Would You or Wouldn't You?

[Vel]

This article details some of the most heinous types of depravity that we see other humans commit against children. This subject has elicited more than 150 responses on another thread with many of the posters willing to suspend our laws against cruel and unusual punishment in a desire to make sure that these two get the punishment they deserve. I have a hypothetical situation that I'd like to pose. I'm not sure how to set up a poll on here so I'll just ask people to respond to the thread.

If the video that the police recovered from the Indiana couple showed a third, unidentified adult molesting those children, would you or would you not be willing to waterboard those two to find out the identity of the third adult?
*******************************************************************************************************


Stephen E. Quick, Samantha Light Accused Of Taping Themselves Having Sex With Children

VEEDERSBURG, Ind. — A couple who ran a baby-sitting service out of their home videotaped themselves performing sex acts with children, some as young as 2 months old, police said Friday.


Stephen E. Quick, 31, and Samantha Light, 25, both of Veedersburg in western Indiana, were being held on $100,000 bond in Fountain County Jail. Both faced preliminary charges of child molestation and child exploitation. Jail staff did not know whether either one had an attorney.
Police who searched the couple's home found a videotape depicting sex acts involving Quick and Light and at least four different children between the ages of 2 months and 6 years old, said Fountain County Sheriff's Deputy Bob Kemp.


"In 15 years of doing this job, it's the worst thing I've ever seen or imagined," he told WRTV. "Just horrible, just horrible It's a new low."
Police searched the couple's home after the parents of a 3-year-old girl reported that she told them Quick and Light had touched her inappropriately and photographed her at their home on Feb. 28.
Deputies seized several computers, cameras, a video camera, pornographic materials, drugs and drug paraphernalia. Several sex toys that appeared in the video were seized during a second search, police said.
Quick and Light were arrested March 5. Neither has a criminal history.
Authorities have removed the couple's daughter from their home.
___
Information from: WRTV-TV, Indianapolis News, Indianapolis, Indiana News, Weather, and Sports - WRTV Indianapolis' Channel 6

 

[Zoom-boing]

The least forceful/harmful ways/methods should be pursued first. If they fail, proceed to water boarding. My guess is they'd break long before water boarding was necessary. These people are sick but they're not terrorists.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

= O !!!!

That is horrifying. 2 MONTHS?!?!?! to 6 YEARS OLD!??! That's certainly "a new low."

Congrats, thats the worst shit I've seen in a while.

 

[Diuretic]

Since the alleged acts have already happened there's no point in torturing the two suspects to find the third suspect. The use of torture during interrogation issue usually comes up in a sort of utilitarian-based discussion where the terrorist in custody is presumed to know the location of a nuclear bomb that is about to blow up a city and the moral question is should he be tortured or not to save the city?

In this one, the third suspect would be found by the usual investigative processes.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Since the alleged acts have already happened there's no point in torturing the two suspects to find the third suspect. The use of torture during interrogation issue usually comes up in a sort of utilitarian-based discussion where the terrorist in custody is presumed to know the location of a nuclear bomb that is about to blow up a city and the moral question is should he be tortured or not to save the city?

In this one, the third suspect would be found by the usual investigative processes.

I would have to agree in this case. Torture should never be used if at all possible and if used it better be damn important to find information in a very fast manner.

Torture of these two would be nothing more then revenge for what they did. Further as far as I know the POLICE have no authority AT ALL to EVER torture anyone for any reason. In fact torture would ensure these vile people would probably not be punished legally at all.

A war is VERY much different from domestic crime.

 

[Toome]

Torture works well on TV but not in the real world. Any information obtained from someone who just wanted the pain to stop is not reliable information. The prisoner simply said whatever it took to stop the pain.

No, I don't give a flip about the constitutional rights and/or human rights of scumbag child molesters. But that's not the point: if it won't stand in court, then all we're doing is allowing these predators to stay on the streets because we screwed up police procedure.

On the battlefield, again, no difference. Any of you arm chair generals willing to deploy troops into harm's way based on information obtained from someone who just wanted to stop the pain? Think about that. There's no way to gauge the accuracy and reliability of that "intelligence information." Could end up on a wild goose chase; could be diverted away from the true target; or could be led into a trap.

Again, just because it works every time Jack Bauer does it doesn't mean it would work in the real world.

 

[Gunny]

I agree. Torturing them for info is probably not necessary.

Torture them for just because of what they are. Hanged, drawn and quartered is too swift and merciful a death. This clearly is a case for hauling some medieval torture devices out of mothballs.

 

[garyd]

Thanks toome for again sharing the left's abysmal knowlegde of interrogation techniques. With or without torture you can only get the information you require at a level of accuracy you need provided you have more than one subject and you keep those subjects sequestered and even then you don't do anything til you've got some background info on the case and subject at hand. Intelligence is about gathering info and cross referencing it and double checking everything until you get a clear pattern not necessarrily about making people squeal.

As for these two, once convicted, waterboard them until they freaking die. Lethal injection is far to0humane to provide an effective deterrent to crazies like this.

 

[Vel]

Thanks for the thought provoking replies. For me, I would want to exhaust all other methods first, but rather than allow some monster to be out there preying on other children, I'd be inclined to waterboard them. But then again, I believe that if people were allowed to enact a little retribution for crimes committed against their families, you'd see alot fewer victims. A parent who beats a child should have to fear the child's grandparents catching up to them. A man who beats his wife or girlfriend to a bloody pulp should have to fear what was going to happen to him when her father, brothers or cousins get him.

 

[Toome]

Thanks for the thought provoking replies. For me, I would want to exhaust all other methods first, but rather than allow some monster to be out there preying on other children, I'd be inclined to waterboard them. But then again, I believe that if people were allowed to enact a little retribution for crimes committed against their families, you'd see alot fewer victims. A parent who beats a child should have to fear the child's grandparents catching up to them. A man who beats his wife or girlfriend to a bloody pulp should have to fear what was going to happen to him when her father, brothers or cousins get him.

We have to be careful as a society on what we become of ourselves. Right now, we are waging a war against fanatics who would impose a society governed by religion rather than a constitutional republic governed by laws; the same type of religious laws that call for public flogging of women who appear to be promiscuous or chops the hands off of thieves whether it was something as trivial as a stick of gum or property belonging to a neighbor, all based on subjective rather than objective judgment.

I agree with the emotions of wishing I had just five minutes with a child molester so I could impose my brand of justice upon them. But that's not who we are nor what our nation of laws is based upon. It's not a perfect criminal justice system, and it does give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant. Our forefathers figured it out that way: if government is going to deprive you of your liberty, then it had better have rock solid evidence and plenty of it. It's a good system even with its imperfections. If anyone has spent any time overseas, especially in third world countries, they would be the first to argue that our criminal justice system is still a good one to hang onto.

As heinous as child molestation is, consider that the number one cause of wrongful death in this country continues to be drunk driving. Yet we pass laws that have an acceptable tolerance of alcohol levels. If we want to be serious about stopping deaths on the public roadways, then the law across the nation should be zero tolerance. But we each come up with our own excuse rationalizing why it's acceptable for a person to get behind the wheel of a car when their body is physiologically impaired by alcohol (yes, you are impaired no matter how few drinks you have). So as horrible as child molestation is, and as horrible as it is for children to be murdered after enduring such brutality, in my eyes, it's no different than the number of children killed as the result of drunk driving. There are far many more children killed in drunk driving related incidents, yet we don't change those laws or talk about waterboarding drunk drivers because we each know that at one time or another, one of us could have been that driver.

The hypocrisy is indeed blinding.

 

[Vel]

I'm sorry but it my eyes it's VERY different. Yes, drunk drivers kill many people including children and it's a horrible thing, but, drunk drivers do not set out with the INTENT to kill or maim. They do not derive their personal pleasure from the misery their acts inflict on others. In fact, I would guess that most drunk drivers, having always gotten safely home, assume that it will NEVER happen to them. So no, I'm not seeing those as equivocal.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Thanks for the thought provoking replies. For me, I would want to exhaust all other methods first, but rather than allow some monster to be out there preying on other children, I'd be inclined to waterboard them. But then again, I believe that if people were allowed to enact a little retribution for crimes committed against their families, you'd see alot fewer victims. A parent who beats a child should have to fear the child's grandparents catching up to them. A man who beats his wife or girlfriend to a bloody pulp should have to fear what was going to happen to him when her father, brothers or cousins get him.

We have to be careful as a society on what we become of ourselves. Right now, we are waging a war against fanatics who would impose a society governed by religion rather than a constitutional republic governed by laws; the same type of religious laws that call for public flogging of women who appear to be promiscuous or chops the hands off of thieves whether it was something as trivial as a stick of gum or property belonging to a neighbor, all based on subjective rather than objective judgment.

I agree with the emotions of wishing I had just five minutes with a child molester so I could impose my brand of justice upon them. But that's not who we are nor what our nation of laws is based upon. It's not a perfect criminal justice system, and it does give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant. Our forefathers figured it out that way: if government is going to deprive you of your liberty, then it had better have rock solid evidence and plenty of it. It's a good system even with its imperfections. If anyone has spent any time overseas, especially in third world countries, they would be the first to argue that our criminal justice system is still a good one to hang onto.

As heinous as child molestation is, consider that the number one cause of wrongful death in this country continues to be drunk driving. Yet we pass laws that have an acceptable tolerance of alcohol levels. If we want to be serious about stopping deaths on the public roadways, then the law across the nation should be zero tolerance. But we each come up with our own excuse rationalizing why it's acceptable for a person to get behind the wheel of a car when their body is physiologically impaired by alcohol (yes, you are impaired no matter how few drinks you have). So as horrible as child molestation is, and as horrible as it is for children to be murdered after enduring such brutality, in my eyes, it's no different than the number of children killed as the result of drunk driving. There are far many more children killed in drunk driving related incidents, yet we don't change those laws or talk about waterboarding drunk drivers because we each know that at one time or another, one of us could have been that driver.

The hypocrisy is indeed blinding.

That's ridiculous. You should always start with the pinky and work your way up.