This paper will summarize a current event related to an ethical issue, and the ethical issue will be clearly identified. Then, ethical theory will be applied to show how to resolve the ethical issue. The descriptive, prescriptive, and applied aspects will also be identified in relation to the given ethical issue. The majority perspective and the consequences will be discussed in detail. Finally, the paper will discuss if the majority perspective would change in a different culture and, if so, why it would change. In this digital age, one major ethical concern is privacy. Currently, whether or not phone and other digital records should be tapped for police business is under debate. Naturally, there is an ethical conflict about whether
…show more content…
For example, Kantianism has a categorical imperative. Kantianism states that, when testing whether or not a rule should be set in place, people need to ask themselves if they would want such a rule (or even a law) to be applied universally; that is, to everyone without exception (Van Camp, 2014). In this ethical situation, should everyone be subjected to a data search, if the circumstances of police work warrant it, even if it violates personal privacy? Put another way, should any person’s records or phone number be searched if needed for police investigation? This rule would have to apply to …show more content…
First, officers need personal information in order to do their job. Currently, a police officer has to request personal information, and that request has to go through a sort of chain of command, typically to a superior officer. Second, the information obtained through a search is not exact. It is only a general starting line, which assists police with their work (Rozenburg, 2015). The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) gives access to some common information, such as how long a phone was used, but it will not give what was said for that call. Detectives claim that the power to go and retrieve personal data should not be used more than necessary when doing police work (Rozenburg, 2015). From the prescriptive point of view, there is a need to determine whether obtaining personal data (thus violating privacy) is the ethical thing to do. Technically, philosophy does not recognize privacy as a right, although privacy has been recognized as a right legally in the twentieth century (Van Camp, 2014). Traditionally, the issue of privacy was covered in other areas of the Constitution. However, some current philosophers are examining the issue of privacy as a right on its own. It can be difficult to determine what this right to privacy exactly entails (Van Camp,
For example, Kantianism has a categorical imperative. Kantianism states that, when testing whether or not a rule should be set in place, people need to ask themselves if they would want such a rule (or even a law) to be applied universally; that is, to everyone without exception (Van Camp, 2014). In this ethical situation, should everyone be subjected to a data search, if the circumstances of police work warrant it, even if it violates personal privacy? Put another way, should any person’s records or phone number be searched if needed for police investigation? This rule would have to apply to …show more content…
First, officers need personal information in order to do their job. Currently, a police officer has to request personal information, and that request has to go through a sort of chain of command, typically to a superior officer. Second, the information obtained through a search is not exact. It is only a general starting line, which assists police with their work (Rozenburg, 2015). The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) gives access to some common information, such as how long a phone was used, but it will not give what was said for that call. Detectives claim that the power to go and retrieve personal data should not be used more than necessary when doing police work (Rozenburg, 2015). From the prescriptive point of view, there is a need to determine whether obtaining personal data (thus violating privacy) is the ethical thing to do. Technically, philosophy does not recognize privacy as a right, although privacy has been recognized as a right legally in the twentieth century (Van Camp, 2014). Traditionally, the issue of privacy was covered in other areas of the Constitution. However, some current philosophers are examining the issue of privacy as a right on its own. It can be difficult to determine what this right to privacy exactly entails (Van Camp,