Essay On Deontology

according to the government, does not mean that it is immoral. An example would be speeding in speed zones. Some states allow up to a certain speed over legal speed limits. A ticket can be written in certain instances of course. This is where officer discretion comes in and dissects what can warrant a cause for a ticket in the situation. When using rule utilitarianism an officer would have to take into consideration if all of society was allowed to speed excessively over the posted limit. If an individual decided to speed in a school zone then that would warrant a ticket in most cases. It is hard to keep everyone happy all the time. This can be a problem in using utilitarianism with decision making. Another issue is that utilitarianism disregards the action committed, rather than taking it into consideration. By focusing more on the consequences of an action, officers can disregard the law in which they took an oath to carry out for the community. This can support that society’s feelings should not always be taken into consideration when it comes to the decision-making process of the responding officer and can prevent equality of treatment within the community
According to Conway and Gawronski, deontology is more focused on the action itself, rather than the consequence as in utilitarianism (Conway & Gawronski, 2013, p. 216). Deontology originated from Immanual Kant, who believed that outcomes are determined by the morality of the action committed. Law enforcement officers take the oath of ethics to follow the good order and discipline of the law, which is how deontology fits as a decision-making process. Whether officers want to or not it is their obligation to carry out the government’s duties. Unconditional and hypothetical imperatives are two types of duties. An example of a hypothetical duty would be accumulating as much evidence as you can to build enough probable cause to charge a subject and win a case. The duty hypothetical imperative