Which Policy Would An Act Consequentialist Choose And Why

2a) Which policy would an act consequentialist choose, and why? What about this do you find plausible or implausible? When it comes to making ethical decisions, consequentialism prioritizes the maximization of good outcomes as the basis for moral justification. Within this ethical concept, the evaluation of policies such as Policy 1, which involves empowering the police/military to establish a safer community, becomes significant. Act consequentialism is a form of consequentialism that influences peoples’ decisions by ranking consequences of an act from best to worst, ultimately cultivating the moral rightness of one's decision. An act consequentialist would apply policy 1, as their focus is narrowed on the (alleged) set of consequences: a reduction
2b) Which policy would Nagel’s intrinsic rights theorists choose, and why? What about this do you find plausible or implausible? Thomas Nagel’s ethical framework, presented in the article ‘Personal Rights and Public Space’, offers a good understanding of a philosopher's non-consequentialist point of view, prioritizing moral status over the alleged consequences of an act. Nagel’s ethical theories support the selection of Policy 2; evokes constraints as to what police/military can do to people in their attempts to prevent crime/terrorism, along with raising the rigorous procedures and evidence required for police to take action against people. Nagel would select Policy 2 even if the selection results in an (alleged) increase in crime rates. The alleged set of consequences under policy 1 suppose that crime rates will significantly drop whilst the violation of privacy and basic rights of innocent people will increase. Nagel recognizes that even if rights make it more challenging to achieve a good, or help the prevention of evil, one shall not be seen as