The "ticking bomb"
Jun. 11th, 2009 11:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumSo.... the argument goes like this:
1: A known terrorist is in custody.
2: We know he has information about plots to kill people.
3: He refuses to talk.
4: Saving lives is more important than a little bit of "discomfort"
5: "Enhanced Interrogation"/minor tortures are therefore not only acceptable, but morally required, because life is sacred, and "everything is different" when terrorism is involved.
6: We have no one else we can talk to, and no other way to get the information.
I've said, for ages, that the first two are practically impossible, and to get to that place 6 was almost certainly impossible.
It turns out I was wrong.
James W. Von Brunn, the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum in DC yesterday, has declared he knows of more such actions. He says more people are going to be killed. He, so far as we know, isn't willing to share the details. People's lives are in danger.
So, per the ticking bomb, why aren't we torturing him? What's a little water up the nose, when compared to people's lives? Surely a light dose of the bastinado would, "encourage" him to talk.
Then we could see what sort of practical effect torture has on collecting information, right?
(comments at Better than salt money)
1: A known terrorist is in custody.
2: We know he has information about plots to kill people.
3: He refuses to talk.
4: Saving lives is more important than a little bit of "discomfort"
5: "Enhanced Interrogation"/minor tortures are therefore not only acceptable, but morally required, because life is sacred, and "everything is different" when terrorism is involved.
6: We have no one else we can talk to, and no other way to get the information.
I've said, for ages, that the first two are practically impossible, and to get to that place 6 was almost certainly impossible.
It turns out I was wrong.
James W. Von Brunn, the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum in DC yesterday, has declared he knows of more such actions. He says more people are going to be killed. He, so far as we know, isn't willing to share the details. People's lives are in danger.
So, per the ticking bomb, why aren't we torturing him? What's a little water up the nose, when compared to people's lives? Surely a light dose of the bastinado would, "encourage" him to talk.
Then we could see what sort of practical effect torture has on collecting information, right?
(comments at Better than salt money)
