Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Can the use of torture ever be justified
Torture—Is it Ever Ethical
Essays about torture effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Can the use of torture ever be justified
Based on the UN CONVENTION FOR TORTURE AND PROSPECTS FOR ENFORCEMENT- Torture can be stated as the infliction of severe pain and suffering either physically, mentally or both, intentionally inflicted on an individual for various reasons (Boulesbaa,1999). In spite of this convention, torture continues to be practiced throughout the world. Torture has been used for thousands of years, and is still widespread, occurring throughout much of the world (Amnesty International, 2009).Torture has been shown to violate human rights, gather inaccurate data and cause detrimental effects to the health of its victims. These proven costs of torture have been shown to outweigh the possible hypothesized benefits of torture. This paper will examine the above arguments to prove that torture should not be justified. The first argument with regard to the …show more content…
(Bagraic&Clarke, 2005). The ticking bomb scenario is used by Alan Deshowitz in order to prove that the torture of terrorists is indeed the right thing to do in order to save other innocent lives that might be affected as a result of an imaginary bomb blast. This is because the rights one person should be sacrificed for the greater good (Bagraic & Clarke, 2005). However, the possibility of such a situation occurring is highly debateable. Further, the implementation of torture in such a situation raises uncertain questions. For example, is the subject in custody really related to the bombing plot, will the information he provides be credible, will torture necessarily extract the needed information from him in time? And, accordingly should torture be legalized over such extreme and hypothetical situations (Devine,2009). Thereby, though this argument strongly advocates for the justification of torture according to a utilitarian approach it still has numerous
Who wouldn’t have agreed? Yes, torture is cruel but it is less cruel than the substitute in many positions. Killing Hitler wouldn’t have revived his millions of victims nor would it have ended war. But torture in this predicament is planned to bring no one back but to keep faultless people from being sent off. Of course mass murdering is far more barbaric than torture. The most influential argument against using torture as a penalty or to get an acknowledgment is that such practices ignore the rights of the particulars. Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” discusses both sides of being with and being against torture. This essay gets readers thinking a lot about the scenarios Levin mentioned that torture is justified. Though using pathos, he doesn’t achieve the argument as well as he should because of the absence of good judgment and reasoning. In addition to emotional appeal, the author tries to make you think twice about your take on
Alan Dershowitz challenges the legitimization of non-lethal torture in his essay, “Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist be tortured?” He claims that torture should indeed be legitimized for specific scenarios that require such action. The ticking bomb terrorist gives the example of a terrorist withholding time-sensitive information that could result in the death of innocent citizens, if not shared. Not only does Dershowitz challenge the idea of torture, but he also gives a probable solution that favors the legitimization the torture. He mentions three values that would have to be complied with by all three branches of government if it were to be legitimated, which Dershowitz does endorse. The arguments of the two perspectives discussed in the
...s invaluable. The efficacy of torture can be seen in the capture of Zubaydah and the prevention of the “Dirty bomber,” Jose Padilla. Effectiveness has also been proven; it has hypothetically saved many lives and has prevented many plots known to the general public. Ex-Vice President Dick Cheney said in a speech in 2009 that the “enhanced interrogation” of detainees “prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people” (“The Report of The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment”, 1). Since it has been deemed illegal by the UN it has to be done in secrecy. In result, it cannot be deduced how much has been prevented by this procedure since that information is classified. However, it is irrefutable that torture, in its essence, is beneficial and should be accepted as a means of ensuring public safety.
Guantanamo Bay is located at the southeastern tip of Cuba; it is a United States owned territory dating back to the Spanish American war. The territory contains a high security military detention center and a functional base. The detention center houses high priority Al Qaeda operatives and conspirators to the September 11th attacks on the world trade center. Guantanamo bay is an important asset to keeping the United States safe. In recent years the operation of the base has been slowed down due to the efforts of president Obama. He vowed to shut the base down and move the high risk targets to a high security prison in the United States main land. Without Guantanamo bay the United States wouldn’t be able to contain high risk detainees that the base currently holds. Guantanamo bay should stay open.
Torture is one of the most extreme methods of eliciting information; unfortunately, it has been used for centuries and is still prevalent worldwide.
Levin’s strategy of playing with the fears of people is genius, but, with more creditable details of the issue, the article would have sustained the scrutiny of more educated individuals. The addition of more concrete information, would have given people something to cling to, inherently improving the article's credibility. In Levin’s first instance, he depicts a scenario where a terrorist, who had placed an atomic bomb in the city, was captured. This atomic bomb is to explode in 2 hours if his demands are not met. Levin believes this is a situation in which torture is the only way of extracting the location of the bomb before it explodes.
Torture (Latin torquere, “to twist”), in law, infliction of severe bodily pain either as punishment, or to compel a person to confess to a crime, or to give evidence in a judicial proceeding. Among primitive peoples, torture has been used as a means of ordeal and to punish captured enemies. Examination by torture, often called the “question,” has been used in many countries as a judicial method. It involves using instruments to extort evidence from unwilling witnesses.
Capital punishment is a form of taking someone 's life in order to repay for the crime that they have committed. Almost all capital punishment sentences in the United States of America have been imposed for homicide since the 1970 's. Ever since the reinstatement after 38 years of being banned, there has been intense debate among Americans regarding the constitutionality of capital punishment. Critics say that executions are violations of the “cruel and unusual punishment” provision of the Eighth Amendment. Some capital punishment cases require a separate penalty trial to be made, at which time the jury reviews if there is the need for capital punishment. In 1982, the first lethal injection execution was performed in Texas. Some other common methods of execution used are electrocution, a firing squad, and lethal gas. In recent years, the US Supreme Court has made it more difficult for death row prisoners to file appeals. Nearly 75 percent of Americans support the death sentence as an acceptable form of punishment. The other fourth have condemned it. Some major disagreements between supporters and non-supporters include issues of deterrence,
Until there is a credible way to determine whether or not torture is in fact effective, I pass judgment that the practice should be discontinued. The question as to if the torture policy is a human rights violation or if it holds crucial necessity, is not answered in the essay. Applebaum explores the reality that torture possesses negative implications on the inflictor. After presented with the compelling stance and evidence, Applebaum raises the interesting question as to why so much of society believes that torture is successful. I agree that the torture policy is wrong, a point emphasized by Applebaum, contrary to the popular attitude surrounding the topic.
While one person lays with their wrists circumscribed to the worn leather of the gurney, another person holds two skin-piercing needles. The individual holding the needles is an inexperienced technician who obtains permission from the United States federal government to murder people. One needle is held as a precaution in case the pain is too visible to the viewers. Another dagger filled with a lethal dosage of chemicals is inserted into the vein that causes the person to stop breathing. When the cry of the heart rate monitor becomes monotone, the corrupt procedure is complete. Lying in the chair is a corpse when moments ago it was an individual who made one fatal mistake that will never get the chance to redeem (Ecenbarger). Although some people believe that the death
The notion that fear will make a human leak information is not a novel idea. Torture has widely been used throughout the world by many groups of people. After World War II, The Geneva Convention prohibited any nation from partaking in torture. The emergence of terrorist activity on American soil brought up the question whether torture should be advocated or prohibited from a moral standpoint. The US changed the definition of torture in order to forcibly attain potentially important information from captives. Even though the new clause suggested that many of the methods the US used were now legal, other countries still had an issue in terms of honoring the Geneva Convention and basic human rights. Advocates for torture promise that countless innocent lives can be saved from the information obtained from a single torture victim. Opponents to the advocates suggest that torture often results in misleading information. Morally, torture is not justified as it degrades humans and often leaves victims scarred for life and possibly dead.
Consider the following situation: You are an army officer who has just captured an enemy soldier who knows where a secret time bomb has been planted. Unless defused, the bomb will explode, killing thousands of people. Would it be morally permissible to torture them to get him to reveal the bomb’s location? Discuss this problem in light of both Utilitarian and Kantian moral theories and present arguments from both moral perspectives for why torture is morally wrong.
As we analyze this scenario through the eyes of Kantian Deontology, it is imperative that we recognize that, for our purposes, the lives of the civilians in question are irrelevant. This is because, as stated earlier, the consequences of one’s actions are meaningless; it is only the intent and will that truly matter in deciding an actions morality. We are only concerned with discerning the moral nature of torture itself. By removing the possibility of a terrible outcome, Kant leads us to a clear verdict on torture. In response to the first question that Kantian’s must ask themselves, it appears that torture fails. Torture is certainly not a maxim that many would want to will into the natural law. The second formulation of the categorical imperative, the basis of the second question that Kantian’s need to consider, is where torturing for information is declared absolutely impermissible. By torturing someone for information, specifically the location of several bombs, we are disregarding their rational autonomy by using them merely as a means only (Reitan). There is one scenario where the torture of the criminal could be considered morally acceptable. This is supported by Kant’s stance on capital punishment. Some may find this surprising, but Immanuel Kant was a
In conclusion, the convention against torture, has brought many people together, and has informed many people of the horrible tortures which go on everywhere from the US to Syria. It has tried to set fine lines which prohibit torture under all circumstances. However, since there is no governing body over countries, it remains difficult to enforce the human right standards sought after by the Convention against torture. The convention has therefore done a good job at identifying the torturers. This has in turn lessened the amount of those persecuted. It will remain a gradual process to eliminate torture from all countries, but nevertheless a necessity, in the quest for universal human rights. Torture will continue until all countries decide for themselves, and not from a third party convention that freedom from torture is a human right everyone deserves.
Torture is the process of inflicting pain upon other people in order to force them to say something against their own will. The word “torture” comes from the Latin word “torquere,” which means to twist. Torture can not only be psychologically but mentally painful. Before the Enlightenment, it was perfectly legal to torture individuals but nowadays, it is illegal to torture anyone under any circumstances. In this essay, I will demonstrate why torture should never acceptable, not matter the condition.