IndexCode of EthicsPersonal EthicsUndercover WorkCorruptionUse of ForceInterrogationsOther InteractionsThe topic of police tactics, including the use of force and deceptive techniques, is the subject of speculation quite often. What is appropriate and what is not? Society finds itself asking itself this frequently. The Rodney King incident, Ferguson, Miranda and countless others have become public, prompting questions about the ethical and moral standards police officers should follow. It is clear from these incidents and others like them that police officers have a code of conduct that they are expected to follow. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayCode of EthicsPersonal EthicsEvery person has their own personal code of ethics by which they live. These beliefs can be based on religion or culture. While this personal code may vary from person to person, there is a general ethic that is likely somewhat universal; such as work ethic, honesty, integrity and compassion. Personal ethics can also be the backbone of more organizationally based ethics. United Nations Code of Ethics and IAPC In 1979, the United Nations listed 8 fundamental principles regarding the conduct of police officers. They are as follows (UNHR 2017): · Officers must fulfill their duties by serving and protecting themselves from unlawful acts · Officers must respect and protect human dignity and human rights · Officers may use force only when necessary and only in fulfillment of duty · Officers must maintain confidentiality unless duty or justice requires otherwise · Officers must not incite, inflict or tolerate torture · Officers must protect the health of detained persons by ensuring necessary medical care · Officers must agents must not commit acts of corruption and must oppose such acts · Agents must respect the law and report violations of the law or code of conduct. While this set of rules does not encompass all aspects of daily work, it hits some of the most critical aspects: the use of force, bribery and corruption. human rights. While most law enforcement offices create their own code of conduct and expectations, these principles remain vital parts as they form the basic framework. The International Association of Chiefs of Police also lists an expected code of conduct. It adopts many of the same principles listed in the UN Code of Conduct, but also includes provisions regarding personal life and objective action in the performance of one's duty (IAPC 2017). This is important because it not only provides a baseline of expectations during service, but a general set of expectations. It is important to have a strong set of ethics and follow a code of conduct. However, at certain times police officers find themselves in situations where the application of certain ethical principles is not only contradictory to achieving the desired outcome, but can also be dangerous. It is important to understand as civilized members of society that these situations happen and happen often. It is also important to understand how to act in the most ethical way in a particular situation. Undercover Work The nature of undercover work is inherently deceptive. An officer lies to the alleged criminals about who they are in order to infiltrate the group and gain information. Sometimes this information is collected for learning purposes only. For example, undercover operations inform law enforcement aboutways to manipulate customs (for shipping), how drugs can be smuggled and many other key information. Other times the undercover work is done as a kind of in-person surveillance. In this case the officer has personal knowledge of the criminal activity. This type of work is intended to gather evidence to lead to an arrest. Some examples include undercover work in drug rings and human trafficking. There are many moral dilemmas faced in undercover work. As stated, it is incredibly deceptive to begin with. Other aspects that come into question are whether the agents themselves are involved in illegal activities, whether the agents illicitly commit illegal activities while undercover, and if so, are the agents still credible. In undercover situations the commission of illegal acts may be necessary to maintain cover and gain the trust of targets of investigation (Hotham 2015). For example, an undercover agent might attempt to infiltrate a major drug ring; he may be required to make his way by selling drugs. Faced with these dilemmas, how should an officer proceed? Many agencies provide clear rules on how to behave, as well as additional training for undercover work. Officers are often asked not to solicit illegal activities, such as drug dealing or encouraging prostitution; they are instead encouraged to be more passive allowing the person to act independently and choose to pursue those illegal activities (Hotham 2015). Obviously this is the most ethical choice an officer can make in these situations; however, it is not always a feasible choice. The officer also has an obligation to try to preserve his life, and in some cases even compliance with this marginal ethic can put him in grave danger. At that point the necessary ethic is that of the greater good: one must do what one can to help the larger group, including participating in illegal activities to help stop future illegal activities. This should not discredit the officer. Corruption Anyone who has ever seen a film or television program about the police is familiar with the concept of corruption. Agents who team up with criminals to receive a reward, agents who steal items from the evidence locker, agents who use authority to obtain sexual favors from citizens to avoid fines; the list of situational corruption goes on and on. According to the United Nations Code of Conduct, agents must oppose and report this type of behavior; but this is not always the practice (2017). Many officers feel they owe loyalty to their colleagues (which is another personal ethic), so speaking out can be seen as a betrayal. In situations of corruption, it is essential to act ethically. Society gives a certain level of authority to police officers due to the nature of what they do; Corruption undermines the entire law enforcement branch of the legal system and causes significant distrust of police officers. An example of this is the case of Officer Julian Steele, who used his position and deception tactics to obtain illicit sexual favors from the mother of an arrested teenager (Lynch 2013). Not only was Steele himself arrested and charged with multiple crimes, but he was called into question the integrity of his previous cases. In these cases, the use of ethics is not really questionable because there is no greater good for society that can result from corruption. Officers must obey and respect the law and report those who do not. The use of force As the United Nations code of conduct specifies, force shouldbe used only when necessary and in the performance of duty (2017). There can be no exception to this, nor any questionable ethics. The term force can be used to describe the use of physical actions (e.g. hitting) or the use of weapons (gun, baton, taser, etc.). Due to the training officers receive, they are more well equipped to use both their weapons and their bodies as a weapon than civilians. The use of force can be deadly when applied by an officer. One of the biggest controversies in society regarding police is the use of force and when it is appropriate. Should an officer be allowed to strike, use rough maneuvers to subdue, or kill an individual? The UN code states only that force may be used when necessary. In cases where police use extreme force, the incident is often investigated thoroughly to ascertain whether their actions were appropriate. For example, when the video from the Rodney King incident emerged it was clear to many that the level of force used by the officers was excessive. Although they were initially acquitted, the Supreme Court found that the officers had acted inappropriately (Nazaryan 2017). In some cases, the use of even deadly force is understandable, such as when the life of the officer or another individual (a victim) is in immediate danger. While extreme force was inappropriate in the King case, it has proven necessary in many other cases. While society cannot determine the level of danger an officer perceives at any given time, we expect them to use sound, rational judgment in those situations. In 1989, the United States Supreme Court considered what level of force is acceptable in the case Graham v. Connor. The case centered on the treatment of a diabetic man falsely suspected of criminal behavior (Clark 2014). The outcome of this process established what the expectations are regarding the force. Judge Rehnquist is quoted as saying: “The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer present at the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight” (Clark 2014) . This explains that each situation may require a series of actions that in hindsight we might consider unnecessary, yet at the time those actions are reasonable. Interrogations Interrogations are another area of ​​police work that is scrutinized. This is due to the implementation of various tactics to obtain information. Agents can outright lie, pit people against each other, exaggerate, be incredibly vague, and employ other strategies. Everyone's goal is to get more information than they currently have. Deception is once again the root cause of the ethical dilemma in this case. It should also be noted that during interrogations, the use of force and torture conditions are also a concern. Popular culture has depicted interrogations as encounters in which an officer “beats up” the suspect to get him to confess. One such case involves an incident in which a Milwaukee officer repeatedly struck a handcuffed suspect in an interrogation room; While claiming he was trying to gain information and maintain control of the situation, experts on the use of force say these actions were unnecessary (Holloway 2015). Putting people in extreme situations such as starvation or sleep deprivation can constitute a form of torture. Depending on the person, mental capacity also plays a role. In one study, out of 40 false confessions it was noted that 17 were from mentally ill or mentally retarded people (Zahneyah 2014). This indicates that.