"If you had a jail full of 1000 people, and you thought some of them MIGHT be terrorists that MIGHT know SOME useful things which MAY result in a savings of SOME lives at SOME point (sooner or later), would you torture them all to find out EVERYTHING they knew?"
"If Yes, then how would you know when you tortured each of them enough? And if could tell, once you were done, what would you say to the ones who were innocent? Would you send them home? If you send them home, they will tell all of their friends and families about what you did."
"Shouldn't it be illegal to do this since it seems overwhelmingly likely to make some people think that we are the real enemy, and want to blow us up with bombs and cost lives?"
I'm fine with it being legal for you to torture someone provided your victim's family gets to torture you if he turns out to be innocent.
This is similar my opinion on the subject. I think torture ought to be illegal (simple morals and ethics aside; *I'm* not discounting them, but someone preparing to commit torture already has) because I really do believe that the logic chain ought to be something like "Yes, it really is so important to get information that this person knows that I'm willing to sacrifice my career, my reputation, and my own freedom in order to get it out of them."
This was the conversation on To the Point the other night, in making the distinction between "yes, sometimes it is warranted" and "let's legislate that it's warranted."
Just because something is considered to be a crime doesn't it can't be justified under extreme circumstances.
You just take your chances when you commit such an act. The criminal justice system gets a crack at you and you have to explain yourself. You have to sit and allow yourself to be judged as to whether what you did was justified or not.
Want a real Hollywood scenario?
I'm sure the passengers of the 9/11 flight that crashed in Western PA were violating many laws when they attacked the hijackers. They would have been acquitted of course because they were acting "in the defense of themselves or others".
If the hypothetical Hollywood scenario ever occurs, and I'm sitting on the grand jury, I'll refuse to indict. So would anyone else with a soul. Arguing that it shouldn't be made a crime for that reason insults garden variety straw-man arguments.
(no subject)
I'd respond with the one we have.
"If you had a jail full of 1000 people, and you thought some of them MIGHT be terrorists that MIGHT know SOME useful things which MAY result in a savings of SOME lives at SOME point (sooner or later), would you torture them all to find out EVERYTHING they knew?"
"If Yes, then how would you know when you tortured each of them enough? And if could tell, once you were done, what would you say to the ones who were innocent? Would you send them home? If you send them home, they will tell all of their friends and families about what you did."
"Shouldn't it be illegal to do this since it seems overwhelmingly likely to make some people think that we are the real enemy, and want to blow us up with bombs and cost lives?"
I'm fine with it being legal for you to torture someone provided your victim's family gets to torture you if he turns out to be innocent.
(no subject)
(no subject)
Exactly what I'd been trying to put words together to say.
Thanks.
(no subject)
(no subject)
Just because something is considered to be a crime doesn't it can't be justified under extreme circumstances.
You just take your chances when you commit such an act. The criminal justice system gets a crack at you and you have to explain yourself. You have to sit and allow yourself to be judged as to whether what you did was justified or not.
Want a real Hollywood scenario?
I'm sure the passengers of the 9/11 flight that crashed in Western PA were violating many laws when they attacked the hijackers. They would have been acquitted of course because they were acting "in the defense of themselves or others".
If the hypothetical Hollywood scenario ever occurs, and I'm sitting on the grand jury, I'll refuse to indict. So would anyone else with a soul. Arguing that it shouldn't be made a crime for that reason insults garden variety straw-man arguments.