Policing, law enforcement, or security services provided by government is immoral

In this argument I will be using this as the definition of morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.My BoP is to prove that Policing, Law Enforcement, and Security Services are moral.C1: Law EnforcementTo understand this contention it is imperative that we understand the harm of one person for the sake of others to be objectively moral. Let us assume we have a criminal, and he partakes in a crime with victims. If we punish our criminal, and the punishment has proven a deterrent effect, thereby reducing the number of victims of the same crime. If we assume that this is the best way to reduce the rate of crime, we can then be able to claim that our actions are moral. The assumptions that I have created in this scenario are as follows: All crimes have victims, our current state of law enforcement proves a deterrent effect, and that our current method of punishment is the best way to diminish crime. If I successfully prove these assumptions then we can reach the conclusion that law enforcement is moral.The first assumption that most, if not all, crimes have victims. I have found that the simplest way to prove this point is to list crime that many people have assumed to be victimless, and then prove that these crimes have victims I will analyze three crimes that many people assume do not have victims. The crimes I will analyze are, drug possession and use, piracy, and prostitution.First on the list is drug possession and use. In cases of drugs with smoke such as marijuana a major problem is second hand smoke. Second hand smoke, or SHS, is a severe issue. It most affects children who live in the home of the smoker. SHS is also a major problem in workplaces where smoking is not banned.SHS causes cancer along with other major health problems like lung infection or a weak immune system(1). A study shows that 53 thousand people die each year from second hand smoke, most of them children(2). Drug addiction and use also has severe effects on the abuser’s family and friends(3). The mental trauma that drug use causes to families involved allows us to classify the families as victims of drug abuse.Piracy is a crime with of victims. It is painfully obvious that the victims of piracy are the companies that produce the music or movies that are being pirated. Ever since a file sharing site called Napster was released music sales in the US dropped 47%. It is estimated that between 2004 and 2009 30 million songs were pirated(4). The colossal scope of this problem justifies piracy being a crime with victims.Prostitution biggest victims are the prostitutes themselves. 62% of women have been raped in prostitution, and 73% report physical assault(5). If we were to accept prostitution as a viable job option, then more of our young girls would become prostitutes. In Spain where prostitution is legal there is even a college for prostitutes(6). My second assumption is the easiest to prove. Punishments have a deterrent effect, if they didn’t our criminal justice system would be an utter failure. I do not speed my car because I do not want a ticket, not because there is a law. I believe that it is easy to assume that punishments prove a deterrent effect. The last assumption is the hardest to prove, that there is no better alternative. There are two options that seem a little viable, a trust based system and a reward for innocence system. I will explain why both of these options fall flat.A trust based system would quickly fall apart. If a criminal committed a crime in a trust based system, the criminal would be deported. But that does not repay the cost of the crime. We have no way to make sure people do not follow the rules in a trust based system, and the government would quickly fall apart. A trust based government is not a viable option.The second, and seemingly more promising, option is a reward based government. The Idea is that if you have done nothing wrong then you get rewarded. There are a few problems with this option. There are about 325 million people in the US right now(7). Imagine the cost of rewarding all of these people. If the government payed everyone only 3 dollars, we would hit almost one billion dollars. If someone was to break a law and the government revoked some of their rewards, what is stopping them from commit more crimes? For these reasons our system of law enforcement and criminal justice is the only viable option. C2: PolicingThere have been recent police shooting, and now people are starting to view police as corrupt. But we have to remember there are thousands of police officers that have never shot an unarmed african american. Less than a quarter of police shooting have been against african americans(8). Over 200 police officers die each year in the line of duty(9). The police are the good guys.The police are necessary. The police uphold the laws and allow the deterrent effect I have explained. If we did not have police, then we would not have a method of upholding the law. Our police are moral, and it is illogical to suggest otherwise. C3: Security ServicesThe number one priority of a government is the protection of it’s citizens. Our system of security, including background checks and US customs are to uphold that duty. To prove that security services are moral all we have to do is ask if restricting our freedom for safety is right. We are not slaves, our security services do not restrict our freedom greatly. Because of this minimal concession we make we are safe. In the US you do fear walking outside like in other countries. Therefore our security services are, in fact, moral.Citations1.http://www.cancer.org...2.http://www.no-smoke.org...3.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...4.http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com...5.http://crime.about.com...6.http://www.dailymail.co.uk...7.http://www.census.gov...8.http://www.usatoday.com...9.http://www.nleomf.org...