Should We Use Experimental Drugs on Prisoners?

rockin'robin said:
Us Nazi's?? No way!...I'm very patroitic and love my country! If the Constitution forbids it...then why are we testing our people off the street?? Most likely, good people! But just not caring what they put into their bodies! Not playing with a "full deck" eh?

It's just my opinion! Not the law! I can't change the laws, but I can voice my opinion, can't I? Ur reference to "nazi" was an insult! Let's not "name call" here!...We can close this thread if you'd like!...I'm standing by my opinion, tho'! And respect urs, to a certain extent!
Click to expand...

That is true what Jiro said about the Nazi's. Look up Mengele. He did exactly that to a captive population.
 
Bottesini said:
That is true what Jiro said about the Nazi's. Look up Mengele. He did exactly that to a captive population.
Click to expand...

Quite right on the spot.

Ex-Nazi Doktor Josef Mengelé. I studied him for a short period of time. He is mentioned for his crazed view of how the world works, countless of times. Just about every other TV show may mention his name as part of an idiom of expression. He's probably one of the few that defines for what it takes to be a "mad scientist".
 
I feel that the prisoners on death row have enough on their hands. (knowing they will die) or die waiting.


Physiologically, The ones on death row.. will not be able to make a decision like that. To be able to give consent.


And they are not usually released for any circumstances... Much less I feel they will not be released for "Human testing"

As Jillio was speaking of before. In and out of an controlled environment.

The cost of doing the testing, for them to make money off of it would not be worth it.

The state funding would exceed the pay, that the prisoner may get. Compared the cost of the guards, transportation. Extra security of the testing facility.

It would also create a huge escape risk.
 
rockin'robin said:
Us Nazi's?? No way!...I'm very patroitic and love my country! If the Constitution forbids it...then why are we testing our people off the street?? Most likely, good people! But just not caring what they put into their bodies! Not playing with a "full deck" eh?

It's just my opinion! Not the law! I can't change the laws, but I can voice my opinion, can't I? Ur reference to "nazi" was an insult! Let's not "name call" here!...We can close this thread if you'd like!...I'm standing by my opinion, tho'! And respect urs, to a certain extent!
Click to expand...

Let's not jump the gun a bit too early here. Nobody isn't doing the name calling yet. The Nazi reference is not an insult because it does apply to the situation. It's not like saying YOU are the Nazi which is not true. :)

Yes, We all have our own opinions to a certain extent which is fine. I think in order to understand each other is to ask and to tell. That's how we learn about it in progress.

As for having experimental drugs on prisoners - It is inhumane and not only that, prisoners in fact do have human rights just as much as we do. The difference is, They are in prison to serve for their crime, not for their human rights.
 
rockin'robin said:
Us Nazi's?? No way!...I'm very patroitic and love my country! If the Constitution forbids it...then why are we testing our people off the street?? Most likely, good people! But just not caring what they put into their bodies! Not playing with a "full deck" eh?

It's just my opinion! Not the law! I can't change the laws, but I can voice my opinion, can't I? Ur reference to "nazi" was an insult! Let's not "name call" here!...We can close this thread if you'd like!...I'm standing by my opinion, tho'! And respect urs, to a certain extent!
Click to expand...

I'm not insulting nor name-calling you. I'm just trying to make you understand the reasoning of my strong objection to your suggestion. My question was rhetoric. It wasn't meant to question you or your patriotism. Your OPINION about testing prisoners as "nothing wrong because they're gonna die anyway" is exactly the same as Josef Mengele's opinion. To support and/or perform any kinds of experiments, testings, procedures or anything at all on prisoners "just because they're gonna die anyway" is a crime against humanity - regardless of your nationality.
 
You know, one thing that can easily offset this all, is an innocent person on deathrow. Chances are it will be bound to happen if this all were hypothetically to pass through.

Of course an easy away around innocents is to only administer the drugs on those where they were sure that they were 99% "admitted guilty" to bypass this junction.

But..

It takes only one innocent inmate, a bad solution in the syringe, plus the media to get this thing rolling across the world like a fire on steroids.

I would feel really bad when that happens. Imagine the headlines in Germany. "Americans are no different than the Nazi". The Nazi isn't a reference to anyone in particular, but as the aspect of "ideas" of the country overall. International people would be quick to point fingers and blame.
 
naisho said:
You know, one thing that can easily offset this all, is an innocent person on deathrow. Chances are it will be bound to happen if this all were hypothetically to pass through.

Of course an easy away around innocents is to only administer the drugs on those where they were sure that they were 99% "admitted guilty" to bypass this junction.

But..

It takes only one innocent inmate, a bad solution in the syringe, plus the media to get this thing rolling across the world like a fire on steroids.

I would feel really bad when that happens. Imagine the headlines in Germany. "Americans are no different than the Nazi". The Nazi isn't a reference to anyone in particular, but as the aspect of "ideas" of the country overall. International people would be quick to point fingers and blame.
Click to expand...


Many innocent people go to jail.

Due to no contest. but that is a whole different story.

anyhoo. Technology, and appeals have proven that innocent people do go to jail.

So I do understand what you are saying.
 
Even if testing was done on prisoners, wouldnt the results be invalid since many of the prisoners have pychological issues?
 
the answer is no, they should not. Let volunteers do it. My mom was willing to volunteer when she had cancer.

We have already went down that path, we don't need to go again -- I'm referring to mental institution experimenting on mental illness residents. And remember, they were put in the institution because they could not live on their own without harming themselves and others So they are somewhat like prisoners (in a way, they break laws because of their illness). .
 
shel90 said:
Even if testing was done on prisoners, wouldnt the results be invalid since many of the prisoners have pychological issues?
Click to expand...

It would depend on the type of meds being tested in some cases. In others, it would invalidate the results because someone with psychological problems such as so many prisoners have would not be considered to be representative of the general population, and when they do this kind of testing, they need a representative sample.
 
naisho said:
Quite right on the spot.

Ex-Nazi Doktor Josef Mengelé. I studied him for a short period of time. He is mentioned for his crazed view of how the world works, countless of times. Just about every other TV show may mention his name as part of an idiom of expression. He's probably one of the few that defines for what it takes to be a "mad scientist".
Click to expand...

Indeed. I still get chills just hearing his name.
 
The discussion remind me of those Jews who get in the gas shower and dying there, which I studied at my school.

I don't see any reason to put the prisoners in the testing without agree to be an volunteer. They can if they want to, but we can't just take them out of the prison and do something to their body, the experiments on the prisoners are just like a death penatly to me.
 
I agree with Puyo. Prisoners are no less human than those who are not in prison. Unless a prisoner agrees to be a subject and volunteer for a research study, it is inhumane to subject them to this kind of testing unless they are willing to do so.
 
On one hand, I don't think the "freedom" of a choice is quite the same between a free person and a prisoner. Consider this scenario:
"Free person, if you agree to this, we will compensate you with 100 dollars."
"Prisoner, if you agree to this, we will shorten your parole, give you a TV, allow more visitation rights, and so on"
With free people, it's hard to exploit their needs. But with prisoners, it is, oh, so easy.

On the other hand though, the same thing can be said about the poor people. They need money desperately, so the companies can also easily exploit this need (coercion) to get volunteers.

Jillio's point (post #7) about the costs and risks outweighing the benefits is a very good argument, so I'm leaning towards no. There probably can be special cases such as a death row prisoner with cancer and so on.
 
I'm sure that a lot of the people on the street that agree to the testing have phychological problems too. IMO, any "sane" person would never agree to be subject to experimental testing.

For those with a terminal illness, then again, saying "they are gonna die regardless"....who accept the testing, in hopes it will save/prolong their lives, or for the benefit of mankind, I agree.

Wasn't Ted Bundy considered to be highly intelligent? Then deemed criminally insane?

If these death row/lifer prisoners are healthy in body and judged "sane" when the commited the crime....and "sane" afterwards then why Not??....

We would never impose such testing on those who are mental retarded! And those prisoners on death row/lifers are not retarded, or they would have been sent to places for the criminally insane/retarded and allowed to live.
 
Sometimes prisoners who are deemed criminally insane are kept in a different area (in the general population) that is designed for those who have mental illness instead of being sent to psychiatric hospitals.

Fortunately, psychiatrists are on staff to talk to prisoners who are mentally ill as well as to adjust their meds if needed. The care they receive is less than satisfactory compared to what it is available in the outside world, but it's better than nothing.
 
Hear Again said:
Sometimes prisoners who are deemed criminally insane are kept in a different area (in the general population) that is designed for those who have mental illness instead of being sent to psychiatric hospitals.

Fortunately, psychiatrists are on staff to talk to prisoners who are mentally ill as well as to adjust their meds if needed. The care they receive is less than satisfactory compared to what it is available in the outside world, but it's better than nothing.
Click to expand...

Right! I was never implying to give the testing to those who are "insane" or deemed so! Just the death row/lifers who are able to understand the experiemental testing and agree to it. They are "sane" or would be put elsewhere and not put to death. They know, that by agreeing to the testing, that it could, in fact, make their last days/years on earth a little more pleasant. Or could, in fact, kill them...or drive them crazy, then they would be moved to the "insane" ward and live out the rest of their years!

Are people, who are on the street, sane or insane, agreeing to this testing?
 
Back
Top