Tasers, torture, euthanasia, the death penalty, free speech: the common theme is safety margins.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

I believe that there are some (very few) circumstances in which it is morally justifiable to torture someone for information.
I believe that torture should always be illegal, under any circumstances whatsoever.
Inconstistent? No; the only way to be sure that we don't torture people unjustifiably is to never allow anyone to be tortured.

I am at least willing to listen to the proposition that there are some people who have done things so wicked that killing them is justifiable.
I believe am strongly opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances.
Inconsistent? No, for exactly the same reason as above.

I support the legalisation of euthanasia, but I acknowledge that "if anyone is euthanised, it will sometimes be used on people who have e.g. been pressured into it, or who might have been glad not to have been killed later had they live" is a powerful argument against it, that demands a response.

I have mixed feelings about the use of tasers by the police. It seems clear to me that there are situations where using a taser is the best middle ground (between firearms and batons/brute force), but I can certainly see a risk that they will be used in situations where brute force might otherwise have been used, and consequently lead to more deaths than otherwise. There are some situations where the use of a taser is appropriate, but they willinevitably be used inappropriately to, and if so is that sufficient grounds to ban/restrict them?

I strongly support the legality of pornography, the right to incite racial and religious hatred (unless you're actively inciting to crime) and the right to deny that the holocaust happened. The only way to be sure that we don't restrict the right to be right is to avoid restricting the right to be wrong, even slightly.


If you go out and murder and dismember one person, you can use their organs for transplants to save many, but pretty much everyone would agree that it is wrong to do so. When in doubt, the state should err on the side of safety, I think.

[Dawson Leery]

1. You touched on some of the subjects that I wanted to talk

about.

In short:

I can never support torture in ANY case.
Don't believe the hype you see on tv, extracting information is takes time and resources as well
as relationship building. Valarie Plame should understand this.

I find it strange how lightly tasers are treated. This goes so far as to
see police tasing/tasering each other. Reporters have volunteered to be tased.
I find the whole thing strange. The uses of electricity so leniently is strange.
See this video I was sent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg-oHsFmBNw
I don't know why but I was sent it. I find it strange that they did not bother to clean the wounds afterwards.
Considering that the prongs punctured the skin, they should at least wipe the blood off and cover them. Strange.

You have the right to have done to your body after life as you wish. The last desires of those who
have just passed need to be respected. The state nor anyone else has the right to take parts of your
body for any reason.

[Dawson Leery]

2. kick

[Dawson Leery]

3. kick

[BlooInBloo]

4. If I thought police had the public's best interest at heart, I might feel differently about tasers..

But I don't, so I don't.

[Dawson Leery]

5. Anyone can buy a taser too.

[Dawson Leery]

6. kick for more responses.