The Dirty Harry Problem
“When and to what extent does the morally good end warrant or justify an ethically, politically, or legally dangerous means for its achievement?” This is the question posed by Carl Klockars about the ever growing Dirty Harry problem in society. This has become a focus of mass media and even a source of profit. The name itself comes from a Hollywood movie staring Clint Eastwood. Well if you believe the movies then the answer is never, for along as the bad guy gets what he deserves than the means didn’t matter. But at some point doesn’t a line have to be drawn?
Yes, in some manner in some situations I believe that you must step off the position of power and leadership, and get your hands dirty. Klockars argues that all persons encountered by police officers in situation of enforcement, such as a traffic stop, must be considered guilty. The officer must take that stand in order to protect themselves. If nothing is found the person is merely innocent this time. This assumption doesn’t justify using dirty means however. Only when an officer knows guilt exists should dirty means come into effect.
There must be limits to these means; officers can not just go around using acts that are not considered legal, just because they are in a position of power. The dirty means are a last resource in a situation where something greater than the law hangs in the balance. Revenge or punishment does not fit these criteria; Klockars says that some officers may use these ideals of dirty means in order to punish the guilty. This is not what the dirty harry problem is about, however it may be how some people view the subject.
Klockars is correct when discussing, when only a dirty means will work. Departments must take some responsibility for the actions of the officers. Had the department trained the officers well? In many cases perfectly legal acts may produce the same results that, dirty ones do. This situation implies that the officers had no ideas as to how to conduct proper investigations, or they don’t understand the consequences for their actions, not only to them but the investigation, as the suspect will surely go free. But of course it is easy to preach from a classroom, those officers dealing with situations rely on instinct an...
... middle of paper ...
...ns who condone the dirty means, force officers to go a catch people to keep their jobs. If they are a ticket short might they not ticket someone who doesn’t deserve it? Arrest an innocent person just to keep track with what is required. The last moral dilemma is that, the police as they should be, are held to a higher standard than those they chase. Doesn’t that give the edge back to those the police are trying to stop? If so, then officers must from time to time remove that edge, remind the criminals that the police are higher then them and will stop criminals no matter what.
The Dirty Harry problem is much more than the violation of a few rights. It has at its core the equalization of police and criminals. While this equalization is better achieved thought legal and just means, from time to time that may need to be broken. I do not condone the use of violence to gain something; I merely understand that sometimes there is no other choice but to do what must be done. To answer the question from the start, only when a life may be saved can the morally good end warrant or justify an ethically, politically, or legally dangerous means for its achievement.
As taught in the lectures, it is impossible for police officers to win the war against crime without bending the rules, however when the rules are bent so much that it starts to violate t...
Crank & Caldero (2004) discuss the notion of the noble cause that is widely used by police officers to justify their actions. Police officers feel that there are many obstacles that prevent them to do their job efficiently. They claim that courts only hinder the process of putting criminals behind bars. They also believe that they are true patriots with a noble cause of getting rid of bad guys. To further prove their point Crank & Caldero (2004) use works of many authors, who wrote about police ethics and corruption and about how the noble cause is interpreted by police officers. Each of the authors discusses a dilemma with which polices officers have to deal when deciding what action they need to take in order to deal with criminals. Cumulatively, it seems that police conduct themselves towards criminals and citizens with hostility and with actions that maybe constituted as unlawful and corruptive in nature. But to the police officers, who are seeking justice and are driven by a noble cause, all means are good to get the bad guys. There is also a philosophical twist that puts a poli...
For years police corruption has been a major problem in American society but where is the line between moral and unethical police corruption, many modern movies address this vary issue. Some films portray how types of police corruption can have a positive influence on society, while others show the dark side of police corruption. Many law enforcement agents join the criminal justice with the basic idea of “justice for all,” however, most of them do not realize that the nice guy doesn’t always win. Even though there are vast amounts of movies which specifically address police corruption we will use three main movies for our argument today, mostly LA Confidential, however, also Training Day.
The movie Dirty Harry is about a cop who was known as Dirty Harry. Harry is a cop film with Clint Eastwood, who depicts Harry Callahan, as a strict cop. He uses any means to bring down a criminal, even if it means breaking the rules. He seeks justice and never forgets the case until he gets it done, even if the government asks him to leave the case. Regarding the movie, Edwin J. Delattre states that “It is easy for the justice system to protect potential suspects ahead of enforcing the rights of victims while ignoring citizens who were in danger or who had been murdered” (2002).
Officers abusing their power can range from taking bribes, choosing who they decide to let go and who to prosecute, and even abusing their power by molestation. In July of 2009 two Phoenix police officers lost their jobs after they stopped a bikini clad woman who had run from a rear end collision. The officers handcuffed her, drove her back to the accident scene to complete the paper work, and then drove her to elementary school where they knew that they would be alone. When they reached the school one of them fondled her breasts, abdomen, and buttocks while the other one watched and did nothing to help he...
For numerous years, corruption within the police department has been a national problem. The corruption is not only limited to America, it reaches parts of Asia and Europe. Police officers are investigated regarding this issue, with good judgement. Corruption and misconduct in the police department are evident in various embodiment.
...an also affect the integrity of a department. The book states that “if the police culture influences the level of police misconduct, it is important to change it” (Pollock 208) This culture can lead officers to believe that what others are doing is ok, and, that in turn, makes it okay for them to do it also. These views and actions can be changed by a change in supervision or by taking ethics classes.
Wood identifies that during the probationary period of the police officers first year on the force he or she can easily be fired for any cause. He specifically points to the fact that if a rookie police officer were to complain about another police officer’s ethical behavior the rookie police officer could be terminated. This constant threat of easy termination forces the police officers hand to fall in line with others. Consequently, during the officers first year he or she learns to shut up and do as others do. Therefore, by the end of the polices officers first year he or she is just as corrupt or ignorant to the corrupt actions of fellow officers. For instance, Mr. Wood alleged that another officer kicked a handcuffed and facedown suspect at the end of a chase (Wood, 2015). Two problem exist, the actions of the officer kicking an act of malfeasance and the failure to report the crime by the witnessing officer an act of nonfeasance. Although probationary periods are great policy, if not administered correctly an environment of corruption will easily be passed to another generation of police officers. Therefore, the lack of department policy to protect new officers from termination if reporting unethical actions was the driving factor the lead officers like Sgt. Wood to perform nonfeasance while the other officers kicked the suspect (Albanese, 2012). Essentially, police officer become ignorant of the unethical behavior
“But they didn't have to beat me this bad. I don't know what I did to be beat up." Rodney King, March 3, 1991. Police Brutality has been a long lasting problem in the United States since at least 1903 when police Captain Williams of the New York Police Department said the phrase, "There is more law at the end of a policeman's nightstick than in a decision of the Supreme Court." In the 1920's the Wichersham Commission had a number of instances of police brutality. Many of these included the use of the "third degree" (beating to obtain a confession). This is a very effective way to get a confession out of somebody. However, beating the accused could easily elicit a confession from a scared and innocent person. Also, this puts the accused person's life in danger. Police officers must make snap life and death decisions daily. Officers' work in an environment where death (theirs, their partners, and an innocent or guilty person) is one decision away. How does that constant fear effect an officer's perception? Unfortunately, many that are attracted to law enforcement are aggressive and prone towards violence as a solution. Police officers have a lot of power. With this power comes responsibility. Police brutality can be defined as the excessive or unreasonable use of force in dealing with citizens, suspects and offenders.
The article Police Integrity: Rankings of Scenarios on the Klockars Scale by “Management Cops,” conveys that the different scenarios for each definition and the nature of police work make this corruption difficult to specifically define (Vito 153). Since it is so challenging to correctly define, the three broad ca...
Police misconduct is as rampant as ever in America, and it has become a fixture of the news cycle. Police brutality is the use of any force exceeding that reasonably necessary to accomplish a lawful police purpose. The media is inevitably drawn toward tales of conflict, hence why there are so many crime and police stories on the news. Despite the increasing frequency of misbehaving cops, many Americans still maintain a high respect for the man in uniform. Still, police misconduct is a systemic problem, not just an anecdotal one. Here are some reasons why it is a problem. First, many departments don’t provide adequate training in nonviolent solutions. With this, police are unfamiliar with what to do in a non-violent situation, often resorting
Bibliography Why Good Cops Go Bad. Newsweek, p.18. Carter, David L. (1986). Deviance & Police. Ohio: Anderson Publishing Co. Castaneda, Ruben (1993, Jan. 18). Bearing the Badge of Mistrust. The Washington Post, p.11. Dantzer, Mark L. (1995). Understanding Today's Police. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. James, George (1993, Mar. 29). Confessions of Corruption. The New York Times, P.8, James, George (1993, Nov. 17). Officials Say Police Corruption is Hard To Stop. The New York times, p.3. Sherman, Lawrence W(1978). Commission Findings. New York Post, P. 28 Walker, J.T. (1992). The police in America, p.243-263, chp. 10, Walker, Samuel (1999).
One may ask themselves, if law enforcement officers are working to protect the public, why would they commit corruption like they do? As it is described above, corruption is a big part in the law enforcement sector of society. The entire concept is quite complex although it may seem self explanatory to many people. Learning the many types of corruption and misconduct is only the beginning, then, to understand why the officers commit the conduct for which they do. With all this, it becomes apparent to the certain measures that need to be taken to rid society and police departments of the conduct that is constantly present.
Police behavior is different across all communities. In fact, how police react to combat crime is affected by the management style of the various police administrators. Also, local politics will have a strong influence on how police react to crime. When police respond to a call, they will make a determination of the “cost and benefits” of their reaction. How they decide to intervene is based on the net gain to the neighborhood, suspect and the officer himself (Wilson, 1969). There have been several efforts to understand how police use discretion in their day-today operations. One of the difficulties in understanding police discretion, is when an officer makes a determination not to invoke the law, that decision is often not seen by anyone who would oversight over that officers decision, therefore that decision is usually not subject to review from any authority (Wilson, 1969). Police records are usually to incomplete to allow evaluation of non-enforcement decisions (Goldstein, 1960) Full enforcement of the law is not possible due to various reasons, a limitation of officer time, and a limitation of investigative devices. In some instances the police may choose not to enforce the law in order to allow a confidential informant to gather information on another suspect. This is an exchange relationship where both parties have the opportunity to gain so...
It is often said that power brings corruption, but in reality it is an individual’s lack of character, self-discipline, and integrity that leads to corruption. Law enforcement can bring many temptations on the job, and maintaining an up most level of personal integrity can often times be very difficult. The very nature of the job surrounds officers with all of the bad things that society, produces. There can be an endless amount of training and rules put into place to try and deter officers from committing unethical acts, but in the end it really just comes down to the specific individual and their willingness to do the right thing.