To Torture or Not Torture, That is the Question Should torture be used by police and the United States military? Some say yes, law enforcement should use all means available to apprehend terrorists and other dangerous criminals. They believe public safety and national security trump individual safety, and that some people are not worthy of humane treatment. The increasing amount of mass shootings and terrorist attacks happening in our country prove torture tactics should be used. People who commit serious acts of violence should be subject to serious methods and our military should be able to execute without hesitation. Some argue that torture shouldn’t be used the police and US military because it will undermine our value as Americans, puts innocent people at risk, and believe that everyone deserves the same punishment. However, if it is wrong to torture a terrorist or a criminal for the right reasons (i.e. saving civilian’s life) then some risk is worth taking. For example, “the CIA believes that the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since September 2001” (Washington Post). This is a good example of using torture as a way of learning about a planned terrorist attacks so they …show more content…
If a person is so secretive or criminal that they can't own up or say why or what they did, what they are keeping hidden must be bad and dangerous. If it’s that unspeakable then they are most likely not worthy of humane treatment - they are a risk to the country, including themselves. Using torture doesn’t undermine our value as Americans. In fact, torture does the opposite. They, U.S. Military and the police, would be using torture for us not just for any reason on anyone. They would do it to gather data, location, etc. It would only be used to ensure the safety and protection of the
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
According to “Tortures Terrible Toll” by John McCain, who is the Senator, he mentioned that we shouldn’t just torture the prisoners or the terrorists that we have caught. I agree with his point and the word of “inhumanly” to define torture is not a good way to punish a criminal. Even though their actions is not a human being, they are still human. They
Torture has been a sensitive subject in our government and among the people of the US. The article “Torture is Wrong-But it Might Work” Bloche about how even though torture is not moral to some, it can still provide effective results because of advanced techniques and psychological studies. He goes on to say that many believe it is effective but others will say it does not provide adequate results in interrogation efforts. Senators such as John McCain (R-Ariz.) believe it does not help at all; however, other government officials, such as former attorney general Michael Mukasey and former vice president Dick Cheney, believe it does (Bloche 115).
The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.
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
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
According to the blog The Spector, “A terrorist group is believed to be in possession of a nuclear device. Time is desperately short, but we have captured a member of the group. In such circumstances, torture would surely be justified” (Andersen, 2014). Torture should be used in certain situations. In conditions when a child is being tortured is is not okay, but when it is a terrorist it is okay. Torture should be used when large groups of people are being threatened. According to The New York Times, “Torture can be morally justifiable, and even obligatory, when it is wholly defensive--for example when torturing a wrongdoer would prevent him from seriously harming innocent people” (Gutting, McMahan, 2015). Torturing people is okay when used right. People should only use torture when many other people's lives are at risk. Although torturing someone to save a large group of people may seem good, it’s not, because they could give false information to get you to stop, and you may injure more people than you
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
Coercive interrogation does not work in producing timely, reliable, and life saving information. Thus far, much of the discussion in this area has been concerned with the procedural, legal, and philosophical issues raised by torture. Only very limited attention has been given to the issue of effectiveness. Even if one concludes that torture can sometimes be riddled with moral objections, the argument for coercive techniques depends on the assumption that torture is an effective means of obtaining information. This is a dubious assumption. Scientific investigations of torture as an effective tool of interrogation have found no evidence that it is effective. That conclusion comes from a 2006 report on torture by the Intelligence Science Board. If torture is not an effective means to deduce information from a suspect, it is difficult to justify torture, as many experts in the field agree, even if you assert that it is necessary in certain circumstances. In addition, even if torture may work, if there are other ways to elicit information, the use of torture is not necessary. Lastly, it is super counter intuitive and has the potential to lead to radicalization.
People’s imaginations start to go wild when they hear the word torture. However, there are enhanced interrogation techniques that are more humane than others. Waterboarding, for example, simulates the effect of drowning and is highly recommended by people such as former Vice President Dick Cheney (Defrank). It is highly unpleasant, but breaks no bones and leaves no bruises. It also exposes those performing the interrogation to lesser psychological strain than other methods that could be used would. Torture is accused of being a cancer in society, but if regulated and reserved for the “especially” bad guys, societal homeostasis would be maintained.
Holmes explains, the Utilitarianism theory: The ideas that the goal of society should be to bring about the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, the act of utilitarian it is the action towards the morally right act to produce the favorable balance of good over evil which everyone considered, the rule for utilitarianism; action which is only right, if, it is required by rules, for instance don’t kill, steal, lie. etc..” … However,” the Principle of utility actions are right when they tends to promote happiness and wrong when they do the opposite towards morally right actions that are proposing as it maximizes utility and minimizes when the propositions are wrong for instance ,
Most people in a civilized nation disagree with torture. However, in compelling and threatening circumstances it may be allowed. Here is the reason, Many terrorist organizations take advantage of the situation and make an entryway for an assault. Without the usage of torture, it would take extra time and open doors for another strike later on. Through the use of torture, the CIA gained useful data by interrogating two terrorist group leaders, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, both of them gave significant data, after agents used torture. (Gordon n.p.) Zubaydah showed the way to Khalid Mohammed, who was found to be the mastermind behind 9-11 attacks. (Gordon n.p.) The usage of torture helped gain useful information about terrorist organizations accountable for the assaults and it opened a way to stop possible assaults driven by Al-Qaida later on. (In -Debate n.p.) Present and former U.S. authorities have claimed they found key data
According to Mis and Vagner, “36% of people think that torture can sometimes be justified to gain information that may protect the public”(trust.org). Torture is often used to gain information or to punish individuals who have committed a crime. Without influence, some information may remain unknown unless the suspect is forced into talking. This can lead to many issues such as invalid information and the violation of human rights. Normally, the thought of punishment by anguish is appalling, but under the right circumstances, some believe it may be justified. It has been used many times in the past by some government agencies to gain information that is deemed essential for public safety, but does that make it justifiable? Torture is never
Ronald D. Cretlinsten contends that torturers acquire the ability to cope with the moral dilemmas of inflicting pain upon and murdering their fellow humans primarily through the processes of “routinization” and “dehumanization”, and also through the notion of “authorization” (191). With such as the case, an individual adept in the art of torture would necessarily have learned to be cruel, however, that argument neglects the very reality that many engaged in such activities are intrinsically perverse, and in fact willingly and happily do harm to others.
This debate has been around for a while. Most people when they think about torture think back to the middle ages, the stuff they heard about in books. But, this is not the barbaric age, but torture could still be useful. Like the situation I illustrated for you above, can you tell me what you would do in that situation? I f countless lives were depending on you to get this information from this person, what would you do? Now, I understand that this person is still a human being, and they should be treated like one. Sure, torturing a terrorist is probably not constitutional. But, could you deal with the blood on your hands when millions of people are dead, because you couldn’t get the vital information? Now, like this example shows, torture should be used in only extreme cases. If you could save millions of lives, why would you not.