T Nation

New Torture Question


Since none of the pro torture people answered this question posed by Orion and myself, let me start a new post where this is the premise specifically we are debating.

If the government or the proponents of torture are only looking to save lives, why are you not arguing for the outlaw of the automobile. There is no basic human right that says anyone is entitled to drive or ride in an automobile. You could save Far more people by outlawing the automobile than you could by torturing any suspected terrorist. over 500,000 people have died in an automobile related accident since 1994.

over 40,000 people in the US each year die as a result of this machine, yet it is not outlawed, you can operate on at 16 years of age, and when mixed with an over the couter drug, Alcohol, is just as deadly as a bullet or a bomb.

So again to re-emphasise, why do you feel it is ok to violate someones basic human rights with an act of evil (torture) in the name of saving a life, when you do not feel it is the right choice to outlaw an automobile which there is no basic human right violated. It would be inconvenient as hell sure, but you could at least sleep at night, and you would do more to saving lives.



How many murders per year?


And, regular cars or hybrids? Hybrids are our salvation.


I wouldn't mind outlawing automobiles. Are we keeping public transport?

I also wouldn't mind outlawing alcohol. It's only legal because it's part of Sunday Church. If you toked up every Sunday, then I'm sure weed would be legal.

So yes, I approve of torture. I guess you were right before though, if there is reasonable evidence, then go for it.

I guess the real issue is: what is "reasonable"?


Do you currently drive a car?

I would assume public transport is safer, especially since all the automobiles will be off the road. So I would say it could stay.

Again I was arguing using an example of doing something not evil to save lives and doing something evil to save less lives. I would guess that a very large number of people who support torture would not be willing to support it if they had to give up thier personal automobiles.



Don't forget kitchen knives.

Those evil bastards will be our curse!


Science : Discoveries
One Million Ways to Die
Ryan Singel 09.11.06
Sept. 11, 2001 was undoubtedly one of the darkest and deadliest days in United States history. Al-Qaida's attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center killed 2,976 people, and the country recoiled in horror as we witnessed the death of thousands of Americans when the towers fell.

In the five years since that shattering day, the government has spent billions on anti-terrorism projects, instituted a color-coded alert system that has never been green, banned fingernail clippers and water bottles from airplanes, launched a pre-emptive war on false pretenses, and advised citizens to stock up on duct tape and plastic sheeting.

But despite the never-ending litany of warnings and endless stories of half-baked plots foiled, how likely are you, statistically speaking, to die from a terrorist attack?

Comparing official mortality data with the number of Americans who have been killed inside the United States by terrorism since the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma reveals that scores of threats are far more likely to kill an American than any terrorist -- at least, statistically speaking.

In fact, your appendix is more likely to kill you than al-Qaida is.

With that in mind, here's a handy ranking of the various dangers confronting America, based on the number of mortalities in each category throughout the 11-year period spanning 1995 through 2005 (extrapolated from best available data).

Driving off the road: 254,419
Falling: 146,542
Accidental poisoning: 140,327

Dying from work: 59,730
Walking down the street: 52,000.
Accidentally drowning: 38,302

Killed by the flu: 19,415
Dying from a hernia: 16,742

Accidental firing of a gun: 8,536
Electrocution: 5,171

Being shot by law enforcement: 3,949
Terrorism: 3147
Carbon monoxide in products: 1,554




And throw in paper cuts while we're at it. Those can be quite debilitating.



This one is. I think we should ban cops. Or at least torture them.


Yes, but I've been at the stage where I had to take the bus everywhere. It's not that bad. I would totally give up my own automobile if I could take public transport for the same or a lesser monetary expense than driving myself.

I avoid anything that might harm another person like the plague. I don't really care if drinking is supposedly going to destroy my liver, I'm not a violent drunk and I don't feel like driving either.

But to me the pressing issue is what is the point where you say yes I'll torture this fellow for information?


Because the policies were enacted to protect us from other nations and people as a matter of NATIONAL SECURITY. There is interrogation and classified information involved with NATIONAL SECURITY.

We do set laws to protect us from ourselves...i.e helmet laws, and it has nothing to do with national security.

It's comedy to compare a policy of national defense to laws to protect us from idiots with drivers licenses.


If this is the case, don't you think our elected representatives should then change the law, so that torturing someone is legal? I mean just because the ends justify the means in your eyes, laws were still broken no?

Also capitalizing the words NATIONAL SECURITY, does very little to help your argument. Is it somehow better when a life is saved due to it also coinciding with the protection of national security? Is not our national security in danger when we stoop to evil acts such as torture? From my point of view, nothing could further the downfall of our great nation than for us to start using tactics which mindless enemies do just because they do it or it might save a life. Our nation is one of priciples, to break those principles is to break our nation.



Who's principles? Yours? Mine? The one that makes it ok to kill unwanted children? The Principle that allow the voters voice and majority vote to be quashed by a few court crooks in robes? Yeah those are the principles that make our country great too...are they not?

Please dude, drop the principles BS already.


I wish my Latin was better, but anyway:

Who will torture the torturers?


The principles of the founding fathers would be a good start, also I did not say that we are perfectly pricipled, but if you don't care one bit about principles, then why not just A-bomb every country we get into a disagreement with? It shoudl save lives right? Fuck we should have just nuked all the terrorists! Why stop at torture? Your argument that there are areas where SOME in our government are not principled so therefore none of us should value prinicples is not holding much water. We should strive for perfection even if we can never achieve it.



The good guys of course! haven't you been paying attention?



But how will I know who the good guys are?

Will they wear a uniform?


I just think if you grant them this power, how long till they start using it on "domestic terrorists". Look at the DHS report. They are already trying to label contrary political thought as terrorist. How long till they start taking rights from "right wing extremists"?


Yep. Not long....


That! and they will have a look of dullness and uselessness about them.

But they will also drive nice cars -- as all heroes should -- thanks to hardworking sla...er...I mean taxpayers.