But if they have no rights at all, then the solution for the overpopulation is simply: kill them all. There are several ways to do that, a regular toolbox for mass killings have been developed during the 20th century that could be put to use for such a program. In Germany, Cyklon B was used to great effect, and in only a few years, several million people were killed, so that is obviously a very quick and efficient way to deal with that problem. Of course, it could still be seen as somewhat expensive, after all, there are significant infrastructure investments that need to be made. But the Soviet Union and other Communist countries had remedies for that. In the Gulag, people worked themselves to death in Siberia. It wouldn't be very difficult to ship these...creatures (because those who have no rights at all are clearly not human, since all humans have basic human rights) to Alaska to do dangerous work out there to very little cost indeed. Or they could all be starved to death. That's really cheap, and you'd be rid of all of them in a matter of months. This method was applied in the Ukraine in the early 30s, in China in the early 50s and in Kambodja in the late 70s. Millions dead every time. All the above methods are seen as crimes against humanity, but maybe only soft-hearted liberals are concerned with such things? Or maybe the problem with your argument is that you are putting up a false dichotomy between the victim's rights and the rights of the perpetrators. Looking out for the former does not preclude denying the latter. Indeed, it could be argued that denying the rights of the convicted is to victimize them in turn, and one has to ask how that does the victim any good?