Criminology

In an effort to curb terrorism and the severity of the attacks, law enforcers have come up with ways to deter such attacks while maintaining liberty and security. The use of torture as a way of getting information from terrorists has sparked a lot of debate and controversy in regard to human rights and the threat to national security. In this case, I will not follow my partner’s instructions by backing up his story because it is false and goes against the ethical code.

ORDER A PAPER LIKE THIS NOW

To begin with, terrorism is an issue that needs utmost criticality when handling, as it is a matter that presents a threat to national security. As per John (2015), there must be a balance between deterring terrorism and maintaining a balance between civil liberties and national security. Many questions arise on whether the extent to which society deters terrorism is legal or moral. Some terrorists crave attention; thus, they withhold vital information, for instance, the code required to deactivate the bomb. The use of torture or force to acquire information from a terrorist is only permitted after a court gives an officer a judicial warrant. In this case, the court had not offered any judicial warrant; hence, it was illegal to torture the suspected terrorist. Nonetheless, the use of torture is likely to save the lives of many individuals, as the suspect reveals the information required to deactivate the bomb. However, I believe that following protocol and acquiring a warrant would be the right way to go about it.

Consequently, it is crucial to note that the eighth amendment prohibits the use of unusual and cruel punishment. However, the amendment does not apply to this scenario because the suspect is not yet a convict. By unplugging the recording equipment, my partner violated the law that requires any form of torture to take place under the radar screen through judicial warrants. According to the judicial system, when torture was introduced, its purpose was to be used minimally and only when the suspect becomes aggressive towards the officers. From a humanly dignified perspective, in conjunction with the United States law, the reasons for avoiding the use of torture are more than those that justify it. The legal consequence of my action is that I may be suspended until further investigations are carried out.

In a nutshell, my partner’s use of torture and force on the suspect was unconstitutional and illegal, as he was not offered a judicial warrant. It is important to use lawful means to acquire information before resolving to use force and torture.

References

John, V. (2015). New way of war: the role of perception in counterinsurgency (Doctoral dissertation, Wheaton College (Norton, Mass.)).