Is it normal to want to run "unethical" experiments on people?

Greetings,

Every day, lots of innocent animals die in gruesome ways to serve our ever-growing quest for scientific knowledge and advancement.
WHY NOT DO IT ON CRIMINALS?!! I'm talking about murderers, rapists, paedophiles, terrorists and basically the most vile and disgusting examples of humanity's imperfection. Here are some reasons why:
No matter what the stupid, hypocritical and logic-blind liberal fools tell you, violent criminals deserve to die horrible deaths. It is a small way of paying for their crimes against our species. Vivisections, drug-testing and psychological torture experiments will not only save millions of innocent, harmless animals, but it will allow horrible people to be severely punished.

Why are we testing out HUMAN drugs on animals. We're never going to need to cure a rat of cancer, or treat a cat for Ebola, so why experiment on them when we can get results DIRECTLY BENEFITTING OUR OWN SPECIES if we test it on our own species.

So tell me, what is wrong with saving millions of innocent animals and eliminating criminals, as well as advancing our scientific knowledge?

Is It Normal?
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 25 ) Sort: best | oldest
  • Not a bad idea. I hate animals being hurt, if it means saving their lives....I don't see why not.
    In fact I would love to conduct a few experiments on rapists myself.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Aren't you the one that goes around telling people they want to cut off limbs because they believe that they're amputees or something?

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Wait if you saw any comment like that could you check the spelling of the user name. I have a feeling its a troll account.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
      • No I'm sure you got the wrong guy.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Josef Mengele would be proud of you.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I just had a vision of Boomhauer from King of the Hill quoting Nietzsche, is it normal?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I agree that animal testing is an ugly affair... Especially cosmetic animal testing, which is WHOLLY unnecessary. Some people seem to think animals feel no pain, which is entirely untrue. I have a list of books that I would encourage everyone to read:

    The Moral Lives of Animals,
    When Elephants Weep: the Emotional Lives of Animals,
    and Beyond Words: What Animals Think and Feel.

    They're written from a very reasonable and scientific viewpoint.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • You are a fake bitch who needs to be liked by everyone to validate yourself because you have very low self esteem.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Works for me. But only if there is no doubt of their guilt.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Ask Hitler, he had a gas time with it

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Call me.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I don't think it would be a good idea to run any psychological experiments on anyone that's already fucked up in the head, the results probably wouldn't transfer well on normal people.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Imprison them first of course.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I think the value of psychological tests on deviant humans would be of little value.

    It also seems that if these people are bad (which is somewhat subjective) then we would be no better.

    I think a lot of animal testing is cruel but some is essential, unfortunately.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • But why test out drugs created to be used on humans on animals. If we test them on human prisoners, then we could see directly how they would affect us, rather than having to understand animals to be able to gain results from our research.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Wow, I'm sorry Steve-O, I didn't realise you were still mired in 19th century science. I bet you get really surprised when little boxes in peoples pockets make a bleating noise and then they hold them up to their ear and have a conversation with a person you can not see. The world must be truly bewildering to someone like yourself.

        I suggest you buy about... oh, I don't know, the last 30 years or so of back issues to Scientific American, or MIT Technology Review and get caught up on where we're at today.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • "millions of innocent animals" Where do you get your figures from? Are you sure it's MILLIONS?
    And please tell me how you know these millions of innocent animals are innocent? How do you know they haven't been out there murdering, raping, paedophiling, terrorizing their own kind before they were captured and used for these necessary and useful experiments.
    You assume too much when you say these animals are innocent.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • We use rats because their genetic, biological and behavior characteristics closely resemble those of humans.

    Humans also have enough intelligence to feel pain moreso than animals. You could run over a dog, get out and say Good boy, go for a walk? And it would wag its tail.

    We don't experiment on criminals because eventually they would have served their time, and therefore inevitably being normal citizens of society again.

    I suppose if some people agreed to being scientifically tested on there wouldn't be an issue. But then again we do have rats!

    Otherwise I don't see any problem with human or fetus experimentation :)

    Comment Hidden ( show )