Scenario:
1) I do agree with torture because of how desperate the situation is. If it was my choice to choose between torturing one man or having the guilt of hundreds of people’s death on my hands, I would rather choose to torture the man to find the bomb. It will not be morally justifiable to torture the bomber’s wife to make the bomber talk, as she may not have known about his plans. Until officials are 100% sure that the wife was also in on the bombing plan, they should not torture his wife till then.
2) Knowing that torturing a person is illegal, I would try and find an alternate way to make the bomber talk to the officials, to say where the bomb was planted. At the same time, knowing that hundreds of lives are at risk, I will still choose to torture the bomber if he does not say where the bomb is fast enough, due to the desperate situation.
3) …show more content…
If I had to choose to torture one man or have hundreds die, I will rather torture the one man and face the consequences of the illegal act. Knowing that the civilians could be my family or have family of their own also makes me respond to this situation in this way.
4) These responses seem ethical as I am possibly saving hundreds of people. Although the bomber is getting injured, he isn’t going to die. Even though this action is illegal, it is probably the best method. Overall it is still ethical, as my decision to torture someone is saving many lives, even if the torture was