In policing, the phrase “professional courtesy” refers to officers letting other officers off with a warning on traffic violations. So here’s the scenario.

While driving a personal vehicle, an off-duty police officer (ODP) was stopped for speeding by a highway patrol officer (HPO). As the HPO approached the violator's vehicle, the ODO stated that a firearm was present. The HPO did not cite the driver when it was discovered that the traffic violator was an off-duty law enforcement officer. The violation was excused as a matter of "professional courtesy". Later, while visiting with friends, the ODO claimed to use the same strategy to avoid traffic citations in the past. Was the off-duty officer's behavior unethical? Did the highway patrol officer's failure to cite demonstrate unethical behavior? Do you feel this practice of “professional courtesy” is okay? Is it a perk of the job?”

           In analyzing the potential for corruption in a job that has relatively few perks, yet more than the average citizen's share of responsibilities and dangers, it's hard to be overly critical of some of these fairly mild “professional courtesies” such as in the above scenario. There was a mutual exchange of these actually, because the off-duty officer announced his firearm to the highway patrolman- a definite courtesy and show of respect. With so many other far more serious types of corruption detailed in the textbook, and the police subculture often covering for each other in such things as brutality, I feel that this use of “discretion” when there's a choice (warning or citation) is ethical, as long as it's applied only to minor traffic laws.

           I experience this kind of patronage within my own subculture of professional musicians or club owners on a regular basis: we often get free food and/or drinks at most places we play, and discounts at music stores because we're reliable customers (while they gouge the poor parents of the kid wanting his first drum set). We always applaud when we see our fellow bands playing somewhere, even if no one else is. And law enforcement themselves often show us some extra courtesy by letting us unload our gear from a “no parking” zone in downtown Wilmington. Perks are a good thing, especially considering musician wages...

           Basically, people in the same professions are going to look out for each other. Especially in  law enforcement, where there's uncommon risk and the potential to be real heroes, that bond is going to be very strong, just as it is in the military. Police have to know they have each others' back in a crisis situation, and that comraderie is naturally going to be present in more relaxed environments. It's not stated in our test case above, but it's certainly implied that if the situation were reversed, the officer would have shown the same lenience to the highway patrolman, or would in the future (now that he “owes him one”, so to speak).

           The only problem I see in the scenario is the ODO's disclosure of this history of professional courtesies to his friends. If they're not police too, they might feel resentful of the special treatment he gets, maybe even to the point of reporting it. This officer doesn't understand how it works- if you're going to benefit from professional discretion, you need to be discreet. Otherwise, it defeats the whole purpose. It's an honor system, so you're not supposed to give out the secret handshake.

           I am not condoning police corruption; I really don't think so, at least. There's a difference between looking the other way while a fellow officer beats a defenseless suspect- as opposed to the mere act of forgiving a few miles over the speed limit to one of your peers. The latter is a harmless gesture, much like being offered a free coffee or meal from a diner you help protect when you're on patrol. There's no real injustice done done, since the officer has the discretion whether or not to write a ticket. Most officers do their best to protect the people and businesses on their beat, whether or not they get some free token from any of them.

           Some more conservative minded persons might disagree with my “situational ethics” approach to the professional courtesy phenomenon. They are entitled to their opinion, and to them it is valid. Some people are purists, and seek perfection and cannot tolerate any bending of the rules. Valiant, maybe, but in this imperfect world they are going to be perpetually frustrated. In the big scheme of what law officers are up against, and the compensation they receive in return, some minor perks such as a speed violation pardoning or a free cup of coffee seem rather small. And I firmly believe that in life, you “shouldn't sweat the small stuff”. These guys deserve a little break here and there.