Police are supposed to possess a moral code that is righteous in nature and maintains only good intentions. They are not supposed to take small gifts from the populace as it increases the chances that small forms of corruption will take root and bloom into something that’s beyond their control. Leadership within the policing environment plays a crucial role in keeping the subordinates on the straight and narrow as they should lead by example (Martin 2017). However, the officers, themselves, must truly represent the ideals that the agency believes in to keep corruption at a minimum. Martin established how letting one’s guard down to corrupting influences can turn a good cop into a bad one after a prolonged period of
With the attitude of the Canadian government, this action helps avoid devastation its national magazines. If I were the Canadian government, trying to protect the domestic magazine market, I would enforce a restrictive law on split-run magazines and organize investment operations in the domestic magazine. Besides, some criteria would be established to distinguish between a split-run and a domestic magazine such as content, quality, ideas, and advertisement amount. I would ask myself these questions: what is the main content? How is its quality?
Therefore, Lord Devlin based on consensual morality has focused more on the enforcement of morality according to the general concept of society. To understand the relationship between law and morality, Lord Devlin has proposed a set of rules. Firstly, the requirement of general sense of right and wrong in a society which is known as common morality as it is a right-minded value that should be maintained by the law. Secondly, there may be bad laws, bad morals or bad societies due to the reason that the law might not serve the society but destroy it even though it is a valid law and provides profit to some people in the
According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, a relativistic view of morality provides a more tolerant and understanding worldview, in which people are encouraged to view an act from the perspective of the actor (Gowans 2011). The observer may have his or her own moral views, but does not judge the moral actions of others because he or she believes that morality is relative. Instead, the criminal justice community will, ideally, uphold the law, ignoring personal moral beliefs. This may be useful from the perspective of Criminal Justice.
Therefore this explains the importance of challenging unjust laws to keep government on a small scale by civilians acting as the counter force to balance authority and prevent corruption. Dr. King also supports this when he describes two types of laws that determine when civil disobedience is needed and a responsibility. He advocates, “one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws” and “a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws” (King 2). Similar to Antigone she tells Creon about her defying acts, her moral duty and how the “final justice that rules the world below makes no such law” against morals that need to be refuted (Antigone 10). Dr. King and Sophocles both advocate the moral responsibility of
The most important concept that is echoed throughout the criminal justice profession is integrity. CBP and the Fort Collins Police Department imply that this principle is the cornerstone of their agency and places the utmost emphasis on ethical and moral principles. The significance of the concept is to ensure that officers understand what conducts honor for your organization and
Ethical egoism is a moral theory focused on improving a person’s well-being. There are many arguments for ethical egoism such as the Self-Reliance Argument and the Best Argument for Ethical Egoism, both presented by Shafer-Landau in The Fundamentals of Ethics. However, in this paper I will discuss how objections presented by Shafer-Landau and Dr. Thomas Carson are fatal to ethical egoism, while keeping in mind arguments for this moral theory. I will discuss objections such as ethical egoism permitting or sometimes requiring murder, theft, or rape, in order to promote oneself’s well-being, egoists subconscious belief of their lives being more important than others, and an argument presented in class that if egoists must do what is best for their
Objectivity states that members must not compromise their professional or business judgement because of bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others. Providing misleading information (Langfield Smith, 2015). Providing misleading information and supporting Richard department will be considered to be unfair and bias. Priscilla should make decision that is in the best interest of the company and avoid any bias judgement due to her personal relationship with
In some case there are some facts which work against law. So does it imply that law is wrong? There are some arguments related to this theory: The Gratitude Argument: We have to obey the law because we are obligated to be grateful to the government because of the good things it does for us, and obeying the law is the best way of showing our gratitude.
The information, ideas and opinions are keeping for themselves since they scar to share the ideas and challenge by the others. This type of silence is same as the fear factors of Morrison and Miliken’s theory in 2000. Pro-social Silence is rely on altruism, employees retain their ideas for keeping the information, ideas and opinions that will benefit the other employee, which the ideas are work-related. Compare with the defensive silence, Pro-social silence retain the ideas to benefit the others rather than avoid personal bad outcomes. This is a form of self-protection from external threat and emphasis on personal emotion.
De George argues that engineers have a moral obligation to blow the whistle only if: they have documented evidence that would convince a reasonable, impartial observer that the engineer’s view of the situation is correct and the policy of the company is wrong (cite), and they have strong evidence that making the situation public will in fact prevent the threatened serious harm (cite). De George claims that the
People should treat their unnecessary motivations as a worthless commitment when it comes into doing something very crucial like saving a man drowning in the water. The relationship between a country’s legal system and ethical responsibility is establishing the connection of people being able to risk political and civil responsibility, while wanting to be admirable for others. Finally, many people in fact find Silver’s argument on ethical responsibility flawed; some will also find his argument reasonable because people’s emotions causes them to do random acts of helpfulness in an ethically manner. Society will improve and become beneficial through civil liability. Silver suggest that the U.S should have fair terms for people who at least attempt to assist others in need as best as possible.
Macdonald case, while still being processed, has set up an important precedent on safe searches and the interpretation of police powers in Canada. In the end, the court decided that the officer made a reasonable search when he barged in to disarm the suspect. The decision was made because the officer suspected that Macdonald was armed and dangerous to the public. The central theme of this case and analysis is whether the Officer infringed on Macdonald’s rights thus causing harm in regards to Liberal Legalism. We can conclude that the decision made in R v. Macdonald does fit Liberal Legalism but not that perfectly.
Another ethical principle that can be applied to the case is the deontological theory of categorical imperative. Under this ethical principle Cathy could argue that he had a moral duty to state and follow the laws that are given from God asserting that we are bringing God’s judgement on ourselves when we try to redefine the definition of marriage. Also under this principle it is the responsibility of the business to do the greatest good for its stakeholders in general. When Cathy stated his stance against same-sex marriage he was not thinking of his customers or the employees of the organization. As the owner of Chick-fil-A he did not respect people and
When the company shared financial information in a fileshare it’s confidential and charges could be filed. The company would most likely in this case file theft against the employee. This crime could leave an employee in imprisonment if the state or federal charges occurred. There’s also the possibility that the company you previously worked for would decide to file lawsuit damages against you and you would have to pay money to the employer. This means you have caused damages to the company and this is possible if the company is known worldwide.