Many social groups as well political groups have discussed the issue of torture. The elements and basic working of torture have many against it saying it is too cruel and violates America’s 8th amendment. But the question does arise what do we do if there is a suspect found hours before the crime is committed? Or what do we do to those that are known to have committed the severe crime (ie. a serial killer that has three victims hidden away) how do we find the victims and such? The usage of torture on individuals that have a reasonable doubt of committed a heinous crime should not happen. Though torture itself in the United States is not allowed. But should torture be allowed, it should only be used on those that committed …show more content…
In agreeing with the man the use of torture should not be as a punishment. Of course there are those like Beccaria, which bring up the point that those at are tortured will sometimes lie to stop the pain. He is incorrect in this situation, because it is not anyone that commits a crime that will be lightly to medium level torture. There is no water boarding torture, as in strapping a person on to a board and then pouring water on the person in a way that the people can actually can die, allowed to low to medium level threats, nor dry downing the person to tell the confess to a rape that they know the person did it but the person is holding back something.
Then comes what is considered light or medium torture. Scaring the criminal without touching them. That would be light torture. Level one (light) is mostly mental torture messing with the mind. Level Two (medium) is a light physical hit, no hit to the head or anything that may seriously hurt the person. That means nothing that they would mean that the medics would have to have the criminal in their care for more that light bleeding. Level Three should never have to be used but if it does for a major threat, meaning code red type of thing (like a terrorist found hours before the bombing), the only thing(s) not allow are severe types of 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
David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are
In contrast, some individuals may debate that torture and even some more minuscule forms of torture can be beneficial to obtaining the information needed. It is debated that torture has been used in a large portion of political systems in history, and that the “degree” of torture is a significant component when deciphering right vs. wrong. Moher argues that in a political system where torture is justifiable and legal, the torture used would be less extreme than what it is today (Moher, 2013). It is reasoned that different degrees of torture are more acceptable than others, in that some are less psychologically and physically harming. A
There are different laws over all countries that control by every government in the world. For those who is a criminal or a prisoner, their country’s government has different laws of punishment to punish them. Torture is one of them. The function of torture is to force someone to say something and as a punishment. Torture is unacceptable which I disagree on which it is an action of inhumanly.
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
Also, if the torturee is a suspected terrorist, he is likely to know that there are limits to the amount of pain being inflicted upon him. Furthermore, the torturee will know precisely when the bomb will go off, so he knows how long his has to endure the interrogation. Also according to Brecher, there is a very realistic chance that the bombers are going to leave a very small window of time between the planting of the bomb and it going off, thus preventing a premature finding of the bomb, and also preventing long periods of interrogation if by chance anyone involved gets caught. Brecher also states that it is likely that most terrorists will die for their cause, as we have seen on September 11th, so they are more than likely willing to plant false tales under interrogational torture.
Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are
One reason torture should not be allowed is that torturing people to get them to admit to something should not be a thing because they will lie to get you to stop. According to New Scientist Website, “IF YOU torture the data long enough,” the saying goes, “it will confess to anything” (Elliott, 2015). When it comes to torturing people as soon
Torture is not a new ethical dilemma, because torture has been practiced throughout human history and in different cultures. Now, however, the Geneva Convention and other modern norms suggest that human beings should not resort to using torture. Torture is becoming taboo as a method of intelligence gathering, which is why the methods used during the Iraq war were decried. However, the ethical case can be made for torture. If torturing one human being leads to information that could save the lives of a thousand, torture suddenly seems like a sensible method. This is a utilitarian perspective on torture, which many people find palatable. However, there are problems with this method of thinking about torture. The state-sanctioned use of torture creates a normative framework in which torture becomes acceptable. Torture sends the wrong message about what a free, open, and enlightened society should be. Even if torture is only acceptable in extreme circumstances, as with a suspect who might know something about an impending terrorist attack, who decides when and what type of torture should be used? There is too much potential for abuse of the moral loophole with regards to torture. If the United States hopes to be a role model, then torture cannot fit into its intelligence methods.
The United States has been, and may again be, under terrorist threat and attacks or other similar incidents. Torture can be used to prevent these terrible incidents and save the lives of many people. Torture in the United States has been a debatable subject for many years now but after resent tragedies, the idea of torture of many American citizens has changed. It has also been debated over more after the attacks on September 9, 2001 than any other time in American history. Many fight the legalization of torture for moral and civil reasons but the truth is that torture is a lesser evil that can be used for a greater good.
Torture methods administered during the medieval times were much more malicious than today’s punishments. In the United States, torturing individuals is forbidden regardless of the circumstance. Using torture as a punishment has been outlawed by the U.S. Supreme court since the 1890’s, and is now included in the Eight amendment.
Should torture be used on suspected terrorists? This question has garnered recent media attention in light of the Paris terror attacks, and has forced a variety of nations to step up and try to prevent such callous acts. Although small advances are being made to counter these blood thirsty and inhumane terrorists; it is clearly evident, that if we are to avoid catastrophe, then extremism must be stopped at the source, rather than just before the end of the line. Thus, torture should be authorized to be used on suspected terrorists; as it will drastically improve the authorities’ ability to strangle the stem of extremism, and potentially save the lives of innocent souls like you and me.
Michael Yoo used several definitions from several different places to define torture in his argument. The first definition is the one he used when he defined torture as the following: 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. The other definition he uses it used to show what the government defines torture as. This definition is as follows: The United States
Torture is one of the most extreme methods of eliciting information; unfortunately, it has been used for centuries and is still prevalent worldwide.
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