Capital Punishment Pro Or Con?

[taxexile]

cruel punishments for cruel crimes. why on earth not ?

Why on earth not?

Well, because left to their own devices some people do have the capacity for great evil, true. But the point of society is that when people are drawn together to shape laws, develop governments and the ruling principles that guide us as laws, one would hope those 'rough edges' are smoothed away, even just a little bit.

Individuals can commit evil acts, but society has no right to commit similar evil acts in retribution. Society - intelligent, compassionate men and women - should logically rise above and negate the individual's propensity for brutality.

Otherwise, what's the point?

The death penalty serves no purpose other than to exact revenge on an evil-doer. We should rise above that because revenge is emotive, not logical.

It's no coincidence in my view that the only countries who actively and regularly use the death penalty are typically those societies with a history of insularity, an attitude of complete lack of interest in and disregard for the world outside of their boundaries - China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and - yes - the USA.

re. your post.

its emotive , not logical.

so how do you deal with evil doers etc. ?

isnt locking them up in a cell for 40 years just as cruel ?

isnt locking them up for 10 years and then freeing them back into , welcoming them back into , the society they have chosen to grossly offend an unbearable cruelty for the innocent victim or close relative of the victim.

too much consideration is given to the poor misunderstood offender , its the feelings of the victims that should be paramount.

revenge is a natural feeling and there are certainly occasions when society should extract revenge from evil doers

as i said , nobody forces anybody to undertake acts of murder etc.

it is a choice made by that person , who is well aware of the consequences they may bring down upon themselves.

[Mosha]

The trouble with giving them a life sentence is..... life is about 6 years with good behaviour. Life should mean just that. No parole and keep them in solitary. As far as I'm concerned, when they commited murder. By that I mean going out and intending to end someones life as opposed to accidental killings. They crossed the line of deserving of any human rights. If they do end up being found innocent, the compenstion can be sorted out. If prisons in the UK were more harsh perhaps there would not be an over crowding issue.

[bendix]

isnt locking them up in a cell for 40 years just as cruel ?

isnt locking them up for 10 years and then freeing them back into , welcoming them back into , the society they have chosen to grossly offend an unbearable cruelty for the innocent victim or close relative of the victim.

too much consideration is given to the poor misunderstood offender , its the feelings of the victims that should be paramount.

revenge is a natural feeling and there are certainly occasions when society should extract revenge from evil doers

as i said , nobody forces anybody to undertake acts of murder etc.

it is a choice made by that person , who is well aware of the consequences they may bring down upon themselves.

I don't have the answers taxexile. As I get older, all I know is I have fewer and fewer things I feel absolute certainty about.

But, intuitatively, I feel the current system is far from perfect but it has to be better than putting people to death under society's vengeful glare. We must have moved away from that, surely?

There are logical arguments against the death penalty, for sure. I could roll out reams of evidence which shows there is no link between executing offenders and reducing crime rates. I can - and have - contradict with evidence the notion that it's cheaper to kill someone than keep them alive for 40-50 years. I could attempt to point out the moral deficiencies in people preparing to accept the occasional innocent being executed, so long as it gets the baddies too.

But, I won't.

Some people feel state sanctioned killing is wrong. Some think it is right.

I believe everyone has the right to life, irrespective of how evil they are.

I could be wrong. I usually am.

[taxexile]

I believe everyone has the right to life, irrespective of how evil they are.

thats the sticking point then.

i strongly believe the opposite , that the evil should not expect any mercy from the society that they have attacked.

whether you execute them or leave them in rags for 50 years in a filthy cell is neither here nor there , but they should be made to suffer for their sins , be it a quick death or a living death , it makes no difference to me.

punishment should fit the crime , and these days , with cells equipped like hotel rooms , warders having to treat prisoners with politically correct respect , human rights cases where prisoners sue the authorities because they cant watch coronation street on their tvs and early release just make a complete mockery of a judicial system in the increasingly barmy society that is now the western world.

as you said , these days very little makes sense to me and it gets confusing.

in fact i think its a breach of my human rights , who do i sue ?

[girlx]

It's curious girlx, but your story peeked my interest because - as is usual with your 'victim mentality' posts - something just didnt stack up. Anyone recently giving up the right to appeal would certainly NOT be executed in the next month or so (your words).

There are currently seven scheduled executions in the US, one of which has been stayed pending appeal to review DNA evidence. None of the other scheduled executions involve a 1997 killing of three people.

Perhaps you'd like to tell us more?

Well it is really not your business to dig deeper or to make any assumptions about my supposed "victim mentality" (never having met me or had a real conversation about my life)... but since you asked... my stepfather.

And according to my sister, it may have been in 1996.

Edited December 1, 2007 by girlx

[bendix]

Well it is really not your business to dig deeper or to make any assumptions about my supposed "victim mentality" (never having met me or had a real conversation about my life)... but since you asked... my stepfather.

girlx (and the rest of ThaiVisa)

I'd like to publicly apologise for doubting your story. I was wrong and I interpreted your post in a way that says more about my (unfair) preconceptions of you than it does about the reality.

Again, I'm sorry.

Both for you, your stepfather and (of course) his victims.

Mea culpa.

[girlx]

Thank you. Apology accepted.

[PhilHarries]

Some people feel state sanctioned killing is wrong. Some think it is right.

I wonder how many of these people also agree with Thaksin's little war on drugs? Amongst those 3000 odd people there must have been one or two bad 'uns.

But I love the hang 'em high brigade when some heineous criminal is brought to justice they'll trot out the old "the death penalty is too good for them" line. I just wish they'd make their minds up.

[mr_hippo]

Sentence a murderer to life, release him back into society after about 10 years and he will probably re-offend.

Execute a murderer and he will never, ever re-offend!

Numerous studies (taken by both the US government and independent organisations) suggest that each execution in the US costs between US$2.1-$3.2 million, depending upon the individual states' various appeals processes.

The cost of keeping an inmate in prison in the US is $17-20,000 per annum. Even if an inmate lives 40 years in prison, the cost of keeping him inside is significantly lower than killing him.

So, let's stop the executions and redirect the resources to education and healthcare, huh?

(And, yes, I can back up the figures with direct sources, if you want).

Who benefits from these multiple appeals? Not the convict, not the victim's family but the lawyers - financially!

Execution by lethal injection is a 'cruel & unusual punishment'? Isn't murdering someone cruel? Wasn't there a case in Florida where the lawyer tried to argue that to execute the convict would rob of of his freedom of speech? Wasn't the victim robbed of their freedom of speech or does this not matter?

We are getting too soft these days - bring back capital & corporal punishment. We have no colonies left so we cannot reintroduce transportation to Australia - and I quite like the Aussies - transportation to the US , now I'd support that!

"How would you feel if a member of your family was innocent but executed?" Nice try, you'll have to tug harder at my heart strings and I don't think that you are strong enough. My opinion would not change and, yes, one of my family was! My maternal grandfather was executed in September 1917 for cowardice he refused to go 'over the top' - possibly suffering from shell shock at the time. Mum was born three month later and never knew her Dad!

[Prakanong]

The trouble with giving them a life sentence is..... life is about 6 years with good behaviour. Life should mean just that. No parole and keep them in solitary. As far as I'm concerned, when they commited murder. By that I mean going out and intending to end someones life as opposed to accidental killings. They crossed the line of deserving of any human rights. If they do end up being found innocent, the compenstion can be sorted out. If prisons in the UK were more harsh perhaps there would not be an over crowding issue.

Life in the UK with parole is only 6 years is it?

Is that the median or mean tarriff served?

Please enlighten us but I do beleive you are wrong. There may be people convicted of murder who do only serve that long but its exceptional - a woman killing her husband after cruel tratment or a soldier who did not follow the exact rules of engagement.

The average served is much longer I beleive and there is a list of individuals who will never get out no matter what.

I do love your line about if they are innocent compensation can be sorted out - do you mean after they are dead or those incarcerated for years who are innocent.

Some guys have spent well over 10 years inside for murders they did not commit and one over 20 I beleive as he could not be parroled until he admitted his guilt which he could and would not do - you really think compensation is just really OK there then? - I hear they also deduct your food and board!

[phibunmike]

Against.

In addition to the arguments already made, we simply don't have the right.

[kmart]

Guest House it tells mt that the Thai are getting soft! I support capitol pinishment-the monies spent keepimg people alive would be betterr spent on health care or educaation etc.

There are miscarriages of justice occasionally ,no doubt. but that does not change my views.

Utter utter rubbish. It costs far more to execute someone (appeals etc) than it does to keep them in prison. The economic argument is rolled out time and again - it is just as weak as the legal, moral and logical arguments.

Hmm,... I think the costs of execution might best be recouped by offering some sort of "pay per view" option to the general public to watch some poor sap get offed by the state apparatus. Methods of execution could accordingly be made more grisly and horrendous according to public opinion rating of the abhorrence of the crime. The public could vote from the comfort of their own home whether to have the culprit say; hanged; shot; or roasted on a spit, by just pressing a button on their handsets. - That would really get the ratings up!

[girlx]

...if you can enjoy watching that then you are no better than the murderer.

[mr_hippo]

Against.

In addition to the arguments already made, we simply don't have the right.

Does the murderer have the right to take a life? So, we will just say to him/her "Don't worry about a thing, we'll give you a nice place to stay, three square meals a day, entertainment and those nice 'do-gooders' will bring you birthday & Christmas presents!"

You steal money - you have to give it back. You take a life and we'll take yours!

[Prakanong]

...if you can enjoy watching that then you are no better than the murderer.

I do think he was being ironic/sarcastic!

[bendix]

psssssst . . i think kmart was being ironic.

Irony REALLY doesnt work in these parts, does it?

[kmart]

psssssst . . i think kmart was being ironic.

Irony REALLY doesnt work in these parts, does it?

Hoping a section of tv members manage to recover from their triple-bypass (irony, charisma, humour) surgery successfully.

[Mosha]

The trouble with giving them a life sentence is..... life is about 6 years with good behaviour. Life should mean just that. No parole and keep them in solitary. As far as I'm concerned, when they commited murder. By that I mean going out and intending to end someones life as opposed to accidental killings. They crossed the line of deserving of any human rights. If they do end up being found innocent, the compenstion can be sorted out. If prisons in the UK were more harsh perhaps there would not be an over crowding issue.

Life in the UK with parole is only 6 years is it?

Is that the median or mean tarriff served?

Please enlighten us but I do beleive you are wrong. There may be people convicted of murder who do only serve that long but its exceptional - a woman killing her husband after cruel tratment or a soldier who did not follow the exact rules of engagement.

The average served is much longer I beleive and there is a list of individuals who will never get out no matter what.

I do love your line about if they are innocent compensation can be sorted out - do you mean after they are dead or those incarcerated for years who are innocent.

Some guys have spent well over 10 years inside for murders they did not commit and one over 20 I beleive as he could not be parroled until he admitted his guilt which he could and would not do - you really think compensation is just really OK there then? - I hear they also deduct your food and board!

Ok may be a rash statement on my behalf, and I was talking compensation for the prisoners. I would only believe in the death penalty if DNA could prove beyond a doubt who the perpetator was. My friend Kevin Jackson was murdered in Huddersfield. Around the New Year in 2002. His killers got a minimum 14 years, so yes my 6 years was daft. Stilll not life is it? His widow had being warned by the police, and solicitors, that because of the 10 months on remand the killers had spent inside. That it was entirely possible the gang would be set free almost immediately after the case.

[Prakanong]

The trouble with giving them a life sentence is..... life is about 6 years with good behaviour. Life should mean just that. No parole and keep them in solitary. As far as I'm concerned, when they commited murder. By that I mean going out and intending to end someones life as opposed to accidental killings. They crossed the line of deserving of any human rights. If they do end up being found innocent, the compenstion can be sorted out. If prisons in the UK were more harsh perhaps there would not be an over crowding issue.

Life in the UK with parole is only 6 years is it?

Is that the median or mean tarriff served?

Please enlighten us but I do beleive you are wrong. There may be people convicted of murder who do only serve that long but its exceptional - a woman killing her husband after cruel tratment or a soldier who did not follow the exact rules of engagement.

The average served is much longer I beleive and there is a list of individuals who will never get out no matter what.

I do love your line about if they are innocent compensation can be sorted out - do you mean after they are dead or those incarcerated for years who are innocent.

Some guys have spent well over 10 years inside for murders they did not commit and one over 20 I beleive as he could not be parroled until he admitted his guilt which he could and would not do - you really think compensation is just really OK there then? - I hear they also deduct your food and board!

Ok may be a rash statement on my behalf, and I was talking compensation for the prisoners. I would only believe in the death penalty if DNA could prove beyond a doubt who the perpetator was. My friend Kevin Jackson was murdered in Huddersfield. Around the New Year in 2002. His killers got a minimum 14 years, so yes my 6 years was daft. Stilll not life is it? His widow had being warned by the police, and solicitors, that because of the 10 months on remand the killers had spent inside. That it was entirely possible the gang would be set free almost immediately after the case.

I am sorry to hear about your friend - is that the case where he went out as some guys were damaging his car?

No - 14 years is not life and while I am against capital punishment I am not against much stiffer jail sentences in all but the most extenuating circumstances.

The poor wife was probably warned in case they got off with manslaughter - were they convicted of murder?

I do believe time on remand does not count in life sentences as it does in fixed period sentences though - they will not get a parole hearing till 14 years after conviction date and I doubt they wil get out first go but I may be wrong - anyone knbow the UK penal system with regard to lifers?

Do the victims now have a say in parole or did I dream that? - I thought they could give a victim impact statement or is that just at sentencing? - sorry I have been out of the UK for a while now.

[zorro1]

Guest House it tells mt that the Thai are getting soft! I support capitol pinishment-the monies spent keepimg people alive would be betterr spent on health care or educaation etc.

There are miscarriages of justice occasionally ,no doubt. but that does not change my views.

Utter utter rubbish. It costs far more to execute someone (appeals etc) than it does to keep them in prison. The economic argument is rolled out time and again - it is just as weak as the legal, moral and logical arguments.

I wonder if this thread reveals something I've often suspected, and that is that there will be a direct correlation between people's views and their literacy levels.

wad ar yoo twying too sai?

[mrtoad]

psssssst . . i think kmart was being ironic.

Irony REALLY doesnt work in these parts, does it?

Hoping a section of tv members manage to recover from their triple-bypass (irony, charisma, humour) surgery successfully.

Well, it certainly made me laugh.

[Mosha]

I am sorry to hear about your friend - is that the case where he went out as some guys were damaging his car?

No - 14 years is not life and while I am against capital punishment I am not against much stiffer jail sentences in all but the most extenuating circumstances.

The poor wife was probably warned in case they got off with manslaughter - were they convicted of murder?

I do believe time on remand does not count in life sentences as it does in fixed period sentences though - they will not get a parole hearing till 14 years after conviction date and I doubt they wil get out first go but I may be wrong - anyone knbow the UK penal system with regard to lifers?

Do the victims now have a say in parole or did I dream that? - I thought they could give a victim impact statement or is that just at sentencing? - sorry I have been out of the UK for a while now.

The car was his father-in-laws. Kevin was watching it while his in-laws were having a Christsmas in walmer climes. The gang were attempting to steel it, Kevin had been out for a few and fell asleep on the sofa. A noise woke him up, I think it was his wife shouting that someone was trying to get in the car. Kevin went out, and gave chase. You had to know Kevin, he would do anything for anyone, and very slow to anger, and usually quick to forgive, except where cars are concerned. The really stupid thing is the car had a flat battery, and the road I believe almost dead flat. The car was going nowhere. The murder weapon was a terminal screw griver, you know of the type electricians use with the small blade.

I just googled on victim impact statement UK, and it appears it has been the case since 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4202618.stm

Edited December 1, 2007 by Mosha

[pgs]

In favour of it for drug / murder / multi rape.

In Oz it costs the people excess of $50,000/year per person in the slammer. Ivan Milat get whatever he wants in the cell - just so he doesn't make trouble. Hang him, I say. Martin Bryant killed 35 people in 1996 - no doubt at all it was him. He should be hanged.

The few that were charged with the pack-rapes & sentenced to around 50 years - that's about $2.5million to keep them alive. Again, there is no doubt it was them, so why are they still alive?

[Prakanong]

I am sorry to hear about your friend - is that the case where he went out as some guys were damaging his car?

No - 14 years is not life and while I am against capital punishment I am not against much stiffer jail sentences in all but the most extenuating circumstances.

The poor wife was probably warned in case they got off with manslaughter - were they convicted of murder?

I do believe time on remand does not count in life sentences as it does in fixed period sentences though - they will not get a parole hearing till 14 years after conviction date and I doubt they wil get out first go but I may be wrong - anyone knbow the UK penal system with regard to lifers?

Do the victims now have a say in parole or did I dream that? - I thought they could give a victim impact statement or is that just at sentencing? - sorry I have been out of the UK for a while now.

The car was his father-in-laws. Kevin was watching it while his in-laws were having a Christsmas in walmer climes. The gang were attempting to steel it, Kevin had been out for a few and fell asleep on the sofa. A noise woke him up, I think it was his wife shouting that someone was trying to get in the car. Kevin went out, and gave chase. You had to know Kevin, he would do anything for anyone, and very slow to anger, and usually quick to forgive, except where cars are concerned. The really stupid thing is the car had a flat battery, and the road I believe almost dead flat. The car was going nowhere. The murder weapon was a terminal screw griver, you know of the type electricians use with the small blade.

I just googled on victim impact statement UK, and it appears it has been the case since 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4202618.stm

That is the case I thought it was - as I said I have been out of the UK for a while but must have read about this case online or seen a report on BSkyB news.

I know 14 years does not seem much but I bet they do longer than that - still does not bring back your friend though and it will not be much consolation to his wife and family will it so any sympathy should be saved for them as they have to live without him now. Every holiday season now will have sad reminders.

[dominique355]

In primitive societies the penal system is also primitive: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. That is not "justice", it's revenge, perhaps some sadism and mostly just utter inability to understand human nature.

As society evolved, so did the penal system. And since we believe that we can educate people, we also believe we can re-educate them, show them what they did wrong and make them change their behavior. In an even more evolved society we start to recognize that each human being has some inalienable right, in particular a right to his life and bodily integrity. It is beyond me how a civilized society can on the one side put human rights on its flag, and on the other side take the most fundamental right away from people by capital punishment.

I do understand the emotions a victim of a crime has and that he/she cries out for revenge, but don't call that "justice", it's not. A victim wants the criminal to suffer as much as he/she did, but that's not what the penal system of a civilized society should do.

Today's penal system should more concentrate on re-socialization with a view to release the convicted into a normal life where he will not repeat his behavior. That's why the penal system has basically two components: a general prevention (to keep others fro doing it) and a special prevention (to keep the perpetrator from doing it again).

Some have argued that capital punishment serves a good general prevention. If this is true, i wonder why in countries with capital punishment are so many murders.

Some say that capital punishment will avoid the murderer to repeat his act. But suppose you have killed someone and you know, capital punishment is awaiting you. So you might as well kill a couple more, your are toast anyway.

So in my opinion, capital punishment has absolutely no justification at all. It's barbaric, inhuman and useless.

And a final note, in a Buddhist society, taking a life is certainly not permissible.

[Mosha]

Justice is just a civilised word for revenge. Jailing someone for a crime is just a form of revenge. Isn't an eye for an eye etc in the bible? Or is that just a part of a religion that people like to ignore.

[ClaytonSeymour]

In primitive societies the penal system is also primitive: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. That is not "justice", it's revenge, perhaps some sadism and mostly just utter inability to understand human nature.

As society evolved, so did the penal system. And since we believe that we can educate people, we also believe we can re-educate them, show them what they did wrong and make them change their behavior. In an even more evolved society we start to recognize that each human being has some inalienable right, in particular a right to his life and bodily integrity. It is beyond me how a civilized society can on the one side put human rights on its flag, and on the other side take the most fundamental right away from people by capital punishment.

I do understand the emotions a victim of a crime has and that he/she cries out for revenge, but don't call that "justice", it's not. A victim wants the criminal to suffer as much as he/she did, but that's not what the penal system of a civilized society should do.

Today's penal system should more concentrate on re-socialization with a view to release the convicted into a normal life where he will not repeat his behavior. That's why the penal system has basically two components: a general prevention (to keep others fro doing it) and a special prevention (to keep the perpetrator from doing it again).

Some have argued that capital punishment serves a good general prevention. If this is true, i wonder why in countries with capital punishment are so many murders.

Some say that capital punishment will avoid the murderer to repeat his act. But suppose you have killed someone and you know, capital punishment is awaiting you. So you might as well kill a couple more, your are toast anyway.

So in my opinion, capital punishment has absolutely no justification at all. It's barbaric, inhuman and useless.

And a final note, in a Buddhist society, taking a life is certainly not permissible.

Your post is utter drivel!

Why shouldn't victims have revenge? If one of my family members was murdered then I want the offender to die. I don't want them re-educated; they've forfeited all their rights.

I even believe that in certain cases a quick death is wrong; they should suffer a much more terrible death than their victims. Barbaric? Yes & so it should be.

If they must keep them in prison, I'd advocate using them for testing new medicines; these b******s have forfeited every right they had & I no longer consider them human beings.

I've said this previously on here but, the party that promises to restore capital and corporal punishment in the UK gets my vote any day.

The death penalty is vastly underused; there are far too many criminals in jail who have no right to life.

My Wife's a Buddhist and she firmly believes in the death penalty.

[ClaytonSeymour]

Guest House it tells mt that the Thai are getting soft! I support capitol pinishment-the monies spent keepimg people alive would be betterr spent on health care or educaation etc.

There are miscarriages of justice occasionally ,no doubt. but that does not change my views.

I want to get back to this economic argument.

Numerous studies (taken by both the US government and independent organisations) suggest that each execution in the US costs between US$2.1-$3.2 million, depending upon the individual states' various appeals processes.

The cost of keeping an inmate in prison in the US is $17-20,000 per annum. Even if an inmate lives 40 years in prison, the cost of keeping him inside is significantly lower than killing him.

So, let's stop the executions and redirect the resources to education and healthcare, huh?

(And, yes, I can back up the figures with direct sources, if you want).

Don't they have appeals when they get life?

What about their carbon footprint? Even in jail they're still contributing, kill them & there's no longer any footprint of any description.

Executions themselves can be carried out far more cheaply anyway - take them to a zoo, throw them to the crocs, make them suffer - it's what they deserve.

[Prakanong]

In primitive societies the penal system is also primitive: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. That is not "justice", it's revenge, perhaps some sadism and mostly just utter inability to understand human nature.

As society evolved, so did the penal system. And since we believe that we can educate people, we also believe we can re-educate them, show them what they did wrong and make them change their behavior. In an even more evolved society we start to recognize that each human being has some inalienable right, in particular a right to his life and bodily integrity. It is beyond me how a civilized society can on the one side put human rights on its flag, and on the other side take the most fundamental right away from people by capital punishment.

I do understand the emotions a victim of a crime has and that he/she cries out for revenge, but don't call that "justice", it's not. A victim wants the criminal to suffer as much as he/she did, but that's not what the penal system of a civilized society should do.

Today's penal system should more concentrate on re-socialization with a view to release the convicted into a normal life where he will not repeat his behavior. That's why the penal system has basically two components: a general prevention (to keep others fro doing it) and a special prevention (to keep the perpetrator from doing it again).

Some have argued that capital punishment serves a good general prevention. If this is true, i wonder why in countries with capital punishment are so many murders.

Some say that capital punishment will avoid the murderer to repeat his act. But suppose you have killed someone and you know, capital punishment is awaiting you. So you might as well kill a couple more, your are toast anyway.

So in my opinion, capital punishment has absolutely no justification at all. It's barbaric, inhuman and useless.

And a final note, in a Buddhist society, taking a life is certainly not permissible.

Your post is utter drivel!

Why shouldn't victims have revenge? If one of my family members was murdered then I want the offender to die. I don't want them re-educated; they've forfeited all their rights.

I even believe that in certain cases a quick death is wrong; they should suffer a much more terrible death than their victims. Barbaric? Yes & so it should be.

If they must keep them in prison, I'd advocate using them for testing new medicines; these b******s have forfeited every right they had & I no longer consider them human beings.

I've said this previously on here but, the party that promises to restore capital and corporal punishment in the UK gets my vote any day.

The death penalty is vastly underused; there are far too many criminals in jail who have no right to life.

My Wife's a Buddhist and she firmly believes in the death penalty.

I can see you think deeply about these trhings

I doubt you will be voting for anyone then as I doubt any party will ever put that on its manifesto unless its some right wing looney party and if so your wife will not be in the country with you!

As for testing new medicines on them - you really show your knowledge here of the procedures and total ignorance may I add

Lets forget the fact that using prisoners for clinical trials is totally aganst GCP and the Helsinky Agreement but why do you think testing on prisoners would do them any harm as you obviously wish?

Lets guess - you reached CSE level then you left school?

Edited December 1, 2007 by Prakanong

[canuckamuck]

I think we should ship em over to Australia and set em all loose. Oh wait, we tried that already.