Philosophical and practical approaches

Write a three to five (3-5) [that is a min” rel=”nofollow”>inimum] page paper in” rel=”nofollow”>in which you: 1. Create a philosophy and approach for balancin” rel=”nofollow”>ing the issues of in” rel=”nofollow”>individual rights and the public’s protection. Provide one
to two (1 to 2) examples illustratin” rel=”nofollow”>ing how you will balance the two issues in” rel=”nofollow”>in your own career in” rel=”nofollow”>in law enforcement. Usin” rel=”nofollow”>ing your philosophical approach how do you balance the needs of both the
in” rel=”nofollow”>individual and society’s need for order and safety. How do you do this in” rel=”nofollow”>in your chosen career. You need to identify your career and how this will apply. This question is askin” rel=”nofollow”>ing you to “create” your
own philosophy that balances the tension between in” rel=”nofollow”>individual rights and public safety. For in” rel=”nofollow”>instance there are limits as to how far you can go to compromise in” rel=”nofollow”>individual rights because of the
Constitution. However, if you are a consequentialist, and the ends justify the means then you can squeeze Constitutional Rights. If you are a Kantian then the Constitution trumps. You can model
your chosen philosophy on any of the various ethical theories that have been presented, or combin” rel=”nofollow”>ine them. Most theories boil down to deontology or teleology. Usin” rel=”nofollow”>ing your philosophical approach how do
you balance the needs of both the in” rel=”nofollow”>individual rights an autonomy which in” rel=”nofollow”>includes privacy, and society’s need for order and safety. How do you do this in” rel=”nofollow”>in your chosen career. You need to identify your
career and how this will apply. Remember to prove one or two examples that illustrate your argument.
The biggest problem I see with this question is that students do not identify their philosophy, and do not make a decision as to how do you balance personal rights and public safety. What criteria
will you use to decide which is more important?
2. Determin” rel=”nofollow”>ine a philosophy and approach for balancin” rel=”nofollow”>ing the use of reward and punishment in” rel=”nofollow”>in crimin” rel=”nofollow”>inal justice. Provide one to two (1-2) examples illustratin” rel=”nofollow”>ing how you will use this philosophy in” rel=”nofollow”>in your
own career. Usin” rel=”nofollow”>ing your philosophical approach how do you balance the use of rewards and punishments to ensure that they are fairly handed out. You have to decide your goal, and explain” rel=”nofollow”>in why your
choice of rewards or punishments meets the goals. What will be rewarded, and what punished. You need to identify your career and how this will apply. Usin” rel=”nofollow”>ing the philosophical approach that you have
chosen, how do you balance the use of rewards and punishments to ensure that they are fairly handed out. See pp 90-92, 114-117and/or Chapter 8 of the text. You have to decide your goal, and explain” rel=”nofollow”>in
why your choice of rewards or punishments meets the goals. What will be rewarded, and what punished. You need to identify your career and how this will apply. The biggest mistake I see on this
question is not tyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing management recommendations to a particular ethical/philosophical approach.
3. Select a philosophy and approach that addresses the use of immoral means (e.g., torture or lyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing in” rel=”nofollow”>in in” rel=”nofollow”>interrogation) to accomplish desirable ends. Provide one to two (1-2) examples illustratin” rel=”nofollow”>ing
how you will use this philosophy in” rel=”nofollow”>in your own career. By now you should be on a roll. First identify what you consider “immoral means”. Remember that there is a huge difference between torture and
lyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing in” rel=”nofollow”>in in” rel=”nofollow”>interrogations. Most systems recognize that torture is a violation of human rights and not accepted by any ethicaVmoral code. The debate of waterboardin” rel=”nofollow”>ing is whether or not it is torture,
not whether torture is permitted. Deontology might argue that any lyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing is not permitted while utilitarianism might support the use of lyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing to achieve a greater good. The question specifically
asks for a utilitarian analysis. You do not have to use torture and lyin” rel=”nofollow”>ing in” rel=”nofollow”>in in” rel=”nofollow”>interrogations. You can identify somethin” rel=”nofollow”>ing else. The critical piece is this is askin” rel=”nofollow”>ing for a utilitarian analysis of
somethin” rel=”nofollow”>ing that many people would not accept as permissible. You need to identify your career and how this will apply.
4. Explain” rel=”nofollow”>in what you believe the Ethics of Care and Peacemakin” rel=”nofollow”>ing Crimin” rel=”nofollow”>inology presented in” rel=”nofollow”>in your textbook should mean for law enforcement professionals. This is a straight forward question. Read the
sections in” rel=”nofollow”>in the textbook, then explain” rel=”nofollow”>in how they each can be applied effectively by law enforcement professionals .

find the cost of your paper