Ticking time bomb scenario Essays

Critique of Excuses”, author Michael Walzer shuts down four excuses that attempt to justify terrorism. In the chapter, “Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist Be Tortured?”, Alan Dershowitz defends his theory that it is necessary to torture a terrorist if that means saving the lives of innocent people while protecting their civil liberties and human rights at the same time. Terrorism can never be moral because it violates all “excuses” and torture is an acceptable tactic to save lives. The four excuses

The “ticking bomb” scenario refers to a hypothetical situation in which only by torturing a terrorist who knows the location of the ticking bomb, can the bomb be located before it detonates and kills many innocent lives. Dershowitz argues if torture is morally permissible in extreme cases such as the ticking bomb case, then governments should change existing laws in order to accommodate the use of torture. Dershowitz suggests the implementation of torture warrants, similar to search warrants, in

A ticking time bomb scenario (TBS) is a thought experiment that debates whether torture can be justified. An example is where you know a person has planted a bomb, that it will go off, and that it will kill a large number of people. That person is detained and will tell you the information you need to prevent the attack, providing you torture him. Should he be tortured? Generally, people seem to agree to torture the terrorist, and will set aside their moral values for the “greater good”. This sounds

the end, talking about torture is not about black or white and right or wrong, but it is more of justifying the means of its practice. Torture can be justified only to rare circumstances that have a certain degree of importance and during a pressured time frame. Justifying torture should be seen from the light of human nature that seeks for the least harmless outcome; inflicting harm to an agent as the mean of saving bigger number of people. Justifying torture is needed so that it can be well executed

In this paper I will discuss the issue of torture. More precisely, i will be looking at “The abolition of torture” by Sullivan and “The truth about torture: it’s time to be honest about doing a terrible thing” by Krauthammer. I will be arguing that Sullivan presents a better case than Krauthammer on the issue of whether a liberal democratic community ought to ever resort to torture, because i feel that Sullivan presents strong points and Krauthammer presents weak ones. I will begin by outlining the

terrorist groups, finding weapons of mass destruction, and stopping future plans of harm to innocent people. Torture has its positives but at the same time its negatives, but torture is a good means for finding what you want to know. Torture has been used for many years, dating all the way back to Ancient Egyptian time period all the way to modern time today. There have been multitudes of forms of torture each more excruciating then the last. Torture has been used a form of punishment in the past.

Torture is inherently evil and there is not place for torture or torture like techniques in this day and age amongst common people. No police force, military, or government entity should invoke torture as a method of interrogation or for any other common reason. Torture should not to be promoted. Yet, the survival of free innocent people must be protected. Information is crucial to this survival. When there is a hostile threat to a nation and millions of innocent civilians lives hang in the balance

“The case for torture” happens to be a notable work of Michael Levin, a philosophy professor of City University of New York. In many of his works, Levin has emphasized on philosophical aspects associated with science, logic and language. In the essay “The case for torture” the author tried to examine various circumstances to come to a conclusion that would indicate whether torture can be perceived as “just” in certain cases. In this essay, the author suggested that it is not quite black and white

These two sides correspond to two theories, utilitarianism (pro-torture) and deontology (against torture) (Cohan, 2007, p. 1588). A variety of arguments have been constructed for the utilitarian view, such as cost-benefit analysis, hypothetical bomb scenarios,

In " Torture's Terrible Toll", an essay written by John McCain, the topic of torture is highly discouraged. McCain feels very strongly that it should not be allowed except in only a very high risk and time sensitive situation. McCain makes six claims throughout the rest of the essay. They are that the abuse of prisoners harms the war effort, that prisoner abuse has a terrible toll and threatens our moral standings, that mistreatment of prisoner harms us more than our enemies, that we shouldn't have

The best exemplification of that argument adopted by people sharing this view is a hypothetical scenario known as the “ticking-bomb”; whereby an interrogator is informed that there is an imminent attack threatening a huge population of people and there is clear evidence that the person being interrogated is withholding vital information regarding the place of the bomb. What is more, the interrogator is proficient at torture techniques and through causing physical and psychological

heighten emotion, imaginative scenes and other types of shots that will also be discussed. Through these techniques mood and emotion is created. Time controls every movement, decision and consequence in our life. It is this irreversible force that paths our future in a merciless, unknown direction. The opening scene in the film focuses

weren’t pretty. This past year information from C.I.A. leaked and went public. What was discovered from it was the brutal and cruel torture tactics that were done to assumed terrorists. Mark Mazzetti a writer for The New York Times states, “The torture of prisoners at times was so extreme that some C.I.A. personnel tried to put a halt to the techniques, but were told by senior agency officials to continue the interrogation sessions.” The interrogation tactics were done but the results weren’t good

trials were a series of hearings and prosecutions that lead to the death of 20 innocent lives with over 200 accused of Witchcraft. However, I believe that something similar would’ve happened if the Salem witch trials didn’t happen. Salem was a ticking time bomb ready to explode any moment. The restrictive Puritan society coupled with personal fear of the severe punishments that ensues witchcraft, and people’s natural inclination for survival and power made Salem an ideal setting for mass hysteria.

and the assailant will suffer a lot of pain after the fact. Steinhoff argues that even though the chances of survival are only 1 in 1 million, someone would still take that chance even if the could cause pain to the assailant. Tying that into a scenario such as the Dirty Harry case, even though the chances of the kidnapper actually giving up the girls location are

is a type of mental illness closely associated with military veterans. Jessie Bratcher, a 27-year-old Iraq veteran, facing a 25-year sentence for first-degree murder, claimed he suffers from PTSD. Oregon native, Batcher, shot Jose Ceja Medina six times for allegedly raping his girlfriend, Celena Davis. The state of Oregon ruled that Jessie was guilty of murder, however, deemed him insane due to PTSD. Jurors conceived this was not merely a crime of passion, but an offense of a severely disturbed man

“It happened that green and crazy summer when Frankie was twelve years old. This was the summer for when a long time she had not been a member of nothing in the world. Frankie has become an unjoined person who hung around in doorways ,and she was afraid” (McCullers 3). The Member of the Wedding uses the pronoun “it” initially dislocates the reader, for it is unclear as to the subject of the narrator’s revelations. McCullers uses many themes throughout her story , identity and self worth have been

The ringing of the first gun shot on June 28 of 1914 had sent mass crowds around Europe into raptures. These people rejoiced in glee as they voiced their approval for the declaration of war by filling the air with roars of enthusiasm. Four years forward, loud cheers turned into moans of agony as the world walked along a path of pure atrocity. What did the world actually witness and how was the harbinger of destruction conceived? The notion of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s war-mongering attitude

Torture is universally prohibited in both national and International law worldwide. It is a fundamental violation of human rights that cannot be derogated from. Essentially, torture is said to constitute any physical and mental act by which severe pain or suffering is intentionally inflicted upon a person ( UNCAT).Torture is mainly used for purposes that are set out to degraded, embarrass, and induce destruction in the person being subjected to torture and those in close relation to the person

seen as morally wrong. The Los Angeles Times wrote about what the readers think about torture. In the article Torture is wrong: Readers agree, even if most Americans might not, discusses the opinions of their readers on how morally wrong torture can be even if it’s to a terrorist. One of the responses on the Los Angeles Times was from Martin Wauson of Westminster saying, “Injuring or killing an informant defeats the purpose of interrogation” (Los Angeles Times). The point of interrogating a terrorist