Legal Torture.

[Kagemusha]

Should torture be made legal?



Think about it some terrorist has planted a bomb in a school and you can't find it, he says that if any of the schools are evancuated the bomb will be triggered.



So what do you do?



Do you torture him for information on the bomb and his accomplices or do you let him have his rights and possibly let hundreds of children die?

 

[Sanae]

That's a toughy. Depending on the situation, yes and no xD



The scenario you described, sure. If he's going to be an ass and threatening many lives. He deserves it. Even if it is a bluff. He shouldn't be doing stuff like that. Although, I have a feeling if such a law was passed, it would be taken advantage of >_> Especially, if there's crookedness in the system. End result, it depends on the situation.

 

[Nico.]

If that is the situation, my question is .. how can you torture someone who already threatened you? I mean, of course you would want the whole school to be safe but torturing him is not possible, since well .. you torture him, he presses the button, and .. BOOM! The end.

Unless it's a different case.

​

 

[Kamil]

Depends on what kind of torture... But in that kind of situation, with specific confirmed parameters and a known criminal, sure. General torture for "information" based on "suspicion"..... Well... Not so much.

 

[Nightmare Gear]

maybe usage of sensory deprivation could be used...but I'm not an expert on how effective it is.

 

[Kagemusha]

If that is the situation, my question is .. how can you torture someone who already threatened you? I mean, of course you would want the whole school to be safe but torturing him is not possible, since well .. you torture him, he presses the button, and .. BOOM! The end.

Unless it's a different case.

​

My apologise i should have been clearer. The man you can choose to torture or not does not have the detonator, his accomplice does. So you can attempt to torture him to find out where the bomb is or the accomplice, or both if that's how you roll.

 

[VivaLaPony Onee-chan]

I'm gonna say no, since torture is bad. Getting violent is okay, but not torture >.> and if you have time to torture him, you should have used the time to evacuate the children instead.

 

[Kagemusha]

I'm gonna say no, since torture is bad. Getting violent is okay, but not torture >.> and if you have time to torture him, you should have used the time to evacuate the children instead.

But if you evacauate the children his accomplice blows the building up, plus you don't know what school it's in.



So you have the option to torture the guy to find out where his accomplice is to stop him before the school blows up or let him have his civil rights.



What say you now?

 

[VivaLaPony Onee-chan]

But if you evacauate the children his accomplice blows the building up, plus you don't know what school it's in.



So you have the option to torture the guy to find out where his accomplice is to stop him before the school blows up or let him have his civil rights.



What say you now?

I still say civil rights. Torture is a crude and evil way of doing it, and you have no guarantee that he will speak the truth. People might dislike me for saying this, but I'm not the hero type and I accept acceptable losses. There's also no way of knowing how large the explosion will be, and there's no way to know if finding the accomplice wont just make him detonate the bomb while having second thoughts.

 

[Kaze Araki]

Torture is illegal under international law, hypothetical imaginary situation hardly reflect reality. After 9/11, the Bush administration institute torture in occupied Guantanamo Bay, yet not even a single credible information EVER comes out from this method. All the military and intelligence communities knows that informations extracted from torture has little to no value at all.



Those who advocates torture exchanges security for freedom, but in the end they will neither deserve nor receive both of them.

 

[Hadriel]

Think about it some terrorist has planted a bomb in a school and you can't find it, he says that if any of the schools are evancuated the bomb will be triggered.



So what do you do?



Do you torture him for information on the bomb and his accomplices or do you let him have his rights and possibly let hundreds of children die?

That's a highly unlikely scenario. Note that most terrorists are always at the site of the crime, so the chances of capturing one is highly unlikely. Even though it may happen once in a very blue moon, chances are the authorities involved are going to assess whether to use torture on a case by case basis.



Personally, I do not condone torture as a means of obtaining information. I'm more of a pacifist. If the situation can be resolved through negotiation, then negotiate away. If not, then... I'd examine it on a case by case basis.

 

[Kulitman]

Hmmm....

Yes and No....

it depends on the situation... in that particular situation I'd say use underhanded tricks like torture but not to the point that someone would die or if it's not known to the world do the most brutal thing you can do to a person.

And I live in a country that torture was present when we were under a dictatorship so I think it really depends on the situation.

Justified torture could be possible.

 

[Rah]

I'd get the fuck out. RIP everyone else.



xDDD

 

[Shadowolf]

But if you evacauate the children his accomplice blows the building up, plus you don't know what school it's in.



So you have the option to torture the guy to find out where his accomplice is to stop him before the school blows up or let him have his civil rights.



What say you now?

Just put a hot pepper in his/her mouth (unless he/she's mexican) and then you will have all the information you need

 

[Rah]

Okay, a serious reply, huh?



I'd gladly opt for torture. It's one life versus the lives of many. His rights don't mean shit on that scale. If there's even a small % chance to obtain any information from him, then I say to go for it. By any means necessary.



And yeah, it totally depends on the situation, but if something important is at stake, then I see no problem whatsoever with torturing the person that's part or the source of the problem. Especially if there's a lot at stake.



Torture is very effective, yet it completely depends on the situation.



In your scenario everyone is in a school, right? That's extremely limited. Even if tortured, the subject may still lie in the end. For example, when they're at the *lol* cut the wire phase.



It's very different if the danger is real and imminent, than if time isn't much of an issue. The prisoner will resign himself to the fact that he'll probably never see daylight again, and rather than enduring the physical and psychological torment, crack up and give the information asked of him.



This reminds me of the movie "Unthinkable".



I'd go to greater extremities.

 

[~Kitty~]

why cant they just make torturing legal for terrorist?

 

[Kulitman]

That's why there are organizations who uses torture to extract info. just watch some movies.

If people knew that their government are doing these extreme measures,I'm sure the people would be afraid of them and will lose trust in the government.

 

[Crom]

"How dare he kill those innocents in the cruelest ways! That sick bastard! Quick guys, lets tie him up and deny him of oxygen while we sink his head into this water tank."

 

[Bloodrazor]

The terrorists are pulling the stunt because their father was once being terrorised by the government D;



Torture is illegal and always will be. There is no chance that the info you extract will be the truth and would be rendered ineffective without any evidence or prior info.