Accountability requires that officers be judged by the consequences for justice of their discretionary actions. Superiors should set standards for their officers which aim at doing justice, and their performance should be evaluated accordingly. This does not mean attempting to control officer activity through precise predetermined policy. It must inevitably be assumed that both officers and their superiors are capable of making judgments about the best use of discretion in particular situations. Over and above accountability stands the need for a common process for arriving at consistent judgments about what to do in discretionary situations. This is a process of moral reasoning, and officers must be educated in its use. This process requires that officers keep the goals of police work clearly in mind, think about their behavior as a means for achieving those goals, and follow the restrictions on justifying means by ends. To promote equal treatment through discretionary decisionmaking, education in the use of moral reasoning must be a major component of police training programs; moreover, extensive discussion of a whole range of cases by officers and their superiors is necessary for bringing judgments into line with common perspectives. Ten footnotes are provided.