Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues

Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues

Strayer University

Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues

The job of a law enforcement officer can be difficult as there are issues that an officer has to balance to do their job in a fair and equitable way. It is important to understand that there needs to be a balance between the individual rights that a citizen has and being able to protect the public good. Another issue that can come up in law enforcement is the use of rewards and punishment in criminal justice along with police use of deception to complete their task. It is important to keep in mind that making ethical decisions can help to make these issues a little easier for the law enforcement officer that finds themselves in a situation where these situations come into play.

It can be hard to determine the right balance for individual rights and the public’s protection. There are some countries where the citizens do not have rights, and in the name of public protection, the government can go overboard. According to Ferdico, Fradella and Totten (2008), “The citizens of these countries live in daily fear of official intrusion into the home, the disappearance of a loved one, or tight restrictions on movement, speech, and association” (p. 4). Of course, if the country allows for the individual rights to be above protection the public, the opposite could happen where citizens do not fear being punished for committing crimes.

My philosophy and approach towards balancing these two issues is that it is important to respect an individual as far as their rights go, but to purse the truth. By following the laws that allow an officer of the law to investigate or pursue a suspect, the individual’s rights are being respected, but the officer is protecting the public good within the bounds of the law. It is important to remember that even individuals that have broken the law have rights that should be respected by law enforcement because, without this respect, the country would no longer be a true democracy that follows the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The use of reward and punishment in the criminal justice system is an issue that can be argued over as there are those that believe rewards do not belong in the criminal justice system at all. These rewards that can be offered should be balanced with the need of the court. There are certain actions that the court can take that can been seen as rewarding criminals. These actions include plea bargaining and using confidential informants. According to Heumann, individuals are “… taught one of the central norms of the local court: there is a penalty attached to going to trail and losing; conversely, there is a reward accorded to the defendant who forsakes his right to trail and pleads guilty”. Plea bargains can give offenders a lesser sentence if they are willing to plead guilty or if they have information about an offender that law enforcement may see as a bigger offender. For instance, a small drug dealer that works on a local corner may be given a better sentence if they are willing to provide information on those that are higher up in the drug organization. This information may allow for law enforcement to prosecute the individual that they feel has committed the more serious crime, such as importing the drugs into the country to be distributed by many dealers.

My philosophy and approach to balancing this is that there would be no way for the courts to go through a trial on each and every case that comes in as they are already overburdened. This is also a way to gain information on those criminals that might remain at large because there is no actual evidence to connect them to a crime. I believe that this is one of the best ways to handle something that can be seen as imperfect as our justice system. It may not always work with everyone that is guilty being punished, but it does its best to try to protect the good of the citizens of the country.
There are times when law enforcement can use immoral means to accomplish desirable ends, such as lying in interrogation or going undercover. These actions can be a form of deception on the part of law enforcement, but in some cases, it may be the only way to get to the bottom of a case or get justice. For instance, a law enforcement officer may need to go undercover to gather information about a criminal organization like the Italian mob or street gang. This is a deception because the officer is not being honest about his background, but this would be the only way to gather information about secretive organizations that are able to cover their tracks when it comes to their criminal activities.

My philosophy and approach to balancing this is that there are times when it is necessary to do what is necessary to catch a criminal. Criminals are not acting in a way that is ethical and are doing everything that they can to get away with their crimes. It makes sense that in order to catch a criminal that law enforcement has to find ways that they are able to work within the rules of their organization to be better equipped to deal with this issue. Police officers are able to exceed the speed limit when they are on their way to a call or pursuing a suspect because of this very issue, so it makes sense that there may be other things that law enforcement should be able to do their job.

There are ways to use ethics in decision making about these issues in criminal justice. One is understanding the concept of ethics and your own way of viewing the world. According to Pollock (2011), “When individuals have discretion, individual prejudices and preconceptions of groups such as women, minorities, and homosexuals can influence their decision making. Officers’ views of the world affect the way they do their jobs”. Understanding this is a possibility may help in dealing with people that otherwise an officer may view suspiciously and potentially violate their rights only because of a stereotype or prejudice that was ingrained in a person when they were young. Another way to use ethics in decision making when it comes to these issues in criminal justice is to know the rules and regulations along with thinking about a person’s own ethical stance before a person is placed in this type of situation. This can enable them to make a better decision in the heat of the moment because they already thought about this issue and how to handle it. Also, in order to use ethics in decision making when it comes to these issues in criminal justice, it would be important to try to keep calm about a situation. For instance, having a suspected kidnapper in custody with a missing child could be a situation where some law enforcement officers may think about crossing a line to try to find the child. Keeping calm may allow them to find a way to get the information they need without compromising their ethics.

Law enforcement can be an ethically tricky profession where situations come up where the officer has to make a decision on the best action to take. It is important to know that there should be a balance between the rights that an individual has and the duty to protect the public good. It is also hard to balance the use of rewards and punishment in the criminal justice system as there are times it can be in the good of the system to reward some offenders for their actions even though they committed a crime. There are also times when law enforcement needs to use deception to be able to catch the criminal, but it should be balanced with ethical behaviors.

References

Ferdico, J. N., Fradella, H. F., & Totten, C. D. (2008). Criminal procedure for the criminal justice professional (10th ed., ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Heumann, M. (1981). Plea bargaining: the experiences of prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys (Paperback ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pollock, J. M. (2011). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.