Argumentative Essay: Should We Legalize Torture?

Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case

Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.

The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The fundamental idea of torture is to inflict mental or physical pain onto a suspect to coerce them into revealing information we desire. This tactic is illegal because it violates the Constitution, and in addition, it violates international agreements that our nation has committed itself to. The general provisions of the Geneva Conference of 1949 prevent the use of torture in warfare; the document specifically outlaws “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating or degrading treatment…” By violating these laws, particularly the Constitution, our nation

Levin, Michael. “The Case of Torture.” Evergreen, 9th ed. Susan Fawcett. Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2012. 438-441.

The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The fundamental idea of torture is to inflict mental or physical pain onto a suspect as a form of punishment to obtain information from them. This tactic is illegal because it violates the Constitution, and in addition, it violates international agreements that our nation has committed itself to. The general provisions of the Geneva Conference of 1949 prevent the use of torture in war; the document specifically outlaws “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating or degrading treatment…” By violating these laws, particularly the Constitution, our nation is

If someone has information pertaining about a bomb that would kill thousands of innocent people, you would want to know about it. If they were not willing to give it up then torture would be necessary I know it is grim but is one life worth as many as thousands of lives. It is a tough call, but torture can be justified in some

Torture is a conversation that is spoken on the moral ethics of it. One side that it disregards human life and others say that it is necessary in acts of terrorism or war. I have the same feelings I do for the death sentence and general imprisonment. Deep investigation and complete objectiveness. Although, there usually isn’t a need for investigation for acts of terrorism, but due to the high amount of prejudice in our current time I would suggest to investigate it anyway just in case.

The United States should not engage in torture because it violates one of the most basic human rights established in international law. According to the article, “The U.S. Is Still Violating the Anti-Torture Treaty It Signed 20 Years Ago” stated “In other words, it outlaws the torture of prisoners by agents of the United States regardless of their geographic location”(Schulberg, 2014). The military should not use torture because they go to those other countries and can kill innocent people because they may see everyone as a threat. For example, the military can go to a country like Afghanistan and can go into a booby trap ending an innocent person life because of the booby trap. According to the Geneva Conventions articles 13 and 32 “Civilians

The use of torture as a strategy of war is as old as war itself. Torture serves a number of different functions. One of those functions is punishment for crimes committed, and torture is still used in this way to some degree. Another one of the functions of torture is to extract information or confessions. It is this type of torture that Alan Dershowitz and Ken Roth claim was, and still is, being used in the war against terrorism. Although torture violates the principles of the Geneva Convention, it is still used: "countries all over the world violate the Geneva Accords. They do it secretly," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). The use of torture can be " as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). This stance echoes the official stance of the United States after September 11, when the White House claimed that torture may be "justified" (Priest and Smith). The argument is simple: if torturing one person leads to information that saes hundreds or thousands of lives, then it is worth it. "We won't know if he is a ticking-bomb terrorist unless he provides us information, and he's not likely to provide information unless we use certain extreme measures," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified").

In this new day and age torture is a popular topic of controversial arguments on whether it should be permitted in certain circumstances and its efficiency. In my paper, a logical argument against torture will be presented as well as arguments of from those who support the use of torture. In this paper, I will ultimately defend the position against the use of torture because it not only inefficient, but it is ineffective in some cases

In the United States legal system, torture is currently defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” as defined by Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (US Code, 1) Though this is a seemingly black and white definition, the conditional “…other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions…” have led many to question what precisely this entails. In other words, what are the lawful sanctions that permit such acts? Are they ethically right? Where is the line drawn as torture

In the late twelfth century, the inquisitional procedure was introduced to papal legislation with the purpose of controlling those who strayed from the church. In inquisitional procedure, the court is directly involved in investigation. This eventually extended to secular (nonreligious) crime as well.

A ticking bomb case is a perfect example of where torture should be acceptable (Harris). Imagine this, a bomb has been planted in the heart of a nearby city by an identified terrorist (Harris). You have captured the terrorist and he sits in front of you (Harris). He refuses to disclose the location of the bomb and sits there and brags about the upcoming explosion and the travesty it will cause (Harris). Torture is perfectly acceptable in this situation in order to save endless lives (Harris).

Torture is not always used to protect the vulnerable; historically it has been used to extract information about the enemy, to bring terror especially during conflicts and to punish the defeated. Despite the fact that it might seem morally justifiable, it is morally unethical. Torture in this form of practice is uncontrollable; people lose their lives or became damaged for lifetime. There is not much control over that practice, it can start from occasional, non-leaving physical permanent injury, and increase to the constant, excruciating torture (the difficulty of knowing where to draw the line. There is no way of controlling, assigning and or measuring this practice, as such there is no way to tell how much is too much.)

Dieter, Richard C. "Millions Misspent: What Politicians Don't Say About the High Costs of the