- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
"That is incorrect. There would be no consequences under the criminal law. Self-defense is a perfect, i.e., complete, defense."-- wbgonne
That is correct but it differs from what you are saying in one very important way.
To be useful as a defense, you must prove to a court of law that you were, in fact, defending yourself. By advocating that you be allowed to determine, by yourself, whether or not to torture someone, you're leaving a step out of the process which is critical in criminal law.
Torture must be illegal. (period)
If a court of law decides, upon receipt of valid evidence, that your use of torture is permitted under the doctrine of self-defense, that's a horse of an entirely different color than writing a legal torture exception into the law itself. When you utilize torture, you must begin with the fact that you are committing a crime and may be held accountable for that criminal act.
