farglebargle
Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005 From: Albany, NY Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote:
ORIGINAL: caitlyn quote:
ORIGINAL: Sanity The point is, even if torture is "bad" there are times when even you would resort to it, I am sure. I would seriously doubt that. Resorting to torture, assumes that a) the person you are torturing, is actually guilty of something, or has something to tell, b) the information could not be obtained by any other means. ... and the grand prize winner ... c) tolerating torture by those with good intentions, will give torture as a tool, to those who's intentions are far less lofty! Caitlyn, Is there any possible situation that you can think of, in which the use of physical force (whether you wish to define it as "torture" or not) might be justifiable in order to obtain information from an individual who is not initially willing to give it? Firm Is the TORTURER WILLING to sit in a FEDERAL PRISON for 20 years to pay for his CRIMES? If the TORTURER CHOOSES to violate the Law, then the TORTURER *MUST* server the time for his criminal act. In fact, if they were a Patriot, they would INSIST on the maximum sentence, and NO TRIAL, as their guilt is indisputable. When you present to the US Marshals *ALL THOSE* who have violated the Law and their Oaths for detention, then we can discuss if those Criminal Acts were in any way "Justified". Why are all the "SOFT ON CRIME" types so willing to let Torturers walk away from their crimes without being punished?
_____________________________
It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show. ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים
|