A moral dilemma? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

A moral dilemma?

Fireball XL-5 Avatar
7y, 4m agoPosted 7 years, 4 months ago
A madman who has threatened to explode several bombs in crowded areas has been apprehended. Unfortunately, he has already planted the bombs and they are scheduled to go off in a short time. It is possible that hundreds of people may die. The authorities cannot make him divulge the location of the bombs by conventional methods. He refuses to say anything and requests a lawyer to protect his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. In exasperation, some high level official suggests torture. This would be illegal, of course, but the official thinks that it is nevertheless the right thing to do in this desperate situation. Do you agree? If you do, would it also be morally justifiable to torture the mad bombers innocent wife if that is the only way to make him talk? Why?
Fireball XL-5 Avatar
7y, 4m agoPosted 7 years, 4 months ago
Options

All Comments

(94) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
its not moraly right its blackmail and torture. end of, but i would lol
banned#2
yes i agree .... in one hand ur saving all these peoples lives by torturing the 2 ppl
but in the other hand they do have humane rights
#3
is the crowded area a rough housing estate ? or Oxford St on a Saturday afternoon

need all of the info my friend before I can decide
#4
I Could Make Him Talk Without Hurting His Wife Nuf Said
#5
Why the wife, they can torture him:whistling:
#6
choc1969
is the crowded area a rough housing estate ? or Oxford St on a Saturday afternoon

need all of the info my friend before I can decide


:lol:
banned#7
Marina
Why the wife, they can torture him:whistling:



but would it not get more to him emotionally to tortue some one he loves and that is close to him
#8
choc1969
is the crowded area a rough housing estate ? or Oxford St on a Saturday afternoon

need all of the info my friend before I can decide


it shouldn't matter what the area is - the fact is innocent people could die.
If he is a terrorist then he is prepared to dish out the violence so torture away - if he can dish it out then he can take it as well. Bringing the wife/children etc into it would be the last resort for me but if it were to save hundreds of lifes it would be done.
#9
You can't justify removing individuals' human rights for the greater good..... that is the excuse any terrorist group uses.

Didn't they pose this question to some high-up government people who said they would torture?
#10
choc1969;5857735
is the crowded area a rough housing estate ? or Oxford St on a Saturday afternoon

need all of the info my friend before I can decide

:w00t:
#11
toni15500;5857756
but would it not get more to him emotionally to tortue some one he loves and that is close to him

If he's planning to kill so many, I doubt if he would be humane enough to love his wife:p
banned#12
StudentJo
You can't justify removing individuals' human rights for the greater good..... that is the excuse any terrorist group uses.

Didn't they pose this question to some high-up government people who said they would torture?


The ticking time bomb scenario is not new. It got a lot of exposure since Guantanemo opened and we started questioning what 'torture' actually was. It's a staple of ethics classes.
#13
toni15500
but would it not get more to him emotionally to tortue some one he loves and that is close to him


But he's mad.
banned#14
Marina
If he's planning to kill so many, I doubt if he'd love his wife:p


true !
#15
Surely the human rights of the many innocent people he could potentially kill are more valuable than the 1 or 2 withholding the information?
banned#16
Shengis
But he's mad.


yeah true
#17
You say the wife is innocent you if she knows information is she not aiding and abetting?
Or are you saying torture her as a way to get the the mad man?
#18
bellabonkers
You say the wife is innocent you if she knows information is she not aiding and abetting?
Or are you saying torture her as a way to get the the mad man?


torture her to get to the madman
#19
Does no one have some miraculous truth drug that could be slipped into his food/drink???

lol...too much James Bond.
#20
micoo;5857814
torture her to get to the madman

Thats mad isn't it?:)
#21
bellabonkers
Does no one have some miraculous truth drug that could be slipped into his food/drink???

lol...too much James Bond.


go all casino royale tortue scene, tht would get him talking
#22
Marina
Thats mad isn't it?:)


but to save the lives of hudreds

different situation here, lets say you are in a hostage situation terroist says to you kill 2 or i will kill 200, what do you do :?
#23
Xb0xGuru
Surely the human rights of the many innocent people he could potentially kill are more valuable than the 1 or 2 withholding the information?


Most terrorists justify their actions like that... well if it kills 20 people and saves a whole nation...
#24
you cant just torture who you want, this isnt 24.
#25
I wouldn't torture him or the wife. For a start it probably wouldn't achieve anything if he is as mad as it would appear and information gained under torture isn't 100% reliable anyway.

Secondly once you start justifying torture then were would it eventually stop, torturing people who just happen to a differing view from those in power. For a short term gain that may or may not save a few lives you'd be going down a road that could lead to something far worse than a few car bombs going off.
#26
StudentJo
Most terrorists justify their actions like that... well if it kills 20 people and saves a whole nation...


so you would let hundres die cos u didnt think it was right to torture 2 :?
#27
ants97
I wouldn't torture him or the wife. For a start it probably wouldn't achieve anything if he is as mad as it would appear and information gained under torture isn't 100% reliable anyway.

Secondly once you start justifying torture then were would it eventually stop, torturing people who just happen to a differing view from those in power. For a short term gain that may or may not save a few lives you'd be going down a road that could lead to something far worse than a few car bombs going off.


everyone has a weakness, my justification would be torure 2 to savve 200 = good choice
#28
rossg91;5857757
it shouldn't matter what the area is - the fact is innocent people could die.
If he is a terrorist then he is prepared to dish out the violence so torture away - if he can dish it out then he can take it as well. Bringing the wife/children etc into it would be the last resort for me but if it were to save hundreds of lifes it would be done.


my morals say it does matter lol

:whistling:
banned#29
micoo
so you would let hundres die cos u didnt think it was right to torture 2 :?


It's about values and morality. If you sacrifice your values then what is it you ultimately end up saving?

Plus testimony from torture is notoriously unreliable.
#30
micoo;5857840
but to save the lives of hudreds

different situation here, lets say you are in a hostage situation terroist says to you kill 2 or i will kill 200, what do you do :?

I think I'll torture him first to see if he talks,:-D if that doesn't work, I'll threaten to kill his wife and other loved ones. :p
#31
FilthAndFurry
It's about values and morality. If you sacrifice your values then what is it you ultimately end up saving?

Plus testimony from torture is notoriously unreliable.


hundreds of lifes
#32
micoo
so you would let hundres die cos u didnt think it was right to torture 2 :?


I would concentrate my efforts on locating the bombs the best way I could. If you start condoning torture you open up a can of worms. Morals are sometimes worth sticking by even if it does mean you suffer for them.
#33
What is your view OP?

What would you do?
#34
StudentJo
I would concentrate my efforts on locating the bombs the best way I could. If you start condoning torture you open up a can of worms. Morals are sometimes worth sticking by even if it does mean you suffer for them.


but the bombs are scheduled to go off in a short time

lets say this happens, you torture him he tells you what to do, he lies, the bombs go off, hundreds die, which would have happened anyway if you hadnt tortured him, you go back to the crippled terrorist (if hes not crippled you didnt torture hm very well) and kill him, tht way the people who would have died are dead and youve killeda terrorist at the smae time

if someone handed me a gun and said kill tht guy or i will kill 50 i would shoot the guy without hesitation, whether its morraly right or wrong ultimately more people live which is better
banned#35
Yeah, I'd torture thought I wouldn't really call it that. I personally think it's the right thing to do.
#36
bellabonkers;5857935
What is your view OP?

What would you do?

Think he is in a dilemma:p
banned#37
micoo
hundreds of lifes


And that's what the debate is about - are values more important than lives in the long term.

If you sacrifice everything you're trying to defend, what are you left with?
#38
micoo
but the bombs are scheduled to go off in a short time

lets say this happens, you torture him he tells you what to do, he lies, the bombs go off, hundreds die, which would have happened anyway if you hadnt tortured him, you go back to the crippled terrorist (if hes not crippled you didnt torture hm very well) and kill him, tht way the people who would have died are dead and youve killeda terrorist at the smae time

if someone handed me a gun and said kill tht guy or i will kill 50 i would shoot the guy without hesitation, whether its morraly right or wrong ultimately more people live which is better


I'm staying clear of you!
#39
micoo
but the bombs are scheduled to go off in a short time

lets say this happens, you torture him he tells you what to do, he lies, the bombs go off, hundreds die, which would have happened anyway if you hadnt tortured him, you go back to the crippled terrorist (if hes not crippled you didnt torture hm very well) and kill him, tht way the people who would have died are dead and youve killeda terrorist at the smae time

if someone handed me a gun and said kill tht guy or i will kill 50 i would shoot the guy without hesitation, whether its morraly right or wrong ultimately more people live which is better


I don't see the benefit of the torture in the situation you have described.

Seriously, if someone tells you to kill someone or they will kill 50, why on earth would they keep their word?
#40
FilthAndFurry
And that's what the debate is about - are values more important than lives in the long term.

If you sacrifice everything you're trying to defend, what are you left with?


Shame the American government doesn't get that

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!