The scourge of police violence and brutality in the United States goes beyond what is reported in high profile stories in the news outlets. For every hot story reported about a police officer shooting an unarmed black suspect or conducting unlawful raids on businesses, there are many more allegations of police misconduct that are never reported. Some include excessive use of force, planting evidence, mistreatment of detainees, sexual harassment, among other serious offenses. African Americans face wildly disproportionate rates of police violence and wrongful arrests compared to other racial groups. Local police officers are estimated to number 600,000 from 12000 local police agencies. While women, LGBTQIA+, and persons of color make up a good percentage of the force, the bulk remains predominantly males who are white and straight, making the issue of racism and discrimination more profound. What is amiss is that some officers think that such actions are justifiable, some citing the Dinkheller's killing. Research has shown that policing is not a risky occupation as one would expect, with only 13 per 100,000 police officers dying on the job (2017 estimates), compared to 24 deaths per 100,000 for farmers, 26.9 per 100,000 for truck drivers, and 34.9 per 100,000 deaths for trash collectors (Bureau of labor statistics, 2019). Many strategies have been recommended to control this, including psychological screening of candidates, immediate employment termination, and excessive force training drills, accountability partners, monitoring at risk police officers, and defunding police departments, among others. This discussion will focus chiefly on the ethics of defunding police departments as an intervention to containing police misconduct with the case illustration of Garden city, Minnesota.
Statement of the Problem
Defunding the police implies reallocation of funds meant for police to other government and community agencies. Defund the police movement advocates for the relocation of funds from large municipalities with a history of police misconduct to serve other needs. In Los Angeles, for example, $100 million was relocated from the LAPD to defund community programs for minority groups. In Baltimore, $22 million from a budget of $500 million will be defunded in the 2021 fiscal year to fund construction of recreation centers, trauma units and provide forgivable loans to Africa –American owned business. This movement has seen tremendous benefits in these states altogether. In the current case study, 25% of Garden City's police department was defunded following the Floyd murder and mounting pressure on city officials by activist groups to reduce police violence. Following the implementation, police stops and arrests for minority persons dropped, but the crime rate went up in some blocks due to low police presence. Response time to 911 calls also reduced by a significant margin. Defunding the police in Garden city proved to have both positive and negative impacts. The mayor faces a dilemma to choose the lesser evil between high rate minority arrests, searches, and wastage of resources on nonviolent response to service calls should be he chose to rescind the program or high crime rates due to stretched police resources if the program stays in effect.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
If the program remains in effect, crime rates may go up, and response time for 911 calls will fall. This means the injury and death of people, higher thefts other crimes that affect the citizens directly. If the program were to be rescinded, then crime rates would fall, but police misconduct would undoubtedly increase. Additionally, wastage of resources responding to service calls of non-criminal nature will be witnessed.
Application of the Deontological Moral Theory and Utilitarian Theory
The deontological moral theory holds that the wrongness or rightness of any action does not depend on the consequences that result from the action but rather on whether or not the action s fulfill their duty or intended purpose (Constantin, 2014). This theory can assist law enforcement; in this case, the mayor, in making the best decision given the moral dilemma at hand. The deontological theory ignores the consequences and assesses the morality of the action itself. Kant (1724-1804), who developed this theory, believed that human beings all have duties to perform, and the duties are imperative such that they must never be abandoned regardless of the anticipated or realized outcomes from performing these duties. This theory, however, cautions against using other people for the desired end result. He asserted that all persons must be treated with respect regardless of the outcome. In law enforcement, deontological theory assists in moral dilemmas in three main ways; [1] universality, where law enforcers and decision-makers consider the ramifications of decisions or actions as if they were universal; [2] the importance of duty whereby law enforcers make decisions bound by their duty despite the costs personal or otherwise; [3] respect whereby decision-makers should not use other people as a means to an end by taking advantage of their weaknesses.
If the deontological theory is applied in the current case study, the mayor would not rescind the decision to defund the police department in Garden City, irrespective of the consequence. The key thing to consider according to the theory is the original intent of defunding the police, which was to control police misconduct. Given the fact the arrests of minority groups have reduced despite an increase in the crime rate, then the decision to defund is ethical arguing from a deontological point of view. The consequences of defunding the police here will be disregarded even if the crime rate skyrockets. Provided police misconduct and perceived violence has reduced, then the decision by the mayor to defund 25% of the police budget is ethical.
The second theory to discuss is the utilitarian theory. This theory is the exact opposite of deontological theory. In this approach, people are more concerned with the consequences and outcomes than they are about the individual actions that precipitate these outcomes. The end results are more important than the actions themselves (Nagin, 2019). Utilitarianism posits that actions undertaken must produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Police officers, regardless of their rank and stature, are confronted with a myriad of complex moral dilemmas while exercising their duties. Utilitarianism is among the most formidable theory to help them decide on the rightness or wrongness of an action. They should simply ask whether or not the decision or action will be of benefit to more people and harmful to a lesser number of people. If so, then the decision is ethical and should be upheld. If not, then the decision is an unethical one and should not be taken. An important thing to note is that utilitarianism seeks to maximize pleasure and happiness and minimize pain and suffering.
In the current case study, the mayor acting on the basis of utilitarianism would consider the consequences of defunding the police budget by 25% and examining whether the consequences are beneficial to the most number of people or not. The consequences were both positive and negative. On the positive side, police stop and arrests of minority persons began to go down in Garden City while crime began to go up and response times to 911 calls increased in some minority neighborhoods. Analyzing these consequences, one would realize that higher crime rates in the minority neighborhoods create less utility in comparison to a reduction in stops and arrests. Therefore, from a utilitarian perspective, the consequences of defunding the police are more negative than they are positive. With that regard, the mayor would have to rescind the defunding and reinstitute the original order where crime rates were lower.
Discussion and Conclusions
The decision for this case, in my view, also holds for utilitarianism—consequences of any action matter more than the action. If a decision is bound to cause harm, then it is best not to take it. Given the escalation in crime, evaluation of the defunding program becomes imperative and implementation of newer programs with consequences that are not detrimental to the well-being of the residents. However, utilitarianism is subject to several counterarguments. One of the most profound counterarguments is that it is impossible to determine the consequences of an action before it has already happened. There is also the weakness of unintended consequences, which utilitarianism views as immoral. For example, by defunding the police, the response time to a service call increases a person who was shot due to an increase in crime rate bleeds to death. The mayor is not directly responsible for the crime despite his being the hand that orchestrated the occurrence. Finally, the desired consequences or results from an action may not be seen immediately. Critiques may ask how long one must wait until the results are achieved and what if they are never achieved.
To respond to the first argument regarding the impossibility of determining the end result, I would suggest that actions whose end result cannot be forecasted be avoided. The use of research findings from other similar programs helps predict outcomes before taking action. Concerning unintended consequences from actions, I would prescribe that decision-makers should first assess the problem and all the circumstances to determine the potential weak areas and variations to the dilemma. Finally, decision-makers should set limits to achieve the desired result, and if not achieved, a new strategy should be formulated.
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). National census of fatal occupational injuries in 2018. Retrieved 25 th November 2020 from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
Constantin, E. (2014). Deontology in public administration. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice , 6 (1), 432-436.
Nagin, D. S. (2019). Utilitarianism and Policing in the United States. International Criminal Justice Review , 1057567719850244.
