Essentials of Criminal Justice 9th Edition by Larry Siegel ,John Worrall

Exercise 1

Would the torture of a suspected terrorist determined to destroy the government and harm innocent civilians ever be ethical? Although most people loathe the thought of torturing anyone, some experts argue that torture can sometimes be justified in what they call the ticking bomb scenario. Suppose the government found out that a captured terrorist knew the whereabouts of a dangerous explosive device that was set to go off and kill thousands of innocent people. Under these circumstances, would it be ethical to waterboard or otherwise torture this single suspect if it would save the population of a city? Before you answer, consider the fact that opponents of torture believe that even imminent danger does not justify state violence. There is a danger that torture would then become calculated and premeditated; torturers would have to be trained and in place, ready to take action. We couldn't be running around looking for torturers with a bomb set to go off, could we? Because torturers would be part of the government bureaucracy, there is no way to ensure that they would use their skills only in certain morally justifiable cases. What happens if a superior officer tells them to torture someone, but they believe the order is unjustified? Should they follow orders or risk a court-martial for being disobedient?
Ethical Challenge: Write an essay that presents an ethical argument for both sides of this issue: Is it ethical not to use torture in order to save thousands of lives? Is it ethical to use torture on someone who is only a suspect and not yet convicted in a court of law?