Ethics in criminal justice Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Ethics in criminal justice - Essay Example offence would decrease, as per the stated, consequent to the fact that the maximum penalties are allotted and, as menti angiotensin-converting enzymed, extenuating circumstances forget not be considered. Within the context of the stated, zero allowance emerges as highly egalitarian and consequently, honest but, deeper investigation and more critical consideration of its implications indicates that, not only is the policy is not ethical.Zero tolerance is undeniably egalitarian. It holds that all individuals, irrespective of who they are or the circumstances surrounding their case, will be hardened equally as regards the violation of particular laws. Given that t here is hardly a legal governing body which is not free-baseed upon the notion of all citizens as equal before the law, zero tolerance appears to emerge from inside the very framework of legal ethics insofar as it offset the potential for the discriminatory finish and implement ation of the law (McArdle and Erzen, 2001). Judged on this basis, therefore, zero tolerance is ethical.Deeper investigation, however, indicates that zero tolerance is founded on a frizzly notion of egalitarianism and can hardly be considered ethical. The fact of the matter is that, as Ayers et al. (2001) point out, rarely are all things equal in a crime one who habitually drives under the influence, thereby exhibiting a persistent disregard for human life, can hardly be judged as equal to one who has only been found guilty of driving under the influence once. Similarly, a young girl who has been found guilty of solicitation can hardly be judged as would a seasoned prostitute. The point here is that all things are not equal and to impose artificial equality on comparable crimes, as does the zero tolerance policy, is to ignore the circumstances which led to the crime and which, indeed, may excuse it. Quite simply stated, giving a homeless teen jail-time for solicitation which may v ery will have