Court ordered shaming....fair or unfair?

[BillsFanM.D.]

They all seem pretty good to me. I like 'linking' the time to the crime. Number six, however, seems as though it would fit the definition of 'cruel and unusual.' Given what he did, however, I'm not particularly concerned about his suffering.

 

http://www.rr.com/ne...ordered_shaming

 

List from article:

 

1. UTAH: PONYTAIL CUT OFF

The mother of a 13-year-old Utah girl chopped off her daughter's ponytail in court in order to reduce her community service sentence.

The teen had landed in court in May because she and another girl used dollar-store scissors to cut off the hair of a 3-year-old they had befriended at a McDonald's.

 

2. HOUSTON: 'I AM A THIEF'

Daniel and Eloise Mireles were convicted of stealing more than $265,000 from the crime victims fund in Harris County, Texas.

In addition to restitution and jail time, the Houston couple were sentenced in July 2010 to stand in front of the local mall for five hours every weekend for six years with a sign reading, "I am a thief." A sign was also posted outside their house stating they were convicted thieves.

 

3. PENNSYLVANIA: 'I STOLE FROM A 9-YEAR-OLD'

Western Pennsylvania residents Evelyn Border and her daughter, Tina Griekspoor, 35, were caught stealing a gift card from a child inside a Wal-Mart. In November 2009, the Bedford County district attorney said he would recommend probation instead of jail time because the women stood in front of the courthouse for 4 1/2 hours holding signs reading, "I stole from a 9-year-old on her birthday! Don't steal or this could happen to you!"

 

4. WISCONSIN: 'I WAS STUPID' A man who crashed his car into the gates at a Wisconsin waste water treatment plant spent eight hours holding a sign saying, "I was stupid." Shane McQuillan decided he would rather do that than spend 20 days in jail on a charge of criminal damage to property. McQuillan had a blood alcohol level of 0.238 percent, nearly three times the legal limit for driving, at the time of the 2008 accident in Eau Claire.

 

5. OHIO: 'SORRY FOR THE JACKASS OFFENSE' An Ohio judge ordered a man and woman who vandalized a baby Jesus statue in a church's outdoor nativity to march through town with a donkey to apologize. Jessica Lange and Brian Patrick admitted to defacing the statue at St. Anthony Roman Catholic Church on Christmas Eve 2003. They led a donkey provided by a petting zoo through the streets of Fairport Harbor carrying a sign that said, "Sorry for the jackass offense." After the 30-minute march, the pair were taken to serve 45-day sentences that included drug and alcohol treatment. They also were ordered to replace the statue.

 

6. TEXAS: FROM COURTHOUSE TO DOGHOUSE Curtis Robin Sr. made a deal with Texas prosecutors to spend 30 consecutive nights in a 2-by-3-foot doghouse after pleading guilty to whipping his stepson with a car antenna. Robin served the sentence outside his home in Vidor in 2003 so he could avoid jail time and continue working as a foreman for a demolition company. Police were assigned to randomly check on Robin to ensure he was in the doghouse each night from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. Robin was allowed to have a sleeping bag, mosquito netting, plastic tarp or similar protective items.

 

7. CLEVELAND. A woman caught on camera driving on a sidewalk to pass a Cleveland school bus was ordered this week to hold a sign at the intersection reading, "Only an idiot would drive on the sidewalk to avoid a school bus." It was the latest example of creative, and sometimes controversial, sentences handed out by judges to publicly shame offenders.

Edited November 14, 2012 by BillsFanM.D.

[ExiledInIllinois]

The question is... Can other people, businesses, and whatever discriminate against a person who was outted by being shamed? If they can, then yes... It works. If they can't, then no... What's the point.

 

Are you kidding me, #6? That sounds too EASY. Who wouldn't bunk in a dog house to avoid the pokey... How stupidly EASY! Not cruel and unusal in the least!

Edited November 14, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois

[TakeYouToTasker]

I am a huge advocate of shame based punishment for most offenses. I've long believed we'd be a much safer society with a much lower crime rate if we were to institute caneing and bring back the stocks.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I am a huge advocate of shame based punishment for most offenses. I've long believed we'd be a much safer society with a much lower crime rate if we were to institute caneing and bring back the stocks.

 

What good is it if society can't act on the shaming after the ordeal? The perp will just endure and be done with and go onto live their life? That is why I aske the question above. The act of shaming does noting without the future re-enforcement.

[BillsFanM.D.]

Are you kidding me, #6? That sounds too EASY. Who wouldn't bunk in a dog house to avoid the pokey... How stupidly EASY! Not cruel and unusal in the least!

I don't know. By today's standards...it certainly is unusual and atypical. Again...I, personally, could care less. They could have the townspeople line up and smack his bare backside with the antenna he used on the kid. I wouldn't lose any sleep.

 

I am a huge advocate of shame based punishment for most offenses. I've long believed we'd be a much safer society with a much lower crime rate if we were to institute caneing and bring back the stocks.

 

It certainly would be a lot more cost effective than incarceration. Caning would be fine for number six as well.

[Duck_dodgers007]

I am a huge advocate of shame based punishment for most offenses. I've long believed we'd be a much safer society with a much lower crime rate if we were to institute caneing and bring back the stocks.

 

But you are an idiot, so no, beating, humiliating, denying people of their human dignity will only make things worse. What type of sadistic animal are you?

[BillsFanM.D.]

But you are an idiot, so no, beating, humiliating, denying people of their human dignity will only make things worse. What type of sadistic animal are you?

 

He's likely one who wants sadistic animals to stop doing this to kids.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Shaming has worked in countries like Singapore when combined with corporeal punishment.

 

I would like to see it tested either in smaller segments of the population or in a sampling of specific non-violent crimes for effectiveness in the US population long before a larger implementation was considered.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I don't know. By today's standards...it certainly is unusual and atypical. Again...I, personally, could care less. They could have the townspeople line up and smack his bare backside with the antenna he used on the kid. I wouldn't lose any sleep.

 

 

 

It certainly would be a lot more cost effective than incarceration. Caning would be fine for number six as well.

 

Again... What is the point if say a perspective employer can't act on the shaming and discriminate against said "shamee?" Can they? Legally?

 

In today's type of society... Who really cares what people think. Do their punishment and move on? How is that going to have an effect on people?

 

What I am getting at is that it is simply ineffective in today's culture and legal system.

Edited November 14, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois

[Duck_dodgers007]

 

 

He's likely one who wants sadistic animals to stop doing this to kids.

 

No, probably just enjoys seeing people humiliated, brutalized, etc. Society is a better place with less violence, cruelty and institutionalized and government sanctioned collective punishment for entertainment of the lower sorts of society.

[BillsFanM.D.]

Again... What is the point if say a perspective employer can't act on the shaming and discriminate against said "shamee?" Can they? Legall?

 

 

IF I am following your question correctly....who's saying the employer/background checker wouldn't see a record for this person? They are still charged and convicted and a record is there to be found. The sentence is 'living in a doghouse' versus 'living in a statehouse.'

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

 

Again... What is the point if say a perspective employer can't act on the shaming and discriminate against said "shamee?" Can they? Legally?

 

In today's type of society... Who really cares what people think. Do their punishment and move on? How is that going to have an effect on people?

 

What I am getting at is that it is simply ineffective in today's culture and legal system.

As I said, it's been very effective in Singapore; both in lowering the crime rate, the recidivism rate, and the prison population. It would certainly be worth implementing for a small section of non-violent crimes to test the results.

[BillsFanM.D.]

No, probably just enjoys seeing people humiliated, brutalized, etc. Society is a better place with less violence, cruelty and institutionalized and government sanctioned collective punishment for entertainment of the lower sorts of society.

Agree with the bolded part. I think the argument, however, is that 'old school' punishment might be more effective at reducing violence in total. I.e. be a more effective deterrent against the subhuman elements that prey on children (as an example). I don't think anyone views this as entertainment. It is certainly a controversial issue. I tend to react with my gut when I read things like the story of the guy whipping the kid with an antenna....and I tend to have very little no sympathy. I can see your point, however, in terms of this being a 'bad example' and a very slippery slope for the caning type phenomenon. I don't really understand the beef with the 'shaming' stuff however.

Edited November 14, 2012 by BillsFanM.D.

[Duck_dodgers007]

As I said, it's been very effective in Singapore; both in lowering the crime rate, the recidivism rate, and the prison population. It would certainly be worth implementing for a small section of non-violent crimes to test the results.

 

That's total bs. Sure, let's do an experiment in destroying a persons dignity and take notes on it

 

 

You are a total a-hole

 

 

Agree with the bolded part. I think the argument, however, is that 'old school' punishment might be more effective at reducing violence in total. I.e. be a more effective deterrent against the subhuman elements that prey on children (as an example). I don't think anyone views this as entertainment. It is certainly a controversial issue. I tend to react with my gut when I read things like the story of the guy whipping the kid with an antenna....and I tend to have very little no sympathy. I can see your point, however, in terms of this being a 'bad example' and a very slippery slope for the caning type phenomenon. I don't really understand the beef with the 'shaming' stuff however.

 

Are you serious??? People love this stuff, beatings, whippings, hangings....lynchings! Were very popular spectator events and the minute that human torture, humiliation etc becomes something "respectable" people sanction we have taken a long step backwards, not forward. No thanks

[TakeYouToTasker]

Caneing is far more humane than subjecting non-violent criminals to the horrors of daily life as a prison inmate, where offenders are beaten, raped, and hardened into criminal culture which has been statistically shown to remain with them after their release leading to more crime.

[ExiledInIllinois]

As I said, it's been very effective in Singapore; both in lowering the crime rate, the recidivism rate, and the prison population. It would certainly be worth implementing for a small section of non-violent crimes to test the results.

 

Singapore culture is not American culture... Look, you shame yourself here everyday... Does that stop you... Of course not!

 

[Duck_dodgers007]

 

 

Singapore culture is not American culture... Look, you shame yourself here everyday... Does that stop you... Of course not!

 

 

Ha ha!

[BillsFanM.D.]

That's total bs. Sure, let's do an experiment in destroying a persons dignity and take notes on it

 

Are you serious??? People love this stuff, beatings, whippings, hangings....lynchings! Were very popular spectator events and the minute that human torture, humiliation etc becomes something "respectable" people sanction we have taken a long step backwards, not forward. No thanks

 

Destroy a person's dignity? Ask the child whipped with the antenna about dignity.

 

I said I understand your concerns about the more violent 'punishments' such as caning and that it is a very controversial issue....with a very slippery slope. Does it have a role? You say no. I'm not sure. Does our current system protect our children to a level that is satisfactory to you? The realism of child abuse is horrific and if a better punishment exists then I'm all for it. Protecting the dignity of the perpetrator, in this scenario, is not my concern.

 

Lastly, I don't see the beef with someone hanging a sign around their neck indicating what they did. That's not exactly a lynching....different issue.

[Rob's House]

I am a huge advocate of shame based punishment for most offenses. I've long believed we'd be a much safer society with a much lower crime rate if we were to institute caneing and bring back the stocks.

I read something about this recently & the guy suggested giving criminals the option of a cane lashing for every 6 mos of jail time. (4 lashes or 2 yrs, your choice) Sounds pretty reasonable. It would save a lot of money on jails, minimize the impact a jail sentence has on a family, is really effective, doesn't take irreplaceable stretches of a person's life, and the best part is it's voluntary.

 

Of course Dicky doesn't like it; he's all about saving people from making decisions.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Rob's House

[3rdnlng]

This is funny as hell.Thanks DiN for the laugh.