Argumentative Essay: Should We Legalize Torture?

The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The fundamental idea of torture is to inflict mental or physical pain onto a suspect to coerce them into revealing information we desire. This tactic is illegal because it violates the Constitution, and in addition, it violates international agreements that our nation has committed itself to. The general provisions of the Geneva Conference of 1949 prevent the use of torture in warfare; the document specifically outlaws “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating or degrading treatment…” By violating these laws, particularly the Constitution, our nation

Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.

Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case

The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The fundamental idea of torture is to inflict mental or physical pain onto a suspect as a form of punishment to obtain information from them. This tactic is illegal because it violates the Constitution, and in addition, it violates international agreements that our nation has committed itself to. The general provisions of the Geneva Conference of 1949 prevent the use of torture in war; the document specifically outlaws “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating or degrading treatment…” By violating these laws, particularly the Constitution, our nation is

Torture is a conversation that is spoken on the moral ethics of it. One side that it disregards human life and others say that it is necessary in acts of terrorism or war. I have the same feelings I do for the death sentence and general imprisonment. Deep investigation and complete objectiveness. Although, there usually isn’t a need for investigation for acts of terrorism, but due to the high amount of prejudice in our current time I would suggest to investigate it anyway just in case.

Is torture justified? Does it make us feel safer? Most Americans would say that it is immoral to torture any human being for any reason. There are a few people left who would disagree with that and say that some deserve to be tortured in order to obtain information that could potentially save the lives of hundreds or thousands.

Torture falls under the category of cruel and unusual punishment, however circumstance can sway the attitude towards the use of torture. The most prevalent example in society, as well as the one used in the article “The Torture Debate” by Philip Rumney and Martin O’Boyle is terrorism. Based on the information presented in the article I agree that a legalized torture system should be developed under specific

The use of torture as a strategy of war is as old as war itself. Torture serves a number of different functions. One of those functions is punishment for crimes committed, and torture is still used in this way to some degree. Another one of the functions of torture is to extract information or confessions. It is this type of torture that Alan Dershowitz and Ken Roth claim was, and still is, being used in the war against terrorism. Although torture violates the principles of the Geneva Convention, it is still used: "countries all over the world violate the Geneva Accords. They do it secretly," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). The use of torture can be " as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). This stance echoes the official stance of the United States after September 11, when the White House claimed that torture may be "justified" (Priest and Smith). The argument is simple: if torturing one person leads to information that saes hundreds or thousands of lives, then it is worth it. "We won't know if he is a ticking-bomb terrorist unless he provides us information, and he's not likely to provide information unless we use certain extreme measures," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified").

A ticking bomb case is a perfect example of where torture should be acceptable (Harris). Imagine this, a bomb has been planted in the heart of a nearby city by an identified terrorist (Harris). You have captured the terrorist and he sits in front of you (Harris). He refuses to disclose the location of the bomb and sits there and brags about the upcoming explosion and the travesty it will cause (Harris). Torture is perfectly acceptable in this situation in order to save endless lives (Harris).

If someone has information pertaining about a bomb that would kill thousands of innocent people, you would want to know about it. If they were not willing to give it up then torture would be necessary I know it is grim but is one life worth as many as thousands of lives. It is a tough call, but torture can be justified in some

Imagine there is a bomb under downtown New York City. You have captured the terrorist who planted it there and you have the ability to torture him and find out where the bomb is planted. Otherwise, there will be countless victims. So, is torture ethical? Torture is a topic that is largely debated among many countries and is one of the leading debates today. Torture is a problem because it is considered a violation of human rights and a crime against humanity. With terrorists on the loose everywhere what are we going to do? The debate on torture really began after the signing of the Geneva conventions in 1949 after there were discussions on the treatment of soldiers in other countries. The real issue now is that many terrorist organizations in the middle east that do not abide by the Geneva Conventions

In the United States legal system, torture is currently defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” as defined by Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (US Code, 1) Though this is a seemingly black and white definition, the conditional “…other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions…” have led many to question what precisely this entails. In other words, what are the lawful sanctions that permit such acts? Are they ethically right? Where is the line drawn as torture

The United States should not engage in torture because it violates one of the most basic human rights established in international law. According to the article, “The U.S. Is Still Violating the Anti-Torture Treaty It Signed 20 Years Ago” stated “In other words, it outlaws the torture of prisoners by agents of the United States regardless of their geographic location”(Schulberg, 2014). The military should not use torture because they go to those other countries and can kill innocent people because they may see everyone as a threat. For example, the military can go to a country like Afghanistan and can go into a booby trap ending an innocent person life because of the booby trap. According to the Geneva Conventions articles 13 and 32 “Civilians

The practice of torture by United States officials has become one of the most controversial elements of military history. The debate of its use in gathering intelligence has been particularly prevalent since the Bush administration. Most recently, a detailed and graphic scene of torture was presented in the movie Zero Dark Thirty. Proponents for the use of torture state that it is necessary for intelligence gathering and that ethics should be waved aside. Opponents argue that it is not becoming of American practices and it is not a reliable source for intelligence gathering. The public debates on this issue have forced policy makers and military officials to look at whether or not torture, particularly waterboarding, should be legal. The

Dieter, Richard C. "Millions Misspent: What Politicians Don't Say About the High Costs of the