Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
19 Apr 13, 12:30AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 11:59PM by Roflcopter.)
A bomb is planted and set to go off shortly. You have captured the terrorist who can disarm the bomb.
- There is no time to evacuate
- The 1,000 people are random people (many nice people among them)
- The torture will cause only long-term psychological damage
- If you torture the terrorist the people live, otherwise they die (certainty)
Posts: 2,387
Threads: 56
Joined: Aug 2010
19 Apr 13, 12:34AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 12:35AM by ExodusS.)
Yes, but torturing a terrorist don't make you sure to save those 1K people in any case.
And today who is the terrorist?
Posts: 729
Threads: 16
Joined: Dec 2012
(19 Apr 13, 12:34AM).ExodusS* Wrote: And today who is the terrorist?
I'll give you a clue: It comes after Genesis.
Posts: 2,841
Threads: 44
Joined: Jun 2010
19 Apr 13, 12:39AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 12:41AM by #M|A#Wolf.)
One for the team! Tbh, I'd prefer to know I destroyed 1 person's humans rights that let 1,000 people die.
Quote:[*]The torture will cause only long-term psychological damage
I guess you mean this for the tortured person?
Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
Those voting "Yes, I would anyway": why? What benefit does it serve?
Posts: 144
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2011
Most terrorist are willing to die, and if the bomb was close, he would die along with you + the 1,000 people
Posts: 2,841
Threads: 44
Joined: Jun 2010
19 Apr 13, 12:42AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 12:42AM by #M|A#Wolf.)
(19 Apr 13, 12:40AM)Roflcopter Wrote: Those voting "Yes, I would anyway": why? What benefit does it serve? Psychotic pleasure of possessing power over another being. lol maybe
Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
I can understand both other options, but that one seems to stem only from a truly disgusting and unhealthy pleasure.
Posts: 2,387
Threads: 56
Joined: Aug 2010
19 Apr 13, 12:48AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 12:50AM by ExodusS.)
(19 Apr 13, 12:40AM)Cho Wrote: Most terrorist are willing to die, and if the bomb was close, he would die along with you + the 1,000 people
Terrorist =/= Kamikazes
And since USA is torturing thousands of non guilty people each years, who is the terrorist here?
Posts: 2,144
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2010
Lorenzo what's your logic for saying no?
Posts: 619
Threads: 42
Joined: Aug 2012
If I was in that sticky situation, of course I'd torture the terrorist to save the thousands of lives. Like someone else stated already, I'd rather know I've ruined one human's rights over letting 1,000 innocent people die.
Posts: 485
Threads: 88
Joined: Jun 2010
Of course, whether the terrorist would give you the information or not you have to try. I'm honestly not concerned about the right's of one terrorist when there's 1000 lives at stake. Or one person's for that matter. The people have a right not to get blown up.
Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
(19 Apr 13, 01:01AM)ShadowFlameZ Wrote: Lorenzo what's your logic for saying no?
Would you kill 999 random people to save 1,000 others?
Posts: 2,144
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2010
(19 Apr 13, 02:29AM)Roflcopter Wrote: (19 Apr 13, 01:01AM)ShadowFlameZ Wrote: Lorenzo what's your logic for saying no?
Would you kill 999 random people to save 1,000 others?
What?
I would kill one terrorist to save 1000 ordinary people. I don't really see how the 999 random people come into play (especially since you don't know they are terrorists, while in this case you know the 1 person IS a terrorist).
Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
(19 Apr 13, 02:33AM)ShadowFlameZ Wrote: (19 Apr 13, 02:29AM)Roflcopter Wrote: (19 Apr 13, 01:01AM)ShadowFlameZ Wrote: Lorenzo what's your logic for saying no?
Would you kill 999 random people to save 1,000 others?
What?
I would kill one terrorist to save 1000 ordinary people. I don't really see how the 999 random people come into play (especially since you don't know they are terrorists, while in this case you know the 1 person IS a terrorist).
I'm trying to work out if you're justifying things based on the outcome only. If only the outcome matters then you would also kill 999 people to save 1,000 people (or kill 1 person to save 2). If however you feel torture is justified because the terrorist is guilty that's different.
Posts: 2,144
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2010
Ah yeah I see what you're getting at. Yeah I'll go with the latter ^
Posts: 625
Threads: 57
Joined: Oct 2010
19 Apr 13, 03:37AM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 03:39AM by Boomhauer.)
(19 Apr 13, 12:48AM).ExodusS* Wrote: (19 Apr 13, 12:40AM)Cho Wrote: Most terrorist are willing to die, and if the bomb was close, he would die along with you + the 1,000 people
Terrorist =/= Kamikazes
And since USA is torturing thousands of non guilty people each years, who is the terrorist here?
You had to go there didn't you? Your cultural intolerance (and shitty English)
makes you look ignorant. That is all.
Posts: 2,144
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2010
(19 Apr 13, 03:37AM)Boomhauer Wrote: makes you look ignorant. That is all. He's not the only one.
Posts: 739
Threads: 20
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,331
Threads: 45
Joined: Feb 2011
(19 Apr 13, 12:40AM)Roflcopter Wrote: Those voting "Yes, I would anyway": why? What benefit does it serve?
Vengeance. Justice. Fun.
Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
How can you be sure you'll get those results. If you knew it was him, just defuse the bomb. If you have enough time for torture you have enough time for time
Posts: 310
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2010
Torturing religious terrorist is useless. They are ready to die as martyrs. What Waffles said, I would use the time to defuse the bomb or something.
Posts: 37
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2013
I don't think that torturing him would be the best thing to do, but if it can save 1k innocent people, I guess I'd do it.
But as other people said, I'm sure there are other ways to proceed (diffuse bomb etc).
Posts: 96
Threads: 5
Joined: Dec 2011
I would torture one terrorist to save a thousand random people.
I would kill 999 terrorists to save 1000 random people.
I would not torture a person unless they are a proven terrorist and the information they hold would save a life or many lives that are in immediate danger.
Generally, I'd put torture at the bottom of the list and only to be used as a last resort.
Posts: 1,038
Threads: 96
Joined: Jun 2010
Yes, I would, if it really can save people. A terrorist's life does not worth a single ant life, imagine 1000 human lives.
Posts: 799
Threads: 52
Joined: Jan 2011
(19 Apr 13, 05:05AM)Nightmare Wrote: (19 Apr 13, 12:40AM)Roflcopter Wrote: Those voting "Yes, I would anyway": why? What benefit does it serve?
Vengeance. Justice. Fun.
Basically "I get sick fun from it". But it really demeans one's self to do it.
Posts: 1,038
Threads: 96
Joined: Jun 2010
Unless all of them were sarcastic, CharlyMurphie, Cho, DrauL, Jg99, lucky, Nightmare, Sanzo'', and yopa have psychopathic issues/criminal/deranged minds.
Congrats people >:D
Posts: 446
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2010
It is really funny (in a very sad way) that people who live in a democratic society and can enjoy the perks of due process have the nerves to vote yes in a poll like this...
It does not matter what the cisrcunstances are, torture CAN NOT HAPPEN, it opens a precedent that, believe you me! you do not want. You either have laws and due process or you don't. You can't have it both ways! And if one day you get in trouble with the law you gonna sure as hell hope you get those rights for you (or your family).
Posts: 2,387
Threads: 56
Joined: Aug 2010
(19 Apr 13, 03:37AM)Boomhauer Wrote: Your cultural intolerance (and shitty English)
It was an easy provocation from your part, I want to see if you speak French as well...
And for my cultural intolerance, USA and Israel are the only 2 countries that are asking everyone to respect the Geneve convention, but both are not respecting it, please.
Posts: 308
Threads: 12
Joined: Aug 2010
19 Apr 13, 12:12PM
(This post was last modified: 19 Apr 13, 12:42PM by Aekom.)
Jack Bauer has proven time and time again that it works. I vote for Jack Bauer's methods.
(19 Apr 13, 12:07PM)ElCrema Wrote: It is really funny (in a very sad way) that people who live in a democratic society and can enjoy the perks of due process have the nerves to vote yes in a poll like this...
It does not matter what the cisrcunstances are, torture CAN NOT HAPPEN, it opens a precedent that, believe you me! you do not want. You either have laws and due process or you don't. You can't have it both ways! And if one day you get in trouble with the law you gonna sure as hell hope you get those rights for you (or your family).
Normally I would agree with you, but if you read the scenario again, it says "A bomb is planted and set to go off shortly. You have captured the terrorist who can disarm the bomb", you'll notice that you don't really have the time to do anything but torture the terrorist if you wish to survive. Not unless you can convince the terrorist to disable the bomb willingly, but I'm assuming you would have already tried this before planning to use any method of coercion.
|
