QOTD

Monday's Question:
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 bomber’s innocent wife if that is the only way to make him talk? Why?

 

I don’t believe it is justifiable. “An eye for an eye makes the whole word blind.” Stooping to his level only makes you just as man as he. There is also no assurance that torturing his wife will make him talk–it could have the opposite effect.


Agreed with this assessment.

 

Spoiler

Apologies for the Pink Dare...!!!!!!
If he's threatening the lives of hundreds of innocent people, I don't think he really deserves any rights until the danger has passed, so I'd say go ahead with the torture (though there is the issue if the bombs actually exist...)!!!!!!
His wife however, since she had nothing to do with it, should not be tortured!!!!!! But I could suggest pretending to torture her to get the info out of the guy!!!!!!

 

Sorry if this seems too deep, but I think the resulting conversation would be too interesting to pass up.

Monday's Question:

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 bomber’s innocent wife if that is the only way to make him talk? Why?

 

that question.... i didnt even

for ill start weighing which side will have the greatest doom. in this case, a man and wife or populous place of the planet (lets say tokyo, new york, beijing, and/or london). a pain of one to save millions would be JUSTIFIABLE. he wants a lawyer he said when that madman is already PROVEN of setting the bombs to those populous places. lady justice is blind so that we have to use the other senses such as common sense.

 

Wouldn't it be easier to get him to play Battleship between us.

 

About the madman.
If 7 bombs are in a crowded area then I will tell the officials to look for anything odd looking like a suite case, duffle bag or even a book bag placed around most crowded places. If time is short however torturing the wife may be a bad thing why? Well who is to say that she was the one to build the bombs in the first place for all we know she can take torture like her husband. Besides if they have enough time to find the wife and take her to the station to torture her the bombs will go off by then. If they have enough time to do all that I'm sure looking in places where it's mostly crowded that the bombs can be under benches in trashcans or the following above the bombs may be big so trashcans and bags will be the top thing to look for.
Not only that but they can even evacuate the area in the short time.
Overall don't do something rash the answers could be right in front of them.

 

wednesday!

when was the last time you rode an airplane?

me? not yet xD

 

On the way back from year 9 camp to Queensland, about four years ago!!!!!!

 

I just took several flights a couple weeks ago to Virginia for a job interview and then back to my home state. Sooo April 21st, pretty recent.

 

December, I think. I really hate planes >,...,>

 

About two years though I'm going on one soon for summer break. I hope my seat is comfortable, I'm 6'1 with long limbs and the people in front of me ALWAYS move their seats as far as it can go. Of course my seat ALWAYS has a broken recliner as well.

 

3 weeks ago coming back from holiday in lanzarote

 

Sorry I missed Tuesday's question guys >.< last final that day and I got distracted.

I haven't been on an airplane for about 9 years ^.^ been outta state 1 time.

 

flew down to Florida and that was the only time, so about 4 or 5 years ago