With so many people opposed to drug testing on animals and with the argument that true testing can only be carried on on humans - why not use people who are serving life or awaiting execution to test the drugs on? This would enable them to repay society for their crimes before they either rot in prison or face execution anyway.
2006-07-31 22:56:12 · 9 answers · asked by Cyberdude 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Community Service
Great idea, save the animals and test on child molesters too.
2006-07-31 23:02:24 · answer #1 · answered by Gone 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
i do no longer think of they'd desire to be examined on the two. Drug companies already pay volunteers to objective drugs for funds and it is to be inspired and greater advantageous. there is no excuse for checking out harmless animals who have no voice interior the subject and an identical applies to prisoners, who certainly do have human rights. besides, if it appears that evidently like an ok element to abuse prisoners, in step with probability people who help this would desire to evaluate that anybody could be imprisoned. they do no longer look to be unavoidably continuously accountable of something, so sooner or later it must be you or your harmless mom who're at the back of bars being shot finished of deadly drugs
2016-12-10 19:17:45 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
holy crap the writer of this question is now the head of the world!!! they found the end to useless animal testing and useless prisoners all in one shot!!!! anyone who can figure that out could definitly do a better job then the yahoos doing it now...no offense to yahoo by the way
2006-07-31 23:50:15 · answer #3 · answered by Jen B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey great minds do think alike. I've always believed it should be that way. Leave the animals alone & put felons to good use.
2006-07-31 23:01:04 · answer #4 · answered by Tortured Soul 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Animals do NOTHING to humans (unless cornered)...humans hurt and violate other humans...and if they are caught...they should be the ones paying!!!
2006-08-02 06:45:40 · answer #5 · answered by Jenny Girl 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
animal
2006-07-31 23:06:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm with ya on that...but could we include animal abusers on that list!
hmmm well i think so.
2006-07-31 23:00:58 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
test them on pedophiles and rapists i say.
2006-08-01 02:11:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i say BOTH
2006-07-31 23:00:57 · answer #9 · answered by What!? No Way!? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋