On Tuesday, we discussed the scenario in which the FBI requests live feed from police cameras in order to generate a database for matches of known terrorists. the police force, as we were told, complied and granted the FBI access to their feeds. Upon first consideration, it seems as if the police force is acting in a utilitarian manner; assisting the FBI in tracking terrorists seemingly benefits the majority of of the population. However, as we discussed in class, this case has multiple dimensions that could yield various different implications on citizens.
To further analyze this situation, we must consider whether the police department took proper action in allowing the FBI access to their resources. From a protection of state stand-point, it seems as if the police department acted correctly here. In my opinion, however, the understanding of freedom in a society is a crucial aspect to this case. Gert suggests ten values that everyone shares, as an aspect of moral understanding. Among those values is the value of “not depriving freedom.” This value of moral action applies to the police department case study in that i believe the police and FBI infringed upon the freedoms of the citizens, and therefore have acted immorally.
In ethics, there is an important distinction to make before determining the morality of an action or event. There must be a define line drawn to prevent the further use of power to exploit subjects. In this case, the FBI must be held and monitored to ensure that their usage of the technology is solely for the purposes for which they requested it. For instance, there was a case back when camera technology was installed on highways for the first time. Back then, if a ticket was sent to a law breaker’s house, the picture of their car was sent with the ticket. In this event, a man was in the car with his mistress, his wife found the picture, and it led to their divorce. As it may seem this man was a scumbag for cheating on his wife, it was also an infringement on his freedom to photograph him and publicize it through distribution.
This pertains to the FBI case in that their use of the pictures of passersby can be used for the good or for the bad. If the FbI were to not draw that line of preserving the rights and freedoms of citizens, then their conduct can take an unethical, exploitative turn.