fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2176 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2176 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Sorry for late, busy day.

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 075 secrets from Secret Submission Post #311.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

as others said, the police force is meant to enforce laws, not create or change them! if you want to change the laws your best bet is to make nice with a legislator or become one yourself. as an officer you need to do your job and part of that job is enforcing drug laws, even if you don't like them. i know a lot of cops who have done drugs before, or gotten drunk in public, or done something illegal of some sort. so it's not like you're the only person in/thinking of getting into law enforcement that may have an issue with some kind of law. but remember what the line of work is - law enforcement. it's that simple, do it or don't. you don't get to cherry pick which ones to enforce.

Not anon.

Interesting.

In practical terms you sorta do, at least in the UK.

That's a big part of why they're 'officers'. A constable isn't going to be expected to stop every single person without a seatbelt for example. Hell turning a possible reported crime into a civil dispute is an art form in some cases. The lack of targets which is imposed for obvious reasons, also makes it difficult to deal with all but the most egregious laziness, or lack of action.

Yeah if some officer is walking past a serious assault or something, and doesn't do anything they'll be in a world of shit, but simply going up to a prostitute soliciting, or a guy with a spliff - and telling them to knock that shit off whilst taking no further action? Nah.

Perhaps things are widely different in the US. I would be surprised though.

i never said officers don't give warnings and nothing else. but that's part of enforcing the law. they're not always obligated by their badge to give out tickets or arrest people who are breaking petty laws. most officers here give warnings unless you piss them off.

but if you have an actual moral problem with a law then i doubt you'd be the type to give out warnings too, hence my comment. there's a difference between an officer having bigger fish to fry at the moment and an officer consciously opting out of warning or ticketing a person for an offense solely because the officer doesn't ~like that law.

Not really, or rather I don't think the difference is as great as you're suggesting, and that in real terms it happens all the time anyway.

are you in law enforcement/law/lawmaking, or have you had experience in any of these things, or are you just assuming? because i am speaking from experience, and in principle there is actually a noticeable difference between those two things. it's all about the whys.

The former.

Can't really expand for obvious reasons unfortunately.

(less something that would affect me, more colleagues tho)

then surely we can agree that it's about the whys, and that, officer depending, there is a noticeable difference between turning the other cheek when you have more important things to do and turning the other cheek because you never intend to enforce a law you vowed to enforce when you went into law enforcement.

At the same time, there's clearly a point at which it is no longer morally acceptable to enforce laws, even as a police officers. There are some laws which it is clearly morally wrong to enforce. I don't believe that there is any moral or legal obligation to obey an unjust law or order.

So I disagree with you in principle, but I do agree with you that, in this case, giving a cannabis warning is probably not the hill you want to die on, especially as long as its just a warning and not an actual arrest. If it was an arrest, you could (in the United States) make an argument that it would be unjust to arrest the person for cannabis use, but a warning is different.

There's also the point that ill_omened makes that it's partly a matter of discretion and choice - and the other point to make, I think, is that OP is being encouraged to do this (as far as I can tell) as a part of attempting to get promoted in the course of their attempt to join the police force. So there's a combination of the questions that OP has to ask his or herself - "Am I only doing this for my career? Is my career important enough to me to suck it up and do this?" Etc. So I think that complicates things.

[ SECRET POST #2176 ]

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question

Re: Ethical Question