On the other hand, proponents believe that such laws protect vulnerable victims. Nevertheless, colleges are imparting rules and regulations to lessen the dangers of date rape.
Alan M. Dershowitzs "The Case for Torture Warrants" is an article about the debate whether law enforcement forces be allowed to torture suspects who are thought to have information pertaining to terrorism. Dershowitz is concerned with the methods of torture and how it can generate truthful information by giving examples of the Israeli, French, English, and American methods of torture. Among these, Dershowitz believes the American approach has over-stepped the boundaries of legal code of conduct. He is of the view that the availability of torture has given rise to unauthorised tortures. There is a resolution to this problem - the obtainment of warrants for authorising torture of suspects. This he believes would curb unaccountable imprisonment and torture across the United States among law enforcement agencies. More importantly this law would reduce exploitation of authority among law enforcement officials who do not have the full understanding of the risks of guessing the wrong suspect.
Michael Levin demonstrates in his article "The Case for Torture" that in severe cases, torture is justified and morally mandatory. This is a reality that one must face in todays day and age of terrorism. He is of the view that the death or torture of one individual for the better or survival of many is justified even though it is unconstitutional. Torture is justified because Levin believes that victims of terrorism are innocent individuals who run the risk of deaths. On the other hand, terrorists have made the choice of running the risks of death. Whether for idealism or for profit terrorists carry out death plans and have excluded themselves from the civilised standards when they make the decision to kill others. In this context, torture is but a small mean to stop them from victimising