> The safety and needs of a prisoner are not the only concerns.
The only ethical stance I've ever heard for torturing someone is the "ticking time bomb" scenario popularized during George W. Bush's administration. (I disagree with that ethical stance, but that's beside the point.)
In your scenario the bomb isn't ticking. Nor is there even a bomb-- only a breach of security with an undefined relationship to safety and needs of people who aren't in any immediate danger.
Read the Senate Report on Torture for an in-depth analysis of the problems with that ethical stance.
The only ethical stance I've ever heard for torturing someone is the "ticking time bomb" scenario popularized during George W. Bush's administration. (I disagree with that ethical stance, but that's beside the point.)
In your scenario the bomb isn't ticking. Nor is there even a bomb-- only a breach of security with an undefined relationship to safety and needs of people who aren't in any immediate danger.
Read the Senate Report on Torture for an in-depth analysis of the problems with that ethical stance.