I think that’s a much more coherent argument, especially if you factor in a fear of disproportionate punishment. For example, in the case of the bank robber I

I think that’s a much more coherent argument, especially if you factor in a fear of disproportionate punishment. For example, in the case of the bank robber I would actually agree that it would amount to torture if police were clearly communicating to the bank robber that they were intent on killing them as soon as they showed up, no matter what they did. So there is nuance to this and I don’t think that nuance ever gets you around to actually arguing the case and the facts of the case.