Should major criminals be used to test medication rather than animals?
That way you would get accurate results and animals, who have done nothing wrong, It could also mean that criminals actually do something with there lives that helps humanity. What are your opinions? Do you agree or disagree?
Yes because...
Side Score: 8
|
 |
No because...
Side Score: 7
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
Absolutely. Animal testing is inaccurate, human testing is more accurate, and at least they did something to deserve it. Animals are condemned just due to human ego and their lives are wasted. At least the criminals may contribute something good to the world. The instances of being wrongly accused are actually very low in the big scheme of things - they just seem bigger because the media reports about them. It's kind of like what happens with pit bull attacks. Side: Yes because...
They are humans not our slaves to do what we want to them. If a major criminal is caught they should be kept away from society, to force someone to 'help' society is slavery. Maybe if there was something negotiated like an early release for being the test subjects, but other than that no. (Two wrongs don't make a right) Side: No because...
2
points
Screw early release. They do have a choice. Don't commit the crime, we won't test on you. That's their choice. Plus, they have prison work programs, so this could just be another way they can work. But I stand by the first choice. If they don't want to be tested on, don't rape/murder/abuse people. Side: Yes because...
|
1
point
1
point
3
points
|
