The Importance Of Ethics And Policing

Lack of training and policing standards are closely linked to the myriad problems bedeviling police work, especially in small departments (Brodeur, 2010). All over the country, police departments report cases of officers being caught in uncompromising and unprofessional situations, resulting in disciplinary actions such as redeployment, suspension or sacking. These cases of unprofessionalism have led to questions being asked about policing, occasioned by recurring series of questionable and controversial encounters with police officers (Brodeur, 2010). The consequence of such encounters is increasing public distrust in law enforcement agencies.

Deontology is an ethical theory concerned with duties and rights. The founder of deontological ethics was a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. Kant’s deontological perspective implies people are sensitive to moral duties that require or prohibit certain behaviors, irrespective of the consequences (Tanner, Medin, & Iliev, 2008). The main focus of deontology is duty: deontology is derived from the Greek word deon, meaning duty. A duty is morally mandated action, for instance, the duty never to lie and always to keep your word. Based on Kant, even when individuals do not want to act on duty they are ethically obligated to do so (Rich, 2008).

As each new member of a police department officially becomes a sworn member, friends, family and other members of the public gather as they speak an oath. The oath these officers take, promises their commitment to ensure the safety of the public they serve. This means more than protecting civilians from individuals who may stray from the law, but to also ensure the protection of basic human rights. Police and other public servants are given a great deal of trust and power, what they do with it is based on the ethics they choose to uphold. In this paper we will look at why it is important for these justice professionals to study ethics.

Law enforcers are supposed to behave in an ethical manner in order to achieve justice to the community. Where some of the police officers complete their duties ethically, others are caught in ethical misconduct that blurs their vision of administering justice. Several unethical practices have been noted in the course of duty of most police officers, and all corners of the world have their police officers affected by the practices (Klockars, Ivkovic, & Haberfeld, 2004).This paper looks into two most prominent and persistent ethical concerns in police systems, in the USA and worldwide.

Are police ever justified in committing illegal acts that violate others rights are they ever justified especially when there is no personal gain but for reasons that may seem to be about a higher purpose. This is the argument for noble cause corruption. This idea brings it to the end justifies the means thinking. If we start down this line where can it lead us? The idea that we can justify any action that would violate civil rights and other laws because we feel that our cause is noble and it is not being done for personal gain but the good of others can lead us into some dark places. The noble cause thinking is

The following paper is to discuss the statement by Brien (1999, p9)” the Rule of Law is one of the necessary elements of any decent, society civilized society. More specifically, it is an ideal and aiming to practice it is a necessary element in any liberal, democratic community”. The ethical policies and practices of the New South Wales Police Force (N.S.W.P.F), including the Oath of Office, Missions and functions, Statement of values and Code of Conduct and Ethics will be discussed in relation to the “Rule of Law”. Two real examples will also be discussed to demonstrate the ethical dilemmas that exist in the N.S.W.P.F.

Police officers are given a lot of power because it is needed to help protect citizens and the community. However, police often abuse their power by the over use of force, corruption, sexual misconduct, bias based policing, and failure to maintain police ethics. (Peak, 2011)

In order for a Police agency to prevent and deter Police misconduct, there must be a definition to what actions and behaviors that the term will encompass. The term ‘police corruption’ has been used to describe many activities: bribery; violence and brutality; fabrication and destruction of evidence; racism; favoritism or nepotism. Many different scholars differ in their own examples of the definition. Before attempting to the question of whether a precise definition is possible, it is worth examining the range of activities that might be included within a broad discussion of corruption. In (Bayley and Perito, 2011), it is defined as police corruption is a contested phrase with narrow and broad meanings. Narrowly

Organizational climate is essential in developing a culture of incorruptible individuals and this climate is set by the organizations leaders. Within the SCORE unit of the Kansas City, Kansas Police Department (KCKPD) at the time of the indictment, it was not clear if leaders set a tone of ethical conduct, nor did it appear that principled conduct was the cornerstone of the command leadership philosophy. Specifically, all ethical standards for Kansas City Police Department are derived from Wyandotte County Unified Government code of ethics and the police department lacks police specific philosophies toward ethical conduct (Unified Government Ordinance, 2009). Although, the International Chiefs of Police have established a code of honor adopted by many police departments, it is unclear bases on empirical information what KCKPD leadership expected of their Police officers. For instance, it is vital for executive to formulate as stated by Martin (2011), “an agenda that explains the moral purposes of the department” (para. 6). Therefore, not making an ethics based agenda and delivering a repetitive and deliberate focus on such an agenda to all levels is one failure by leadership to have contributed to creating a perceived environment of unethical conduct. On the other hand, senior managers cannot root out corruption without captains, lieutenants, sergeants and senior officers. Middle and first-line leader are essential to the command structure ensuring high standards are

“Ethical issues regarding corruption and off-duty behavior have become an increasing challenge in criminal justice” (Writing, 1999-2013). Within the criminal justice system, ethics can be complicated by the moral implications of actions. Differences in cultures and different circumstances can affect the individual moral compass. However, all departments of criminal justice operate by a certain code of ethics and by certain standards. But those standards and ethics often become challenged due to issues relating to police brutality, off duty conduct and corruption that we hear about all of the time through the media.

Law enforcement (police) subcultures have specific set of moral values and a certain mentality exhibited by those in law enforcement. It’s always the public against the police so they form an alliance for supportive reasons. However, people may believe police subculture is breaking down. Police subculture is breaking down because it is inconsistent with the formal morals and values related to the culture and that police are not the same as each other in their qualities and attributes. Examining ethics and its relation to the police subculture is important to help delineate not only the grey area of ethics but also the grey area within which the police operate (McCartney and Parent, 2015). For example, police officers are known to defend their own whether its something right or wrong. However, if another officer feels that the situation interferes with their morals, then it becomes inconsistent with the other officer’s

According to Webster’s Dictionary, ethics is defined “as the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation” (Merriam-Webster Online). This concept is prevalent in the world of police work since police officers are supposed to be the “good” in whatever is considered a “bad” situation. Many police departments offer training in ethics during the time in which a cadet is in the police academy and after officers are put on the streets, which is called in-service training. It is the hope that while this training is available to officers, that they hold a basic code of ethics within themselves which

When debating the issue of police use of force, the issue of what actions constitute too much force must also be addressed. Another concern is the possibility of corruption amount officers. When given such great power, the probability of corruption is high. Officers generally do not start out as corrupt, but years of work on the force can create animosity between officers and suspects and lead them to decide to use force more quickly (McEwen, 1996). Many times, officers patrol the streets alone which creates the opportunity for potential abuse of power (McEwen, 1996). Although police officers need to be permitted to exercise some discretion, they also need limits and guidelines to follow when using their powers of discretion (Manning, 1997). The decision to use force should not be taken lightly in that citizen’s lives are at stake. Police should be allowed discretion in decisions to use force; however, this discretion should be limited. In several cases in Arizona, officers have used deadly means of force. In all cases, the officers

While conducting professional duties police officers are involved in many situations which bring up ethical dilemmas in the course of their careers. Each decision may have a profound impact on a number of people lives in and out of the community which they serve. As a result, police officers must have concrete moral and ethical beliefs in order to act quickly and correctly in situations which bring about ethical dilemmas. The power police officers hold allows them to make discretionary decisions, and these decisions must be made correctly in order to protect and serve.

Some argue that corrupt police officers are simply the product of a corrupt culture of the agency they work for. These officers are socially introduced to a number of informal rules when they begin employment. This process and these rules serve two main purposes. First, this process is designed to minimize the chances of external or internal controls being mobilized to address the behaviors and, secondly, to keep corrupt activities at a level that is acceptable and likely undetectable. The rule most often referred to in this connection, is the “Code of Silence.” Officers are socialized into not cooperating with investigations regarding fellow officers. Whether or not the officer participates in corrupt activities for financial gain, an officer’s adherence to the “Code of Silence” places them squarely amongst the corrupt of the profession (Price, 1972).