Is this Legal/Ethical?

[loc978]

Never in my life have I seen a curfew enforced... technically legal though it was, that's a dick move by the cop (unless the kid was driving dangerously and he/she was just using that as an excuse to get 'im off the road and studying for a couple years)

 

[sirkai007]

How long was he tailing your neighbor?

 

[RanD00M]

I usually stand with the police. But that is utter bullcrap. Some might say "3 mins after 12 is still after 12", but that doesn't change the fact that suspending his license was an ultramegadouchehole move to make.

 

[TWRule]

Here is the thing: if the law is in the books then the cops have to follow it. It would be unethical for a cop to not follow the law even if they consider the law unfair. The people you need to be talking to/about is the lawmakers, not the people who enforce it.

This is an example of the correct definition of the ethical. (It is not completely relative as some of you think, you're confusing it with morality - different things.)

The police officer signs on to the force with an understanding that this means he is responsible for upholding the law, as written. If a law allows for officer discretion, as may have been there case in this scenario, it doesn't necessarily matter (ethically) what choice the officer made so long as it was in line with the law, and he followed through/took responsibility for that choice. If it is the case that the officer broke the law somehow, then it would be unethical. Even the choice to follow that person when he could have done other things is simply a choice in which he is allowed personal discretion - the system affords him that freedom to choose, so he is not in conflict with it.

Was it immoral? Depends on who you ask. There really isn't a single set morality these days to judge by, and the law is the closest tool we have to reflect democratic morality (even though it may not serve that purpose in all cases). So, you can think what the cop did was immoral in a broader perspective, but that doesn't mean it was unethical necessarily.

I don't see how someone getting in trouble for being over curfew is underhanded. It's the 'but s/he turns 18 in a month so it's not statutory' argument. They have to draw the line somewhere and if you're over that line then you're over that line and it doesn't matter if it's a little or a lot. There's nothing underhanded about that.

Plus I really can't see a viewpoint that would make the cop's actions immoral, aside from some teenage rage against the machine view. It's not like a curfew causes undue stress to a teenager regardless of how unfaaaaaaaair and terrible they think it is, and it's not like the kid wouldn't have had warning that they had to be home by midnight. I never had any problems getting home on time when I was still under curfew, and at the time the local law set it at 10PM.

Furthermore, I doubt we're getting the whole story. I highly doubt the kid got that strict a punishment for the first offense, or if they didn't have any previous warnings some snarking at the cop might have been involved. Cops tend to cut someone more slack if they're respectful.

Sorry if I was unclear, but I was actually citing you as an example of someone in this thread who used the word "ethical" correctly lol.

I was also unclear I think in my last sentence: I don't think what the police officer did is immoral or underhanded, but people with different value systems might disagree with me (for example, any of the people on this thread saying that the cop was wrong even if he followed the law).

The point I was trying to make is that morality is subjective, so people can think the cops choices were "too harsh" (immoral according to a value system that exalts mercy for young people), that he should have been less worried about the young neighbor and more so about other potential law-breakers, but others might disagree, and regardless, his actions were still ethical by definition.

And I agree that we probably aren't getting the whole story, I'm just trying to work with what we've got.

 

[Poofs]

I should have checked this more often

sorry about that one guys, so i'm gonna try and answer all your questions in 1 post

1. This happened in Ohio
2. This kid had no record against him and could NOT contest it
3. I'd like to reiterate, this ACTUALLY happened
4. This kid left his friends house, who lived over 10 minutes away.

 

[fontlas]

So my neighbor, who is 16, a new driver was driving home on a Friday night. He arrived in his driveway at 12:03 to find that a cop had tailed him all the way back to his house. As the curfew was midnight he was technically violating it, so the cops suspended his license until he turned 18. thats just under 2 years for 3 minutes past curfew. So i was wondering, are cops allowed to do this. And if they are, do you agree with it. Explain.






*Also, i would like to note that this isnt a hypothetical, it happened next door to me, i mean the house DIRECTLY next to mine.


EDIT: Alot of you guys are asking about the curfew. This happened in Ohio, where the curfew is 12:300 on weekdays and 12:00 on weekends

Curfew???

the fuck?!?

 

[Mcupobob]

This is why I despise small town police and most police in generally(Not all mind you). There bored assholes. How many of you can honestly you say you haven't been a few minuets late to somewhere? What if he was caught in traffic or was just doing a quick run to a late store to get milk in the morning?

EDIT: For those saying a cop doesn't pick and choose the law they enforce.

One of the few good policeman who said "A officer enforces law by its intent not it letter"

The intent of the curfew was to make sure teens aren't causing trouble at 1:Am not to catch them pulling in home a few minuets after curfew.

 

[Deleted]

Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.

The cop was doing his job, BUT he was being a dick.

Laws are imperfect like the humans who make them, sometimes you should bend the rules or be more lenient.

 

[Thaius]

Wow, I'm surprised how many legalistic responses this thread got... I mean really people? You're really going to be that to-the-letter in a situation like this? The kid was on his way home! Once the cop saw that was where he pulled in, only a few minutes past curfew, he should have just let him be! It's no different than the legal fluctuation around the speed limit, or the warning before ticketing someone for a broken taillight.

If he was driving around town, I would understand. But he was on his way home. Seriously, that's not cool. Legal, yes, but not at all good. We really need to work on following the spirit rather than the letter of the law in this country, especially considering many of our traffic laws are screwed up bigtime.

 

[SoulSalmon]

I haven't read ALL 11 pages so forgive me if this has been said:
But here in Australia part of moving up from your learners license to a full one is getting so many hours of driving in AT NIGHT so the whole curfew concept seems very strange to me.

That said, three minutes past should NOT be enforced, ANY given clock could have shown the time as 11:28 as opposed to 12:03 and thgere would be no proper proof OF the time to such accuracy. I wouldn't take that, there'd be a cop standing in a courtroom!

 

[Uncle_Brainhorn]

Ethical? Hell no. Legal? Since when do pigs care about what's legal?

 

[Deleted]

Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.

The cop was doing his job, BUT he was being a dick.

Laws are imperfect like the humans who make them, sometimes you should bend the rules or be more lenient.

Nope. This is a terrible idea. Bending rules is another way to say 'breaking the law'.

What next? Is a few weeks before legal age of consent okay to have sex? What's a few weeks in the grand scale? Just like a few minutes late, right?

The line is there for a reason. The law doesn't say 'oh, okay. You can be three minutes late.'

Well that's going into extremes, and factors in other things. This (3 minutes after curfew) literally hurts nobody and is just the cop punishing the OP rather harshly.

How about 3 minutes before she turns 18?

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.

The cop was doing his job, BUT he was being a dick.

Laws are imperfect like the humans who make them, sometimes you should bend the rules or be more lenient.

Nope. This is a terrible idea. Bending rules is another way to say 'breaking the law'.

What next? Is a few weeks before legal age of consent okay to have sex? What's a few weeks in the grand scale? Just like a few minutes late, right?

The line is there for a reason. The law doesn't say 'oh, okay. You can be three minutes late.'

Well that's going into extremes, and factors in other things. This (3 minutes after curfew) literally hurts nobody and is just the cop punishing the OP rather harshly.

How about 3 minutes before she turns 18?

Yeah, but look. when you were in highschool, or College, and class started at 12:00 noon, you were expected to be IN class and prepared by 12:00 noon, not JUST getting there, or JUST leaving for that class.

When a government curfew is in place, you are expected to be home by 12:00, it is the law. You need to plan your time accordingly in order to be home for that time.

This just might be a suspicion, but giving a heavy fine is one thing, but suspending a lisence for two years and making it harder to meet curfew in the future is another thing. I thing the cop saw some bad driving for him to suspend the driver's lisence and target the car

 

[Nikki_Viper]

Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.

The cop was doing his job, BUT he was being a dick.

Laws are imperfect like the humans who make them, sometimes you should bend the rules or be more lenient.

Nope. This is a terrible idea. Bending rules is another way to say 'breaking the law'.

What next? Is a few weeks before legal age of consent okay to have sex? What's a few weeks in the grand scale? Just like a few minutes late, right?

The line is there for a reason. The law doesn't say 'oh, okay. You can be three minutes late.'

True, the law is there for a reason, and once you start bending the rules, you bend them more and more until you're outright breaking them.

People make examples of others in legal battles all the time, so why not the same with the law

 

[KiKiweaky]

So my neighbor, who is 16, a new driver was driving home on a Friday night. He arrived in his driveway at 12:03 to find that a cop had tailed him all the way back to his house. As the curfew was midnight he was technically violating it, so the cops suspended his license until he turned 18. thats just under 2 years for 3 minutes past curfew. So i was wondering, are cops allowed to do this. And if they are, do you agree with it. Explain.






*Also, i would like to note that this isnt a hypothetical, it happened next door to me, i mean the house DIRECTLY next to mine.


EDIT: Alot of you guys are asking about the curfew. This happened in Ohio, where the curfew is 12:300 on weekdays and 12:00 on weekends

A curfew? Was he given a curfew? Or is there a general curfew in place on young drivers in your area?

Following him home and giving it to him at his house seems a bit unreasonable to me. Im surprised the court actually suspended the license tbh.