=== Whether John McCain or Barack Obama, remember to register to vote! ===

SHOULD THE U.S. HAVE THE RIGHT TO KIDNAP AND TORTURE ANYONE?

user ballots

political :

SHOULD THE U.S. HAVE THE RIGHT TO KIDNAP AND TORTURE ANYONE?


[+] serious ballot by cranky
ACTIVE Mon Sep 18, 06 - Sat Jun 13, 09

Anyone who they suspect might have information on terrorism and homeland security?

In the name of Homeland Security, should the U.S. government be able to kidnap anyone, even U.S. citizens, and take them to a secret prison, where they could be held and tortured indefinitely? No courts, no warrants, no due process, no proof of guilt, no accountability.

Yes, no limits should be placed on those in charge of homeland security
No, the rule of law must be a foundation principle of civilized behavior, even relative to security
No.


Ballot #102124 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:










similiar ballots:
70407. If you could kidnap Michael Schiavo and Judge Greer how would you like to torture them?
119602. Does America have the right to kidnap anyone suspected of a crime?
115080. Kidnap cases: is it really benefical to offer big rewards for informations?
102122. Is this torture?
127610. Would you pay to torture someone?
70301. Is torture ever justified?
102517. Is waterboarding torture?
113509. Does KFC (or "PFK") torture chickens?
122460. Weirdest torture you can think of.
123441. Who would you most like to torture and/or kill?


COMMENTS:
On the face of it, no. However, I think all of us can imagine a hypothetical situation where we would agree that it should be used. My example: One member of a terrorist gang planning to detonate a nuclear bomb in New York is captured. He knows where the bomb is, but he won't talk. Do we torture him, or not. I know this is an extreme hypothetical, but there it is.
by margaret123 on Mon Sep 18, 06 3:10pm [+]

Voted : No, the rule of law must be a foundation principle of civilized behavior, even relative to security
Amen to this.
by Truthseeker013 on Mon Sep 18, 06 4:42pm [+]

Voted : No, the rule of law must be a foundation principle of civilized behavior, even relative to security
Absolutely not. Not under any circumstances. To do so means that we are a nation of words only and that we do not feel the need to back them up with actions. It is an outrage for the United States, under the total mismanagement of George W. Bush, to ever kidnap or torture anyone. Not acceptable ever.
by Beauregard on Mon Sep 18, 06 5:13pm [+]

Voted : No, the rule of law must be a foundation principle of civilized behavior, even relative to security
It would be wrong. And torture doesn't yield reliable information. And it could backfire and be used against U. S. soldiers.
by skylab on Mon Sep 18, 06 5:37pm [+]

And we already sent an innocent person from Canada to Syria to be tortured. Oops.
by skylab on Mon Sep 18, 06 5:38pm [+]

Voted : No, the rule of law must be a foundation principle of civilized behavior, even relative to security
No. I can think of no scenarios where that would be justified.
by Cathexis on Tue Sep 19, 06 7:30am [+]

Mr. Cathexis: Are your really that naive? What principle supercedes survival? You really think that torturing someone who knew the location of an armed and ticking atomic device in a large city would be wrong? Pardon me, sir, but that seems most absurd. If you would give your own life to save millions (and I think most of us would), how can you not torture one to get information that would save these same millions. Absurd, sir.
by margaret123 on Tue Sep 19, 06 12:36pm [+]

Sure we should. Do whatever it takes.
by hurricane on Thu Oct 12, 06 11:20am [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved