Michael Levin is a Professor of Philosophy at the City College of New York and the Graduate center, City University of New York. He is well known in Libertarian circles and has written much about social issues in the US, especially feminism, race, crime, and other unorthodox issues. In Levin=s essay AThe Case for Torture@, he argues his case that torture should become a legal means of law enforcement. He begins his introduction by saying that torture is no longer accepted and that it only was in use during an earlier era. He follows this up in his thesis by stating that torture is no longer unheard of, but becoming a necessity. Is torture an acceptable means of punishment? Is executing law by way of torture morally right? Levin shows his side and also provides unacceptable reasons for using torture. These exceptions are further used to compel the reader to accept torture, but only to an extent. Subsequent, Levin basically breaks necessary cases of torture into two categories: Death and Idealism. Throughout, Levin provides many reasons for his belief.
             Levin begins by discussing death in relation to the use of torture. His whole third paragraph provides an excellent hypothetical example of why torturing should become a legal resolve- AYwe follow due process-wait for his lawyer, arraign him-millions of people will die. If the only way to save those lives is to subject the terrorist to the most excruciating possible pain, what grounds can there be for not doing so?@ In this claim, Levin is demonstrating an example of how terrorism could be one specific reason for using torture. Specifically, he shows how protecting the rights of a United States citizen, in such an extremely detrimental situation as above, can hinder a smooth process in finding a bomb before many lives are lost. Now I can relate to Levin in this case; in most cases, negotiation is almost unattainable when dealing with terrorists. Therefore, we must rely on...