Ethical Issues In Law Enforcement

(Bill or Rights, n.d.) Attempting to keep the country safe while supporting its citizens’ rights is a continuous struggle for the government and its agencies. Absolute privacy with absolute safety, albeit utopia, is a lofty expectation and a challenge to procure. The Associated Press - NORC Center for Public Affairs Research reports 42 percent of Americans feel their security should be a vital objective of the government. While civil libertarians may strongly disagree, 54 percent of Americans feel individual rights may need to be forfeited in order to avert terrorist acts. Warrantless surveillance has been a very contentious subject relating to this right, especially surrounding the abilities granted to governmental agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) via The Patriot and USA Freedom Acts. Despite this controversy, more than half of Americans, 56 percent, still believe the government possesses the right to surveil internet correspondence, conversations, and phone calls without a warrant for suspicious or terrorist activity. This may be due to the fact that the number of Americans who fear that they or someone in their family could eventually become the victim of a terrorist act has doubled since 2013. (Americans,

As we grow up, there are certain rights that we develop as people as we age. For example, at the age of 18 we are given the right to vote in elections as well as purchase tobacco if we so choose too. But there are certain rights, given to all citizens of the United States, independent of age, that also can not be taken away. As an example, the 1st amendment allows for the freedom of religion, press, speech, assembly, and petition. The 14th amendment gives citizenship to all people who are born or naturalized in the United States. In today’s day in age however, one amendment has become quite controversial, the 4th amendment. This amendment protects people against unreasonable and unlawful search and seizure and that warrants may not be issued unless there is probable cause. What becomes controversial now is whether or not this amendment includes the protection of what a person says or does on the internet as well as what a person says to another well calling another person. The 4th amendment reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” In its current phrasing it is vague enough to push the boundaries of what is protected and what isn’t. For this reason it needs to be updated to fit

During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.

On January 15, 2016, a Gainesville, Florida police officer named Bobby White responded to a report of kids playing loudly in the streets. (Earl, 2016) Upon arrival, the officer parked his patrol car and notice a tall boy playing basketball, he asked the boy “Can you believe someone's calling to complain about kids playing basketball in the street?” (Earl, 2016) The boy didn’t respond, and instead Officer White smiled and stated that he had no issue with these children playing in the street, he then procced to playing basketball with the kids. (Earl, 2016) A Gainesville Police Department spokesman named Ben Tobias told CBS News, that these kids were out exercising not sitting inside playing video games and that at times society forgets that

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” Sound familiar? Well it should. That quote was a section of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Those lines are one of the many things that set America apart from other countries around the world. It has protected us for centuries from “unreasonable searches and seizures…” made by anyone, including the government. This is all beginning to change with the inventions of the smartphone, computer, and even GPS. These inventions have possibly turned our world for the better, or maybe even for the worse.

In this article, American Taught Police: Surveillance in the “Land of Freedom,” the author Nikki Jones talks and describes taught of being followed by technology everywhere you go. She talks about the consequences and the civil rights and liberties that the American Taught Police may steal form the citizen. She describes that device as the tracking device and that device follows you. She brings up the question of the fourth Amendment. The fourth amendment is supposed to protect the rights of the citizen through “Search and seizure.” In the second paragraph, the author, Nikki Jones, talks about how the FBI and the NSA collecting so much data without any warrants because there is a question of national security.

The Fourth Amendment makes certain that people are protected within themselves and “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.” Although the Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of people, today’s technology has led to privacy issues that need to be addressed. For illustration, when people comment on Twitter, Twitter and a few other digital companies keep all the comments a person has ever posted. Similarly, warrants must be used at all times if people are seizing information from someone, but searching through metadata does not need a warrant and there is no cause. Another issue is surveillance captures people with cameras, and people who have not committed a crime are still being watched, but security people do not need a warrant

Would you give up your privacy for a little bit of security? The two go hand in hand. Our advancing technology provides our government with the tools to fulfill its top priority—national security. But where is the line drawn between security and privacy? Privacy is not only a value to many Americans—it is a right protected under the Fourth Amendment. But to what extent? The technology meant to protect us seems to be invading the little privacy we have left, having diminished greatly over the years. It has been said, “Give me liberty or give me death!” Since 9/11, security in our daily lives has been a concern for many Americans and the government has since made efforts to secure the nation. The measures taken to protect our nation through the

While there are many benefits provided by the Patriot Act, the program also incorporates drawbacks, chiefly, American citizen’s freedom is being weakened. Corresponding, the Fourth Amendment is being taken advantage of; the protection to citizen’s privacy from government invasion, and no warrant shall be issued without probable cause (Wex Legal Dictionary). With this intention, subpoenas are often obtained rather than a warrant, and the use of technology to record citizen’s information is reducing the Fourth Amendment. Not only is the Fourth Amendment being weakened, but so is our freedom of speech. Moreover, the Patriot Act can easily be abused, crippling the Fourth Amendment, leaving Americans with less freedom than what was written for them

For this assignment I got to research many interesting things. First I learned what CPTED is and what theory it is based on. Next, I found a previous Goldstein award finalist: Operation Safe Clubs: Enforcement and Situational Problem-Oriented Policing (Miami Police Department). After finding a Goldstein award finalist, I evaluated the questions given to me about the problems they were attempting to address, how they determined their best course of action, the response, and how they measured their success or failure.

As women entered the law enforcement profession , on equal footing with men ,one of the primary concerns women have to struggle when obtaining the title in field , was that a woman would be able to control a large violent offender. In the 1970's The 350 Pound Man in the Alley was used when it came to hiring women. However,the job standard test as of today has changed when hiring women include

Alexis met a male online a month ago, and had sex with him. Law Enforcement was not contacted at the time of intake. The father (Jason) just found out about the allegations, and took the child to the hospital to get checked for STD's. It was unknown at the time of intake how Jason found out about the information. It was also unknown where the allegations took place. Alexis is getting a psych eval, per the

In this country we are seeing an increase in ethical violations in the field of law enforcement. I will go into detail about some of the main ethical issues we are seeing today and what can be done to prevent such acts from happening. When one officer is being unethical it has a huge effect on how the public views law enforcement as a whole. Many officers go undetected for a long time before getting caught, but an officer committing ethical violations will have their day it’s just a matter of time. In order to improve this growing problem we must first understand why there is such a problem in the field of law enforcement.

The perception of individual-rights and public-order is quite an interesting controversial double-sided choice in which discussions are to agree or disagree on the US PATRIOT Act. Ever since the PATRIOT Act was issued by George W. Bush to prevent potential terroristic catastrophes has been a controversial concept that surrounds different perspectives. For example, section 206 within the PATRIOT Act, authorizes roving wiretaps in electronic devices (phones, PC, computers, systems, etc.). People argue that it is a violation of the fourth Amendment to have the government (NSA) monitor and see what goes on the digital world. Although, it is true that the government can see everything in the digital world; it does not mean that privacy is compromised. Privacy does not exist anymore in today’s

I do believe police enforcement needs a code of ethics. Ethics promote positive reinforcement and provide a base system for justice. I think morals correlate strongly into this code for a large percentage of the workforce, but as we’ve seen on the news a small percentage of corrupt individuals ruin the name for the whole police force. Setting a code of ethics down doesn’t eliminate corruption, in fact I don't think it would help that much. But By showing prime examples and consequences for negative actions could be the best way for police officers to follow these code of ethics.