Situation: As a patrol officer, I am only doing my job when I stop a car for running a red light. Unfortunately, the driver of the car happens to be the mayor. I give her a ticket anyway, but the next morning I get a call into the captain’s office and told in no uncertain terms that I screwed up, for there is an informal policy extending “Courtesy” to city politicians. Several nights later, I observe the mayor’s car weaving erratically across lanes and speeding. What would you do? What if the driver were a fellow police officer? What if it were a high school friend?
Ethical Judgement: As a patrol officer my job is to serve and protect the public. Therefore, if I observe anyone weaving erratically across lanes and speeding, then I would have to issue him or her a ticket regardless of their job title or my personal relationship with the individual because of their traffic violations. Also, for the safety of other motorist driving on the highway. Based on
…show more content…
In this situation the Patrol officer stopping the Mayor and giving her a ticket for traffic violations would be in the great good of other motorists on the highway. The patrol officer has a job to do, which requires serving and protecting the public. The officer stopping the mayor is for the safety of others and the mayor. By issuing the Mayor ticket the patrol officer is doing their duty as an officer. However, if the patrol officer lets the Mayor off the hook again because of courtesy, then he is not fulfilling his duties because they are allowing her to continue to break laws. By allowing her to continue to drive recklessly would not be in the greatest good of others but only of her. Therefore, the officer doing their job and issuing her a ticket is protecting the public from harm which is in the greatest happiness for the greatest
However, both drivers violated the law of driving. Specific, Hunt caused the accident because he looked at the passenger
The police actions were unjustifiable and unwarranted in this situation. In the court care of Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court ruled that, “deadly force may not be used unless there is a reasonable cause to believe there is a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others exists” (Hendrix, 2013, page 194). The use of physical force should not be used in the manner of vindictiveness, retaliation, or punishment purposes. This display of action is unprofessional and is against the code of conduct. The suspect’s actions of getting out of her vehicle warranted the use of force, because she approached the officer in a threating manner.
State Patrol During the last few weeks, I have been with the Missouri State Patrol and have seen some of the pros and cons of the agency. There are always cons with the job that people do not like the pay or some of the work that is required for them to do. From what has been seen the abuse of power or believing they are above the law and can do what they want.
Max is a hero Max aka (Mad Max) an folk hero of the waste land a man who start off as a police officer doing has best to keep the roads save and his family save from the biker gang and to keep thing in law and order on the roads. Having him and his partner in the frontline to protect the community because the biker gang is rating homes and the roads , murder people off the road to take what they have in there vehicles. So his wife went to go to get ice cream her self and her son while max was help this neighbor fixing his truck and then some reason the biker gang show up and the wife slap the ice cream on the gang leader face and run off with her son and the older neighbor
I would be very calm and show the person who stopped me that there is no reason for profiling me, because getting angry and being difficult only makes things worse. I feel that there is no escape from racial profiling especially in these tense times. Bob Herbert’s article, “Jim Crow Policing” Publishes in the New York Times on February 2, 2010, states that “The New York City Police Department needs to be restrained”, and I believe that his evidence shows this to be true. The author goes on showing statistic after statistic about the type of people that are stopped by the NYPD and more importantly their nationality. Bob Herbert is not writing this article to bash the NYPD, but to educate the people of America that although we may think racism and humiliation is gone, in New York it is still very prevalent.
My own answer to this question is that there are times when it is right to break the law. In this specific situation I am going through that light, especially if I believe my life is in danger. Here is my justification for going through the light and breaking the law: 1. the original intent of the lawmakers was not to stop everyone in all circumstances but to simply regulate the flow of traffic and avoid accidents. There would be no accident in this case since there are no other cars.
There could be cases where the car not the driver has to decide who to save the passengers or the pedestrians crossing the street. Not only do you have to consider the "right" choice but also line up with the customer who bought the car. In some surveys customers preferred saving passengers before saving a child going after a ball. So this is an ethical debate that can be discussed using the fractious problem solving process. Here are the facts: as of September 2017 the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) released federal guidelines for automated driving systems.
Then after these questions we ended up on US-31 patrolling for speeders, which is where Deputy Montgomery pulled over two other drivers. When pulling over the first, a woman in a grey Toyota, while originally pulling her over for going 15 miles over the speed limit, he noticed that had improperly displayed her license plate with it being just taped to the rear window of the car. Then after scanning her driver’s license, he noticed that she failed to also change her address as well. After looking over the violations, at first I thought she would receive at ticket with that many warnings, which to my surprise she only received three warnings. The next stop however, had me extremely nervous until we finally let the driver go.
The major dangers of speeding include the environmental aspect, driving too fast for road conditions, and speeding kills. Driving responsibly is our duty as citizens. We must be defensive in our driving habits. Defensive driving is driving to save lives, time and money, in spite of the conditions around you and the actions of others. Also, defensive driving is the responsibility of everyone who operates a vehicle in our roadway community.
Eager to enforce every law and ordinance to the letter, the rookie officer may feel that the veteran officer is lax in his judgment and views the potential actions of the suspect as a threat to society, justifying and encouraging their behavior and therefore, action should be taken to thwart any future crimes that might be committed as a result of. Additionally, assuming the rookie officer hasn’t had the opportunity to appear in court in such cases, his perception of the justice system is of a grand and noble machine, exacting due justice to everyone equally. In this instance, utilitarianism is not considered morally acceptable as the negative consequences far outweigh the
However, both concepts might play a role in either situation. Some individuals question whether or not “ethics” should play a big part in law enforcement. Ethics should play a part in professional standards of conduct because it sets a standard for how individuals should behave. It is very important for police officers and any other individual in the law enforcement field to properly abide by ethical standards.
In today’s world, unless you call and ask for help, the police are not your friend. Police in 2015 is around to decide if you’ve done something wrong and whether they can arrest you or not to “maintain order” in the community. When you get pulled over by a police you should follow three simple rules. The first rule is to always be courteous and polite to the cop. The second rule is to resist every request of the police until he uses force.
Both individual officers and law enforcement agencies should be held to account for their actions. Accountability includes both what the police do and how they perform. According to Petter Gottschalk Agency-level accountability involves the performance of law enforcement agencies with respect to controlling crime, disorder, and providing services to the public. (Petter Gottschalk).
In today’s day in age, police officers are perceived as dogs. They are nowhere near being protective or obedient. Police officers set out and seek problems on the road. No matter if you are casually driving, or putting other people 's lives in danger with reckless driving. Police have no set boundaries when it comes to police protocol.
‘’Most officers enter law enforcement with minimal experience in the field or in handling the moral dilemmas that officers typically encounter. They learn how to perform their jobs, as well as recognize the organizational norms, values, and culture, from their peers and supervisors. While supervisors provide direct, formal reinforcement, officers’ peers offer friendship and informal rewards that, in many cases, hold greater influence than official recognition from the agency’’ (Fitch, 2011). Officers who come across situations where they are unsure what is morally and ethically best to do often turn to their peers for assurance and guidance. Good ethical behavior can easily be influenced by officers and those in law enforcement.