A gorilla who turns up pregnant in a pen with males who have been neutered is given a DNA test to find out who the father is.
There are hundreds of unsolved crimes than can be solved with DNA tests but the victims of crimes are told that DNA tests are expensive and very time consumning. Also there are many innocent people in prison who would be proven innocent with a proper DNA test.
The real question...Is it fair to waste time and money running DNA tests on animals when the test could improve the quality of the American Justice System? Isn't there something wrong with this picture? Its as if the system doesn't want to catch the criminals.
2007-03-17 08:14:55 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think it is tax dollars that support animal research and some obscene grant was written to approve it.
Are you also implying that justice in America is only for those who can pay for it?
If we provide grants to zoos, why aren't we providing grants to the justice system?
2007-03-17 12:15:32 · update #1
You're absolutely right.
Humans put more value on animal life than human life.
The reason is because animals are a 'business'. By keeping them healthy and well fed, you can make money out of them (zoos, wildlife parks, nature reserves, etc).
The same cannot be said for humans. There's too many of us.
2007-03-17 08:55:31 · answer #1 · answered by Panama Jack 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your premise is wrong, please provide examples instead of spouting nonsense. Furthermore, explain how a private zoo paying for a DNA test stopped some innocent person in jail from utilizing the same service.
Even if you were right (you aren't but I'll indulge you) if private individuals spend their own money then what's it to you. How about the next time you purchase something I feel is frivolous we instead use that money to support the criminal justice system. You can submit a list of your purchases through my email posted on yahoo and I'll tell you what you can keep and what you cant.
2007-03-17 15:21:06 · answer #2 · answered by Daz2020 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If the zoo, which is probably owned by a private company, wants to pay for the tests, that's up to them.
What does that have to do with test paid for by the government?
Also, under our legal system, it's the job of the defense to present evidence that someone is not guilty. So, again, it's not something the prosecutor would pay for.
One has nothing to do with the other.
2007-03-17 15:50:06 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
this was the zoo's money they can do with it as they will we dont have the right to say your not allowed to do that, do you have a new car or a fancy pair of shoes, how dear you buy those there are starving children, shame on you, its about the same thing.
2007-03-17 15:30:30 · answer #4 · answered by Key P 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you really think about it why do people spend more keeping their pets healthy than they do on their own children?
Your point is well taken and I personally agree with you 100%.
2007-03-17 15:19:07 · answer #5 · answered by Nana 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
whats your point?
2007-03-17 15:18:34 · answer #6 · answered by sofmatty 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋