If you could foil a murder plot or gain the advantage over your enemy by torturing someone to gain knowledge of their operations or ..... guilt ..... would it be justified ? How bout giving someone a truth serum or any other type of drug ?
2007-03-15 16:52:17 · 9 answers · asked by burlingtony 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
a truth serum is one thing, but torture is another. I suppose it depends on what's at stake.
2007-03-15 16:59:01 · answer #1 · answered by emma s 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, in cases of hardened criminals or rebel types (fighters) torture would probably not get you any information. It is too adversarial to work on a fighter. I don't think torture does anything but coerce a person into saying whatever you want. It is a tool to create a sacrifice to political and social stability (scapegoat). Because of this I could never justify torture to get information. Useful information would probably be obtained best through some sort of deception (I would do that).
2007-03-15 17:20:23 · answer #2 · answered by george 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
In a word NO you cannot justify torture without making you as bad as the one you are torturing in the eyes of humanity. However truth serum isnt torture. It is a method of interrogation that doesnt involve pain torture or fear. It is humane as long as the drug doesnt have lasting effects and harm the person.
2007-03-15 17:02:21 · answer #3 · answered by Persiphone_Hellecat 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I could justify it if the stakes were high enough...but that is an extremely personal opinion. What makes it "acceptable" to me may not for many others. I think that even the most righteous among us has a breaking point. Fortunately, the vast majority of us never even approach the boundaries of that situation, so the decision will never have to be considered in any context other than this forum.
2007-03-15 17:03:04 · answer #4 · answered by wildraft1 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
This really depends on the situation in my opinion.
I think that if:
a: The person to be tortured has guilty knowledge of the situation i.e. is somehow involved
b: There are lives of innocents at risk (to me it doesnt matter if its one or a million)
Then it is justified. This is of course just my opinion.
2007-03-15 17:05:39 · answer #5 · answered by IncendiumX 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
no - how could u trust anything they said? I for one would say anything if you tortured me but then again if it was for something really drastic like a bombing or something and you knew they knew, i don't really no, i just hope I'm never in the situation that I'd need to
2007-03-15 18:29:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. It's the most unreliable method of intelligence and produces a brutalised society.
2007-03-15 19:19:28 · answer #7 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, I would not. Interrogation specialists say that torture is too unreliable to get what you want.
2007-03-15 17:00:09 · answer #8 · answered by bigjohn B 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you ever met my ex wife you wouldn't ask that question
2007-03-15 17:18:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋