criminal torture

before i even delve into the issue discussed this week on criminal torture, i must admit that the very vague articles sure demoralises me to a great extent.

okay, criminal torture. an issue that is being debated in the political and social world. the question 'is criminal torture ever justified?' still looms over our heads, seeking an answer and a long explanation.

on one side of the argument, it definitely is not. such torture is never right and hence can never be justified in any situation. in my opinion, it is clear why.

torture is, i believe, a lowly and an act of pure cowardice that is amounted from desperation and a lack of direction to approach a certain matter. an authority may be initially abhor such practices of criminal torture, but in the event that they have a lack of lead and investigations are insubstantiable, one cannot deny that torture seems like the most viable and enticing option. a short-cut.

but it is only prudent that we look at the practicality of such approaches. not only does criminal torture seek to degrade an individual, it shows how authorities do not exercise professionalism in addressing the issue in a more objective and upright manner.

though at times, the criminal might have committed such a heinous crime, why must authorities also stoop to an equally low level of morals showed by the criminal and torture him, assuming that that does justice? it might instead augment the tense situation, as more crimes might occur, with people showing their disapproval of such a scheme of justice.

it is clear that torture is not wise and there are better alternatives. like better investigation, more diplomatic approaches and such.

consequently, at times, in our anger and frustrations as a nation, we wonder whether, maybe, just maybe, is such criminal torture ever justified.

take a look at the september eleventh attack on the world trade centre. the event that not only shattered the global economy but also irrevocably shattered the national pride of a country, in this case, the united states of america.

i mean, if i was an american and i had such authoritative powers and managed to capture the criminal responsible for such malice, i'd love to ensure that every bit of his skin met with a red-hot poker. that would truly lead me to believe, that justice was met.

similarly, in real-life, our emotions sometimes, more often than not, clog our logic, and our ability to reason carefully. we think that it's right, that the severity of the situation is directly proportional to the amount of torture that one might receive in punishment, with hopes that he'd atone for his mistakes. but is that really?

or are we practising a system whereby it breeds people not to be gracious and faithful, but just a creed of people who seek to inflict pain for justice?

we have to really look at this carefully and tease out the facts. as to whether the system is for the greater good, or does it only undermine our values and respect for other human beings, who are made equally to every single one of us. it is just their wrongdoings that somewhat sets us apart from them.

as a student, i'm used to telling my friends in consolation that 'we all make mistakes'. i'm sure that many others also do so. if that's the case, then why is it that we find it so hard when what we're dealing with involves the pride of not an individual alone, but the whole nation's population.

i think that leaves us with a lot to ponder and think about.

till the next entry.