The arguments for your “ticking bomb” metaphor are weak. It is a condition which has too many probabilities that happen to be unlikely to happen In point of fact to justify the usage of torture to get details to halt a hypothetical terrorist attack. It ignores The very fact it is feasible to garner important, life-saving details from terrorist

A different argument from the ticking bomb technique is the fact that enabling torture in Remarkable instances can become regime observe. Here is the slippery-slope argument. This argument is most demonstrated by the example of Israel. In 1987 Israel legalised torture being an interrogation process under a “ticking bomb” state of affairs where