Public Shaming
Reason magazine has an article on public shaming for punishment that got me to thinking. The writer thinks it's not consistent or predictable, thus unfair.
I'll agree for the most part. I've written here before I think it's wrong to publish names and photographs of drunk drivers when they haven't yet been convicted. I'm not sure it's fair to publish photographs even after conviction.
If nothing else, I'd like to think one gets caught and convicted for a crime, punishment is meted out and after the punishment those convicted can try to get their lives back together. That might be much more difficult if you have photos of you all over the internet.
In the case of men caught soliciting prostitution, that's an outrageous violation of privacy- pasting a guy's picture all over the papers for something that's the personal business of the guy and gal in question and shouldn't be illegal to begin with. Sadly, that seems to be one use of public shaming that's accepted by most.
One area where I might disagree with the writer is in regards public shaming for those that don't pay their bills, many of whom are simply dishonest people in the first place. Add to that those that regularly write checks without money to cover them. I'd love to see those deadbeats have their fifteen minutes (or more) of fame.
Sorry. I've just known too many of those types through the years. There's often no way to get back at them other than shame. While I agree public shaming can be excessive in many other cases, it seems totally appropriate for those that deliberately don't pay bills or otherwise try to rip people off.
Naturally, nobody else seems to even be considering shame as a way of dealing with such people, yet shaming those involved in prostitution is ok.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 7:48 AM
2 comments
2 Comments:
What about those who are convicted of domestic violence, or should have been? I feel it is a "civic duty" to warn others in the community. Same with sexual offenders.....
Well, they already have that Megan's Law web site, or whatever it's called, for sex offenders.
Domestic violence wouldn't bother me, but what bothers my about the whole idea- including my own suggestions- is it would end up being a blanket smear as it is with some sex offenders. With domestic violence, it's nearly always one of those he said/ she said things. What if the girl lied?
With sex offender registration, more and more often guys who get caught having sex with a girl just a year or two younger than is legal end up being registered sex offenders. I've read even of girls getting arrested and labeled as sex offenders for fairly innocent acts. I hate to see anyone permanently smeared with a label that doesn't fit their crime.
Same goes with my proposal concerning deadbeats. Sometimes bills aren't paid because of circumstances other than nefarious ones. Seems to me I recall some issue with Sears years ago where I forgot to finish paying a bill and had moved, but their bills were never forwarded to me. You'd have to have some mechanism in place to make sure people are being shamed for the right reasons.
And that's what's bad about shaming in this digital age, as the writer of that article pointed out: You could have your name and picture splattered across the internet long after the supposed shameful act happened, and what if it really wasn't a shameful act? How can you set it straight once the shaming is all over cyberspace?
Post a Comment
<< Home