If it's done with their consent IMO it's not really in the common understanding of "experimenting on prisoners" which implies coercion. If they consent I'm fine, they have time on their hands.
Should we be experimenting on prisoners? Why not? Sounds like a great way to get more willing people for scary experiments that would result in great advances for many people.http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/news/communications-media/why-testing-on-prisoners-is-a-bad-idea/ …
-
-
-
I had in mind incentivizing it. E.g. say you are serving a 10 year sentence for armed robbery. I think the public would be happy to reduce this to e.g. 7 years if you were willing to participate in some risky experiments that might be highly beneficial to the population.
-
I share the sentiment, I'm not happy e. g. with low IQ child rapists being absolutely good for nothing, but that verges on coercing dependents, legally a slippery slope. As far as paying them isn't allowed in some jurisdictions, I think it should be, they aren't risk-averse,prlly
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Participate in experiment get shorter sentence? It's community service on steroids!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The potential feedback effects of corruption are high. Imagine voters/prosecutors pushing for longer sentences under the rationale that "if they don't like it than can just [surrender an organ | test experimental drugs | etc]". Slowly opt-in programs become implicitly expected.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.