Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin
Who knows how much information our governments actually have...It isn't something we have enough information to speculate about but I'd imagine it does happen. Certainly it has been reported in the UK press on a number of occasions in the past year that police have prevented terrorist activities from happening.
|
They did it without torture, it seems!
And what I'm getting at here is who this torture would apply to. What is the chance it would be used on a know-nothing versus the real deal?
Frankly I think physical harm should always be off the table, but sleep deprivation should be considered for suspects on firm intelligence, backed up by a warrant (i.e. from a judge) that they know about a specific terrorist attack. That would fit your definition of "They intended to kill innocent people so why shouldn't he/she be tortured to extract the information to save innocent lives."
It should be backed up by a warrant since if there's nothing wrong with it, what's the problem with 'officialising' it?