From a completely ethical standpoint, especially an Utilitarian ethical standpoint, the actions of David Tuff could be considered for the betterment of the society on the whole and therefore correct. Tuff is an experienced military man and has performed law enforcement duties in that post. Recognition for his service and integrity are notable. His actions were brought about by what some might say as "unwarranted" changes in the rules of Tuff's employers.
It is interesting to observe that the changes in the rules made by Blue Mountain Company were contradictory to the rules and regulations set by SSD, the security services division of Blue Mountain Company. In judging Tuff's actions, the efforts made by him to make Blue Mountain Company repeal the changes in the policy should be clear. Tuff pursued the following actions with Blue Mountain Company:
* He vocally complained about the new policy to his immediate superiors;
* He presented them with worst-case scenarios related to individuals driving under the influence of alcohol that could result from the policy;
* He broached the subject sometimes multiple times in a single workday.
Tuff became angry when Blue Mountain Company management did not agree to modify the policy and instead directed him to report any such incidents to the supervisor in charge, who would then make a decision on any further action. After failing to make progress with Blue Mountain Company, Tuff pursued the following actions externally:
* He contacted an anti-drunk driving volunteer organization to seek an interpretation of Blue Mountain Company's policy;
* He later contacted the same organization to voice a specific complaint about Blue Mountain Company's policy;
* He then contacted a local newspaper and television news station.
Unfortunately, during this time, there were several drunk driving incidents on Blue Mountain Company managed property.