = fatal and extremely painful scientific research

Actually, it is. For any results to be reached with lab mice, the ones that are infected and show no satifying results are usually killed by breaking their necks. Do you want to star breaking mens necks for the sake of research yourself? I'm betting half of the people on here supporting the idea have never had to even think about themselves killing someone for results.

so it's fatal because we kill them afterward? alright then

No, it's not. It's fatal because most experiments on a biological level will cause the subject to die. Painfully if left be. Rather than leaving them alive, if there is no results and a new subject is needed, the mouse is killed on the spot. It's not much of a big deal because it's a mouse to people. However, if it's a human than it's different. This is why it's a moral problem.

Allow me to explain. If you want to find an effective cure for MRSA, you have to infect the subject with it, administer product on it and observe their reactions to the product. This usually ranges from dead to dying. MRSA is one of the worse ways to die with infectious boils growing on your internal organs. Extremely painful.

You'd be directly controlling the value of someone's life at anytime you wish. And again, this falls under cruel and unusual punishment. And I will bring up this point again, unless you are willing to experiment on someone yourself and take their life yourself you don't have a leg to stand on. And even if one was willing to do this, honestly they'd need to be put down like a dog.

alright fair enough, but is that all that can be tested? perhaps some allergy testing and stuff. Obviously it should be entirely voluntary, and nothing overly painful like what you mentioned, but there are plenty of non-horrific tests that need to be done. generally by paid volunteers, but this would save a lot of money.
actually, that ^ is kind of a flawed argument considering america is the only (i think) developed country that makes a profit off sick people. so i guess that ends any practical benefit right there because anything that would really, REALLY need to be tested on them would be overly cruel, and anything else would just be helping businessmen make money.
i hear-by correct my opinion.

 

[uzo]

Maybe I should have been more specific. They're taking up space in prison. Maybe this doesn't sound much better, but we have inmates entering prisons every day, so much so that several are overcrowded, at least here in America. While my idea may not be the holiest of options, it's not only freeing up space in prisons, but it's also getting rid of people whom society couldn't care less about in the first place.

Well, i am not against your idea. But only if they accept, and to be fair i am all for human experimentation of any kind as long as it is voluntary.

Congratulations, you are now on the moral level of this man:

OMG Jackie Chan...seriously who the hell is that.

But OT- No that is awful. Just awful.

Shirō Ishii, a rather brilliant microbiologist that also happened to have some weird values.

"Some weird values"? There's an understatement. He killed THOUSANDS of chineese PoW. He tested biological warfare agents on them, froze them to death, disected them while they were alive, etc. The only reason he wasn't prosecuted for war crimes was he was hired by the US government to be a lead scientist in their new and expanded biowarefare division.

I believe the understatement was intentional. And no, he wasn't a very nice chap. That too was understatement.