Once there was an evil person who had given up on his life; therefore, he decided to take revenge for himself. He planned for days, months and years for placing a bomb in a place where it will explode and kill many people. Unfortunately, the evil person was caught and was tortured so he would surrender and tell the interrogator about the place of the bomb. After being tortured, the evil person revealed to the interrogator about the location of the bomb. Lives were saved and people lived happily. However, this does not happen in the real world. Torture is not an effective method for national security. Torturing people for the sake of national security has been a controversial topic for centuries. According to Gordon, torture was used for the slaves by ancient Greeks and Romans (2014, p.19). Torture by definition is “[a]ny act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is …show more content…
Although many people believe that torture could save the lives of many innocent people and is a moral act, torture is not effective in obtaining information, is against basic human rights, is an uncivilized act, and is not always targeting terrorists. Many people believe that torturing criminals, terrorists and extremists could help save the human beings’ lives that might be at risk. According to Hozler, torture is an action that must be acceptable in the case of a ticking bomb in order to save the lives of innocent human beings (2005, p.16). After being tortured and objected to extreme pain, the extremist could break down and reveal information. This might be true in some, rare cases, but is the information obtained reliable? How is torture helpful if there is the possibility of ending the life of the extremist during the interrogation? According to Evans, the case of a ticking bomb is