Should torture be legalized?

outside looking in

outside looking in

<b>Registered Member</b>
Not for punishment, but for extracting information in extraordinary cases. Remember, torture is a wide umbrella that covers truth serum, sleep deprivation, and loud music as well as the less creative physical means.

AFAICT, our Constitution doesn't prohibit the use of torture. It only prohibits the results of that torture from being used to incriminate the tortured person. What about cases where the information is required for other purposes, like to incriminate someone else or to avoid a catastrophe?

That torture happens is a given. IMO, actions that are going to be taken in extraordinary circumstances should be made legal, if only to make them transparent to the public. This opinion of mine is pretty consistent with my leaning towards things I believe are "right" instead of things that are smiply "popular."

Thoughts?
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
OLI said:
truth serum, sleep deprivation, and loud music
Click to expand...

That's not torture, it's having kids.


No rack or iron maiden type of things & why not?
 
Luis G

Luis G

<i><b>Problemator</b></i>
Staff member
No, torture should be eliminated completely from the planet.

Authorizing the use of it, makes the "justice" no better than the criminals and certainly not better than the Inquisition.
 
R

Rose

New Member
I mostly agree with Luis. :) But I think there are always circumstances ... and sometimes rules are bent for certain situations.
 
outside looking in

outside looking in

<b>Registered Member</b>
Precisely. Reminds me of a very stirring statement made by Patrick Stewart during one of the ST:TNG episodes, to the effect that "no justice can be just that is absolute."

I think a corollary could well be that there are circumstances in which things otherwise viewed as inhuman or uncivil are justified.

Let's use this hypothetical example... one often used for this topic. A kidnapper has burried a child alive, and the child has two hours of air before it dies. Without the kidnapper supplying the location there is no hope of finding the child in time.

Do you:

(A) Respect the rights of the kidnapper to not be subjected to torture.

or

(B) Respect the rights of the child to live.

Who is more barbaric... the person choosing A or B? Which choice is indicative of a more "civilized" nation?

This is a clear case of an ethical decision to be made. Do you spare the kidnapper and sacrifice the child? Or do you use whatever means are at your disposal and hope for the best? Ethics aren't black and white answers... not always at least. Either rules will be bent/broken, or you rewrite the rules to allow for the exceptional cases.

Again, as far as the legality in the US, I don't see where the Constitution prohibits torture in extraordinary cases such as the above. I'm not saying it should be common, or even easy to torture someone. Make it something that requires a court order, or perhaps even a governmental or presidential approval. But it has to be an approval process that is very quick, as typically the cases where IMO torture is just are cases where time is limited.

I don't think you could ever make a convincing argument that torture is justified as a punishment. But as an information gathering method... there are some very, very strong arguments.
 
Luis G

Luis G

<i><b>Problemator</b></i>
Staff member
I wouldn't, but perhaps i'd inject him some sort of delusional substance so he would speak up his mind whenever you ask him something.
 
IDLEchild

IDLEchild

Well-Known Member
Luis G said:
I wouldn't, but perhaps i'd inject him some sort of delusional substance so he would speak up his mind whenever you ask him something.
Click to expand...

A truth serum? they tried that...but mostly it turned out to be banter and falsified accounts and confabulation with the criminals it was tested on.
 
chcr

chcr

Too cute for words
Well, I have mixed feelings because I have a great deal of faith in people's ability to abuse anything. With that caveat, I would say yes, both as punishment (if it's not cruel and unusual, it's not punishment) and as a means of extracting information. I guess my personal veneer of civilization is relatively thin. :shrug:
 
freako104

freako104

Well-Known Member
outside looking in said:
So you might be in favor of torture for punishment of some crimes, but not as a means of extracting information?

Bizarre! :)
Click to expand...


how is it bizarre? i think a criminal should suffer since he did the crime and should know not to do it again or on that same hand he should suffer for the pain he has caused. when it comes to information why torture them? they may have the info but that doesnt make them a criminal.
 
ris

ris

New Member
i see no reason for torture if we are the civilised and just society we claim we are. i certainly do not believe in retributory punishment on criminals - justice is something quite removed from retribution and revenge and has no place in a society that purports to place violence against the person as a crime.

state exacted revenge is as much an ill as an act of violence by one individual on another.
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I'm still confused as toi why non-violent methods are considered torture. Aren't yopu supposed to get bloody or broken for torture to happen?
 
freako104

freako104

Well-Known Member
ris said:
i see no reason for torture if we are the civilised and just society we claim we are. i certainly do not believe in retributory punishment on criminals - justice is something quite removed from retribution and revenge and has no place in a society that purports to place violence against the person as a crime.

state exacted revenge is as much an ill as an act of violence by one individual on another.
Click to expand...


depends on how you look at it ris. id sleep more confortably knowing some sick bastard who gets his rocks off by hurting or killing is gone. and what is the purpose of justice? to me its protecting the citizens. now to do that you need to get rid of what would harm them in the first place dont you
 
R

Rose

New Member
freako104 said:
depends on how you look at it ris. id sleep more confortably knowing some sick bastard who gets his rocks off by hurting or killing is gone. and what is the purpose of justice? to me its protecting the citizens. now to do that you need to get rid of what would harm them in the first place dont you
Click to expand...


Agreed.

And that doesn't even touch the bit about (at least in America) a portion of my hard earned dollars generally goes to support these "sick bastard"s if they remain in jail.

But I think I veered off into the death penalty and not torture ...

:crap:
 
freako104

freako104

Well-Known Member
it did but this is off topic central ;) besides used to be torturous. but no more burning people at the steak and no more electric chair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top