I cant really know. I know I wouldn't want to be tortured on obviously. But what if I had someone in custody that I know they know something that life can depend on. They won't tell and i can stand to lose everyone I love. Maybe torture is they only way to get it out of them.
Torture wouldn't be used if people didn't keep secrets, but of course everyone keeps secrets.
It's been argued (by the US government) that link doesn't count as torture, even though it clearly is. That's why I mentioned it specifically.
Torture goes against your basic human rights. Never stoop to that level. Also, there's a good chance that any information gained from torture is false.
No excuse for torture, ever. Especially since when you torture someone they will tell you what they think you want to hear, and whether it is true or not could be a completely different story. There is simply no reason for it, and so many against it.
Torture is completely unethical and waterboarding sounds horrific, but i have to say there are certain circumstances where i think it is acceptable. Not many mind you and i am aware that any information recovered by this means may be false but i am still inclined to say in some circumstances i believe it's acceptable. I mean if you know (through evidence) that some guy in custody of the police kidnapped a wee boy or girl and isn't telling where they are which will lead to the boy or girls death i would have no problem trying to beat it out of them-only if i was 100% sure that this person had comitted the crime though.
Sorry for such a long answer but you said explain yourself!
Torture is barbaric. It's cruel and inhuman to torture people in any way--guess what pro-waterboarders, that's why it's called torture. I recognise that it's important to try and get information out of someone but what if the person genuinely didn't know? There's no way of telling for sure and even if they did know, they might have been severely threatened to keep it secret or their brains might have blocked it out from fear. The person might have been drunk or stoned when they saw it happening (whatever "it" may be) and now not remember anything. There are all kinds of reasons why someone might forget something. Even lie detectors aren't always accurate.
Why then, does the person deserve to have a traumatic experience where they think they're dying? In extreme circumstances, I think there are better ways of figuring things out. Even if they don't learn anything, couldn't that be better than committing a crime by assaulting someone until they cave in? That just makes us question whether authority is on the right side of the law or whether the government/ police etc. and the criminals are just involved in a dangerous fight. Then there will be no authority and everyone will stoop to the same low.
I stand by it goes against your basic human rights, which are inalienable-- that means no one, not even you, can take them from you. Even if you want to torture human rights violators, you should never sink to that level. This may be a naive, optimistic, altruistic way of looking at things, but I still strongly believe it. I am kind of naive. I'm the first to admit it.
I admire the way you all think - not being sarcastic, hard to project tone of voice when writing - and in certain respects alot of these arguements make me question what i believe, but to say they completely change my mind is a lie, i still believe that in certain circumstances torture is acceptable. I understand completely why you all disagree, i'm not saying the idea doesn't scare me because it does, i just believe what i believe and i really can't give further reasons why. Maybe you are all just better people than me, not saying that i'm a bad person for believing what i do, well maybe some of you will.
And i wouldn't say you where naive for believing what you do Cinders, just that you have a higher morale code than me :D
I believe it is a good way to get information out of pedophiles, murderers, criminals etc. People who commite the crime, have violated the rights of another person, and do not deserve their human rights anymore. If they dont respect another's human rights and commit felony, they should pay the price and do not deserve to be treated like everyone else. Criminals know that if caught, they will be charged, and if torchure was legal, i believe there would be less criminals. Everyone can choose whether they commit a crime or not, and therefor by commiting a crime, they would know that there would be a chance of being torchured. So technically, they could choose whether or not to be torchured, by simply not commiting the crime :)
Never for obtaining information, NEVER ever Ever. Now if a guy raped and killed my daughter, you better believe he would get the torture session of a life-time, so as a punishment for certain crimes maybe, whether or not that angers anyone.. doesn't really matter.
If your torturing these So called criminals for information - Wouldn't that suggest you hadn't convicted them yet, And as such you are infact committing a crime yourself - by completely ignoring human rights...
Human rights are inalienable, no one has the right to take them away from you, no matter what you've done. You still have those rights.
Right now it is 'because you killed a child, you don't deserve human rights' but it can easily become 'because you are black' or 'because you are Jewish'. Don't start that slippery slope.
You might think I'm overreacting, but people forget to easy what happens when one part of human rights are ignored.
In this instance it would be ignored because of things we find 'right'. Well guess what? Hitler thought his reason for denying the Jews, Sinti, Roma, Poles, Sovjet civilian their humantity was also right. There is not guarantee that if you decide right now that in certain cases the denying of human rights is right, that one day someone will use that same reasoning to deny others their human right.
Learn from history. People will always try to abuse these kind of things.
I don't think torturing is ever acceptable. It's sickening to think people would support it, even in exceptional circumstances. As others have said, it violates a basic human right, and that I cannot support.
Torture wouldn't be used if people didn't keep secrets, but of course everyone keeps secrets.
I can't decide.
Torture goes against your basic human rights. Never stoop to that level. Also, there's a good chance that any information gained from torture is false.
It's no use and it's not very helpful. And your just hurting another person who may not even know
Sorry for such a long answer but you said explain yourself!
Torture gets you nothing except what the person being tortured thinks you want to hear. Period.
Why then, does the person deserve to have a traumatic experience where they think they're dying? In extreme circumstances, I think there are better ways of figuring things out. Even if they don't learn anything, couldn't that be better than committing a crime by assaulting someone until they cave in? That just makes us question whether authority is on the right side of the law or whether the government/ police etc. and the criminals are just involved in a dangerous fight. Then there will be no authority and everyone will stoop to the same low.
I stand by it goes against your basic human rights, which are inalienable-- that means no one, not even you, can take them from you. Even if you want to torture human rights violators, you should never sink to that level. This may be a naive, optimistic, altruistic way of looking at things, but I still strongly believe it. I am kind of naive. I'm the first to admit it.
And i wouldn't say you where naive for believing what you do Cinders, just that you have a higher morale code than me :D
BUT...if you're Jack Bauer, OK...it seems to work for him.
If your torturing these So called criminals for information - Wouldn't that suggest you hadn't convicted them yet, And as such you are infact committing a crime yourself - by completely ignoring human rights...
Human rights are inalienable, no one has the right to take them away from you, no matter what you've done. You still have those rights.
Right now it is 'because you killed a child, you don't deserve human rights' but it can easily become 'because you are black' or 'because you are Jewish'. Don't start that slippery slope.
You might think I'm overreacting, but people forget to easy what happens when one part of human rights are ignored.
In this instance it would be ignored because of things we find 'right'. Well guess what? Hitler thought his reason for denying the Jews, Sinti, Roma, Poles, Sovjet civilian their humantity was also right. There is not guarantee that if you decide right now that in certain cases the denying of human rights is right, that one day someone will use that same reasoning to deny others their human right.
Learn from history. People will always try to abuse these kind of things.
It has been proven in many books and cases where if you treat a terrorist like a god, he'll spill the beans without pain and misery
RENJI2: and what would be those reasonable circumstances according to you?
ہوں شاملمیں fanpop یا کریں انسائنلئے کے کرنے شامل اپنےتبصرے