Is Torture Necessary?
By falconn4192
@falconn4192 (101)
United States
October 6, 2010 10:04am CST
Imagine someone planted a bomb on a city. This bomb will detonate at a certain time which will kill everyone in the city. If you capture this person, would you torture him to get the information about the bomb? If you won't torture him, will you let the people in the city die?
1 person likes this
4 responses
@Miner49r (568)
• United States
6 Oct 10
While the word torture is a primitive, I prefer the term "information extraction". To answer the question... that would be a resounding yes.
The hypothetical individual in question has already taken the steps to kill, maim, and injure an uncountable number of others. For the greater good I would use whatever means necessary without prejudice to gain the needed information to stop the attack.
@falconn4192 (101)
• United States
6 Oct 10
Even if torture is against the law? would you still commit it, knowing that you would be in prison after torturing someone?
@Miner49r (568)
• United States
6 Oct 10
If one was to prevent the annihilation of a hypothetical city by means of using torture and save hundreds, or thousands or perhaps even hundreds of thousands of lives, and yet be imprisoned?
I have to say that would lead to the question of if the city is actually worth saving or not based on the hypothetical situation.
The slime ball bomb maker had no regard for life, or the effects on those who may be killed, the families and friends left behind or the overall trauma caused by such an incident. In my opinion, that person has no rights, should be deprived of his life, and is less than an animal.
If information extraction was the only means to prevent such an occurrence, and one is to be imprisoned due to a technical law protecting the guilty. Then I would say that the law maker's and the law it's self put the city at risk equally as much as the bomber did.
All this in a hypothetical situation mind you, and hypothetically they would have to catch you to imprison you as well. ;)
@paige4evr (118)
• Estonia
6 Oct 10
That is tough. I don't know how good of a chance there is to get good info from a person that is being tortured- they'd say anything to make it stop. And by the time you find out it's wrong, it'll be too late already. So it's not as though torturing a mass murderer is such a horrible issue if it saves lives, but how much it would actually help to save the people is another thing.
@falconn4192 (101)
• United States
6 Oct 10
So how will you save the people then if you won't torture person for the information?
@bardgirl (362)
• United States
7 Oct 10
I get why someone would think it's a good idea but you can't really be sure if the person is telling the truth or not. I would imagine most people would lie and say anything just to get it to stop. Also some psychos won't break no matter what you do.
@sender621 (14894)
• United States
6 Oct 10
I don't see how torturing someone ever accomplishes anything. it is just abuse plain and simple.@falconn4192 (101)
• United States
6 Oct 10
So are you saying that you would let the innocent people in the city die?
