Medical experiments instead of death penalty or life imprisonment
Modern medicine, drugs take like 10 years to be approved and the main issue is they take awhile before they reach human trials, however I propose instead of there being a life sentence or death penalty for prisoners we should perform medical experiments on them, the more medical trials we perform the lower their sentence.
Eg for every 5 trials they reduce your sentence by one year or something like that
So basically instead of life for murder you get like 40 years.. During those 40 years lots of experiments shall be done on you and eventually we'll end up saving more lives.
I'm talking all kinds of experiments like infecting the worst criminals with HIV then giving them experimental drugs or cancer via radiation and giving them experimental drugs.
Seems like a better use of prisoners than just killing them or letting them rot.. As well as a much better deterrent.
Not all prisoners should be experimented on, just the worst.
Eg for every 5 trials they reduce your sentence by one year or something like that
So basically instead of life for murder you get like 40 years.. During those 40 years lots of experiments shall be done on you and eventually we'll end up saving more lives.
I'm talking all kinds of experiments like infecting the worst criminals with HIV then giving them experimental drugs or cancer via radiation and giving them experimental drugs.
Seems like a better use of prisoners than just killing them or letting them rot.. As well as a much better deterrent.
Not all prisoners should be experimented on, just the worst.
Comments (55)
It's hard to say if people are more easily manipulated or more prone to manipulate others. Eitherway you get people used to something that can be grievously abused the more likely it will be.
Quoting Gitonga
Why not?
Seems like you advocate Utalitarianism.
As for the other excuses you gave, why aren't you thinking more about the results? Like how many people we'll end up saving from cancer, HIV and various other diseases?
Yes
So are you agreeing with me?
What does my Avatar have to do with it?
Quoting Outlander
Well I offer 2 solutions, 1 people could volunteer for the trials or 2 it could only be for those criminals that we're dead sure did it... Like tonnes of whiteness, footage, DNA etc, hec people who even admit to it.
I'm just saying you weigh the pros and the cons, the pros win.
Good luck with that. :up:
The "volunteer" part has to be a must.
As for people erroneously convicted...life is not fair. If a "voluntary medical experiment" option were not available for those rightly convicted and those erroneously convicted...there would still be people both rightly and erroneously convicted serving sentences.
Yeah...not a horrible idea. Just needs a bit more baking.
(Too dark? You know its true.)
The question raised by Banno is a valid one...and troublesome. The only thing I can think of in mitigation, is that blacks and women appear to be shortchanged in medical research. If most of the experimenting is being done on blacks (I think that is overstating the case)...but if it is, they will gain the most benefit from the research.
You are free to think or not think whatever you want, Daniel.
A prisoner might think it to be an ethical bargain.
They should be free to think that.
Why not give them that opportunity? Both the prisoner and society would benefit.
I would loathe to meet a creature capable of employing these ideas. Is this what we want to become?
Ie less criminals due to family members dying of disease.
You can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs and you can't make progress without sacrifices.
Oh hush. If you had one that didn't render you completely unable to function and needed something another had that would die as a result of not your taking of it but presence, long story short the thing you needed would be taken and death would occur.
Because you're (presumably) a decent person. Know nothing of you personally but you more than likely had a tolerable upbringing and currently have a tolerable existence. Who knows what you'd be like if neither were true.
Quoting Mac
Embracing perfectionism and idealism is a sure way to end up with neither.
Quoting Mac
Bruh we all use their systems. You're using one if not many more simultaneously now. You don't know for sure (though I will admit it's probably not unlikely) that all or even any of them aren't decent people who perhaps know more than you or I. So the guy who revolutionized the world (arguably for the better or worse) by inventing the computer or the iPhone shouldn't be rewarded for their works proportionally yet you or I should simply because we're not of the highest class? Which is virtual life imprisonment btw and total removal from society. You can't really go anywhere or do anything. You'd get kidnapped, killed, tortured, or just constantly challenged by those with inferiority complexes.
Even if you're just a minor celebrity or local politician. You'll never know the true nature of people and experience the life that comes with it. Everyone will always either put on their best face because of what you have and can do or their worst because of what they don't and cannot. And no one will truly sympathize with someone who can afford mansions and decide laws that govern others because why should they? Shoot even I'm getting a little pissed thinking about someone doing either lol. Which is my point. You never know the thorns in someone's foot until you've walked in their shoes. Just some random food for thought on the interwebs I guess.
Quoting Mac
There we go. Real talk.
How is this even relevant? My point of view could be a beneficial and useful one regardless of my background. And how could one possibly come to the conclusion that I had a "tolerable upbringing" based on anything I've said? You insult me by acting like you aren't trying to insult me, when your objective is clear. The reason I'm even spending my breath on this topic in this forum is because it's close to home for me. Back to the point: Doing experiments on a criminal against their will is just as immoral as putting them in a cell. I don't think this is that whacky of a stance and I have yet to see the burden of proof fulfilled by the person making the original claim.
I do apologize for that and would like if you believed that was far from my intent other than to say yeah, as far as quantifying life and other decent ideals I was merely asserting a kind of nurture over nature defines our sense of morals, ideals, etc. I even said you were presumably a decent person.
We're on the same page as far as objection to OP's premise. Mine is simply solely based on the fact no one is perfect as shown by DNA evidence exonerating people often some who spent decades incarcerated and so you could be performing inhumane acts on a perfectly innocent man when you think you're not. That could have unexpected ramifications.
I go through great pains to seperate the art from the artist. I don't "know" anyone here personally so like most people hopefully they respond to ideas, concepts, and assertions versus persons, personas, or anything personal like that.
It's less about dealing with crime, more about saving lives
I hesitate to second the motion despite knowing that, sometimes but not always, participating as a subject in an experiment would be way better than incarceration/execution because to learn anything useful the unfortunate criminals should be representative of the general population but that may not be case and criminals could be a special subcategory of the population. Of course, if you make the assumption that we're all potential criminals it would be a different story. Perhaps you mean to gain insight on how to [s]treat[/s] mistreat [s]poor[/s] criminals for an overall benefit to the community.
For example they might let a hardened young killer out of prison if he offers to undergo experimental treatments to cure him of his violent tendencies.