Public
Policy in Criminal Justice
Ethical
decisions are decisions that every person makes every day when going about
their day. Making an ethical decision
could be as easy as waiting at a red light when nobody is around or crossing
the street by foot when cleared to by the traffic system. The problem with ethics is that they are
subject to interpretation from person to person. Ethical standards often drive various
policies to determine what is allowed and what is not allowed. These same standards drive legislation to
create what is illegal and what is legal under the government of any society.
As
time progresses some things that were illegal become legal or fall under far
less of a punishment and some things that were not illegal become illegal. This trend is representative of a changing
culture, social standard and mentality of what is ethical or right and what is
unethical or wrong. Police officers face
tough ethical decisions daily when facing difficult calls where they need to
determine use of force if necessary.
Historically, there have been some severe use of force cases that have
gone national and some cases where the victim has won in court. These police officers however do not write
the law but merely follow it assuming the laws written by the elected officials
are right and ethical.
Policy
writers in the criminal justice system are often reactive to incidents. When cell phones first become popular in the
late 90’s and early 21st century some vehicular accidents occurred
as a result of a vehicle operator being distracted by the use of their
phone. This drove criminal justice
policy writers, or the legislature in some states to begin writing policies to
make the use of a cellular device while driving a finable offense. This penalty picked up momentum in several
other states where the penalty has grown and become more and more severe. The questions the policy writers face
whenever writing any new policy, such as cellular device restrictions are if
they are ethical and constitutional.
While
banning cellular devices while operating a vehicle sailed through some states,
it failed in others or hasn’t even been brought to the table. This split in mentality shows two distinct
sides to the issue. Some states have
legislature writers who state that careless and reckless driving are obvious
offenses already in law that match the description of what a careless or
reckless vehicle operator may do while distracted by their cellular device. States that block cellular use state that they
are saving lives and preventing accidents by introducing additional laws other
than careless and reckless driving laws.
So this presents an issue, are the states that refuse to introduce new
laws being unethical and careless or are the states entering additional laws
being unethical by appearing to be more of a “nanny” style state?
Ian, how would you answer the questions that you have raised in your blog? This is another good blog. Professor Taylor
ReplyDeleteI feel that ethics are in line with social evolution. As the mentality of the masses evolve the things that are important and matter change over time. Personally, I think the continuous chasing of the "shiny object" like banning cell phone usage and making it a criminal offense in some states is excessive and acting as a nanny state.
ReplyDeleteIan, thank you for responding to my questions. Professor Taylor
ReplyDelete