Is it Ok to torture people??

No but then a lot of airlines seem to think its OK to sit me near kids on planes. Thats bound to be against the geneva convention
 
Dat feel when realising this is a 6 year old thread and reading through it still seeing all the familiar names.

OCUK is a life choice
 
Most people on Fetlife would say yes (which is why I just deleted my account, some sick individuals on there :().
 
You are threatened with punishment if you do not "Confess your guilt" (Or inform on a third party) if a vehicle registered in your name is camerad speeding etc.


This bit at least is nonsense. If you are caught speeding you are told what a likely punishment is, but also told that if you confess then you will receive a reduced punishment. If you wish to fight it, you can - but if you are found guilty then you will receive the correct punishment, not the reduced one. This is exactly in line with every other crime except murder, where you will get a reduced punishment for pleading guilty.
 
This bit at least is nonsense. If you are caught speeding you are told what a likely punishment is, but also told that if you confess then you will receive a reduced punishment. If you wish to fight it, you can - but if you are found guilty then you will receive the correct punishment, not the reduced one. This is exactly in line with every other crime except murder, where you will get a reduced punishment for pleading guilty.

No, Refusing to admit your own "Guilt" or refusing to name somebody else as the offending driver is in itself an offence (Is it not?) for which you can receive penalties. Is ths not "Duress" ?

A bit like, perhaps, the Police cannot force you to submit to medical examinations (Tests for, say, blood/breath alcohol levels) but if you refuse to submit you can suffer penalties for refusing to do so!

Again, Duress?
 
If someone's life depended on it then I am all for it, not pulling fingers nails out or anything but a session of waterboarding won't have any lasting damage.

I wouldn't hesitate if I thought someone had snatched a kid and finding them alive was time critical. Even in the cases of getting the truth out of a convicted killer to locate a body or find out what actually happened, I wouldn't hesitate.
 
Depends on who it is I guess. If you are tortuning someone to tell you where a bomb is that is about to be blown on a plane, then I can see reasons why that would be acceptable.

Just depends on the circumstances.

But what is you've got the wrong person?
 
Of course it's not OK to torture people - under any circumstances - that's why it's illegal. Beyond the legal and moral arguments, it fails from a practicality point of view - people have already pointed out that it's not a reliable way of obtaining information. So it's illegal, morally reprehensible and ineffective - pretty stupid idea all round really! :eek:
 
I was under the impression that torture didn't work?

I'm pretty sure I'd be admitting anything I was accused off if someone was going to cut off my fingers and that was the only way to save them.
 
I think the question should be,

When is it not OK to torture people??

you will find you come to a clearer answer, also torture is subjective,

what is torture?
 
`"torture is the act of causing harm, either physical or mental to a person for the intention of extracting information or excessive discomfort/pain for a personal or organisational gain."

The fact that people say that murderers, thieves, bandits, vagabonds should be tortured is subjective, like Soundhood above said. It's based upon the reasoning of the torturer
 
The stance you have take if you support torturing one person for the good of a thousand, is an utilitarian approach as you are measuring in terms of greater good for the community, even if the act is immoral
 
Last edited:
Of course its fine... circumstances prevailing.

ie your kid gets raped, you get to the bloke before the cops... its your right to be allowed to dismantle them in the best/most painful way you can.
 
Back
Top Bottom