Ticking bomb theory

The ticking bomb theory goes, there is a bomb in a busy public place somewhere which if detonates will kill and maim many innocent lives (possibly your wife and child) the whereabouts is unknown by anyone except the person that planted it and that person is in custody of police/inteligence services, he says he wont disclose the location. So what do you do to get the information, and evacuate the area, who's "human rights" are more important one man that is willing to kill and maim innocent members of society or the innocent members of society. Is the short term pain and discomfort more important to avoid or the loss of hundreds of lives. It could be your child, wife, loved one. Do you sit there and do nothing or do you torture the terrorist for the information, you decide, tick tick tick.

Here might be the first concession of the debate. If the government has in their custody the person they know has set the bomb into place, and hundreds, perhaps even thousands of lives are on the line, then torture very well may be the best option.  
 
However, this is a very narrow circumstance. First, how many bombs actually put hundreds or thousands of lives at risk? Two types of people can pull this off.  
 
First, is a deranged figure on a mission. For whatever reason they believe they are deranged enough to pull this off. With the  
 
And forget about the Ticking Bomb Theory being validation for torture against a trained operative. You get a well trained Al Qaeda, Taliban or Hamas operative who would have the resources and ability to pull of an attack like this, and they won't give up information so easily.