Amazon.com Widgets

Should US law be written to permit some forms of torture?

  • Getting more informations can help save more lives

    There has been over 100,000 deaths of innocent people and the number is still increasing. If the government doesn’t put more effort into defending terrorists, more people would loose their families and homes. Ways of torturing terrorists not only will not physically harm them, but also to get truth and information that the government
    need in order to protect innocent lives from being killed or hurt. We all need to find a solution to stop this, I think that the “torture” of suspected terrorists is a way that will benefit everyone. I believe it is worth to put a life of terrorist at risk rather than putting thousands of innocent lives in risk. The terrorists will learn that by joining a terrorist association they would face more consequences.

  • If proven guilty then yes murders should feel pain for the rest of their lives

    I bet it would stop a lot of murders if we tortured them for years on end. Child molesters and serial killers need to be stopped and maybe they will think twice about it if they know what they are in for when caught. I mean how would you feel if your child or little brother or sister was taken and abused by some loser and only got 3-5 years in a nice prison fed 3 meals a day?

  • No, if we don't want to be tortured ourselves, then it shouldn't be allowed to happen at all.

    Current law states that people cannot be subjected to "cruel and unusual treatment", which includes torture. If we, as citizens, don't want to experience it, then it is not justified to allow it. The same holds true for soldiers. If we don't want our soldiers to be subjected to torturous treatment by foreign countries, then we cannot do it against their soldiers either.

    Posted by: Ramon Griffith
  • I believe US law should permit some forms of torture to hardened, bottom of the barrel criminals.

    US law should be written to allow some forms of torture for certain criminals that hurt, kill, or molest children. Violent offenders that commit murder or other forms of sexual abuse. These crimes are terrible and leave long lasting effects on the victims family and friends. In my opinion it's only fair that the perpetrator suffers as well.

    Posted by: R34IHanan
  • There are times when torture many be necessary due to national security concerns and for the protection of society. Therefore US law should be changed to allow for torture in certain circumstances.

    There are certain circumstances where torture is justified. When it is necessary to protect society or when there are issues of national security we must do what we have to do including use torture if necessary. In order for us to protect ourselves US law must be rewritten to allow for the use of some forms of torture.

    Posted by: TasticBran
  • Some Islamic terrorists would only cooperate if they are first are able to resist some physical act.

    There was a very interesting interview with a journalist that talked to the interrogators that questioned the terrorists that had information about future attacks. The terrorists told them they wanted their lawyer. The terrorists told them Americans were too weak. But then the interrogators slapped the stomach of the terrorists. That is when the terrorist felt he had accomplished the resistance requirement and then started telling everything he knew. This is not torture. The terrorists HAVE to have the honor of resisting something before they cooperate.

    Posted by: ddeathnote
  • I only believe in forms of mental torture on specific people in my agreement.

    When it comes to torture, I only believe it should be used in times of desperate need, like a large scale war we did not start. When information that could save millions is confided in one who refuses to give it up, certain measures do need to be taken. I believe though that only mental torture is justifiable and not physical torture. They are also a human being after all.

    Posted by: 5h4m4m3Anto
  • There is no reason to allow torture in the United States, because it is not effective.

    There is no need for torture to be legislated in the U.S. Not only is torture not known to be an effective form of reform, nor an effective technique to get information, but it is not accepted under international law. And, a country that aspires to function as a world leader should not set such an example.

    Posted by: DisillusionedGilberto67
  • I vehemently oppose any form of torture on a platform of basic human rights. To extract information, give them drugs.

    Well, there was all the German concentration camps, the POW camps during WWII and of course all the horrific things going on today.

    Posted by: R4ffJoIIy
  • No, there is no point in making a U.S. law to allow some forms of torture, because the government already can do whatever it wants under the table anyway.

    Making some forms of torture legal will not affect anything. The government is more than willing to break its own laws, or find the loopholes needed to do whatever it wants, when it wants. All making torture laws would do is raise the chances that said torture methods could be used in more situations. Right now, torture is used to help the highest levels of national security, which is something important enough for the government to break its own laws. If it was made more legal, it might start turning up in routine police arrests. The cops could start adding torture to their interrogation methods for any crime they wanted.

    Posted by: H_Baird
  • Codifying torture is inherently wrong, and would also unleash a Pandora's box into any commitment to individual dignity and freedom.

    Because law enforcement, intelligence, and military agencies have an inherently adversarial posture, and in the case of terrorism, have to try to act before, rather than after, bad things happen, they seek steadily to expand their power. This is why constitutional and other legal checks on their power, including a torture ban, are vital for a free and decent society. Without legal restraints, the sense of crisis that attends real or perceived security emergencies leads those in authority to find an ever-more-expansive set of circumstances to justify torture. There are other, better ways to cultivate intelligence and reduce our vulnerability. From cultivating relationships with relevant communities, to reviewing foreign policies that facilitate oppression, it is our task to pursue them. It's worth considering, also, that our reputation as a torturer badly tarnishes our image and improves terrorists' recruitment climate immeasurably.

    Posted by: M4I4cFeIine
  • The US should not condone or codify torture of any kind.

    Torture by is the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain or anguish (see http://www.thefreedictionary.com/torture). That goes beyond correction, punishment and deterrence, which are the main concepts behind criminal laws. If we allow torture, it can be severely abused and can lead to inhuman and unreasonable treatment of prisoners and in some ways is worse than the death penalty.

  • I don't believe that any form of torture should be used on any life form.

    Time and time again studies find that torture usually is fruitless due to the fact that after so long, the one being tortured will just lie about the information being obtained to stop the torture. If this happens, then the torture procedure is completely useless. Humans should just use some type of conversation or psychological "trick" to obtain information instead of torture.

    Posted by: IyanaH
  • Under no circumstances should torture be considered acceptable.

    Torture, whether mental or physical, can cause extreme harm to a person. It is clearly cruel and unusual punishment, something that the US Constitution prohibits. Furthermore, in the United States, anything that a suspect says can be withheld from the court if the suspect says it under duress. This is the US law. The military isn't above it.

    Posted by: 54ndDavi
  • The United States law does not allow for torture.

    The United States of America abides by the Geneva Convention which does not allow torture. This is an international law that requires the humane treatment of prisoners of war. That is not to say that many Americans do not believe that torture should be a part of military interrogations. Especially when it comes to terrorist. When it comes to those who will kill innocent civilians there is very little compassion. However, by law the United States and any other countries that have signed the Geneva Convention are not allowed to perform torture as a means of interrogations.

    Posted by: w00tboycomic
  • No US law should permit or protect torture of any type. Our laws should be written and upheld to protect civil rights.

    The idea of a law written to permit torture on any level is just ridiculous. We are not a nation of brutality. We are a nation of civil rights and democracy and the thought of our government permitting torture of another human being is unthinkable. Where does one cross the line? What would be considered "acceptable torture?" No, I don't agree with that idea in any way.

    Posted by: SilentIgnacio
  • I do not believe forms of torture should be used, regardless of circumstances, because it is a war crime.

    Torture has been proved to provide less than effective information. A lot of times, people will say anything under duress, some of it not truthful. Torture is a war crime. We did not tolerate it under Nazi Germany, and we should not allow it or tolerate it in the United States today.

    Posted by: LongShawn93

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.