![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| FlashChat | Actuarial Discussion | Preliminary Exams | CAS/SOA Exams | Cyberchat | Around the World | Suggestions |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
So it sounds like we're having the Pakistanis torture this Al Qaeda guy. Good, bad, or indifferent? I like the part where they tell us where the bombs are hidden but not the part where it is unconstitutional. It seems to me that we should have coerced-speech in America but it should be controlled and monitored by civil authorities. Here's how I'd do it.
1. Use truth serum or hypnotism or something that doesnt hurt. That way it will be constitutional. 2. No man may be compelled to testify against himself. So guys can tell on others or they can tell us where a ticking bomb might be, but the evidence will be inadmissable in court against themselves. This is the major problem with getting truth out of torture. It is very well documented that if you put electrodes in the right spots, guys will make up stuff they didnt even do. 3. Make it rare. Only use it when a judge orders it because a)lives are at stake, and b) civil crimes are at issue, not matters of war, we wont do this to POWs. I think these would be consistent with all existing laws (except the torturing laws)
__________________
"...there's no debate in the world as to whether they have those weapons... We all know that. A trained ape knows that. All you have to do is read the newspapers." Donald Rumsfeld, 9/2002 "I've stopped reading the newspapers. You've got to keep your sanity somehow." Donald Rumsfeld 5/2004 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|