While reviewing my Google news alerts this morning, I came across a blog posting that reported how DUI arrests in Mongtomery County, Texas will be posted on Twitter during the period between Christmas Eve and New Years Eve. If you are curious like I was and wondered where that county is located in the great state of Texas, think just north of Houston (which is in Harris County) and you are there.
The tweets are reportedly the product of the Montgomery County District Attorney, Brett Ligon, rather than any specific law enforcement agency there. A quick visit to the DA's Twitter page failed to show any arrest pics up to Sunday. At least one agency in the area, Denton PD, has mug shots all of its arrests posted on an "unofficial" Twitter page. The same mug shots are available in our local area as well, so this is really nothing new.
Public figures are used to living their lives in glass bowls and realize publicity will follow if they should get arrested. However, some will argue posting DUI arrests, or any arrest for that matter, is an intentional act of "shaming" with no real societal value if the arrestee is not a public figure. Others are quick to respond that such information is a public record in most areas and thus violates no law of confidentiality. I will leave that debate, as well as the argument of presumed innocent until found guilty, for others to join, but I am curious what you think about the concept of a law enforcement agency tweeting pics of specific arrests or all arrests by the agency.
- Asst Chief Bill LePere
The key question is: does shaming lead to a reduction of the crime?
In Polk County, most police departments have opened the arrests and crime reports for all non-violent crimes. Finding the records for other crimes is usually possible for the inquisitive citizen. Publishing photos of DUI drivers would not prevent drunk driving, but it would be a step backward to 18th century policing.
Publicizing the photos is merely stigmatic shaming, which is shown to drive a wedge between the offender and the group looking to resolve the crime (community, school, family). It creates a ripple effect as the offender is not the only one shamed. Family members, co-workers and friends are also touched by the shaming. Imagine a child being told his father's photo was publicized? The child didn't commit the crime, but receives a punishment.
Public officials understand their choice to enter public service will subject them to greater scrutiny. We hold such persons to higher standards. A councilperson's arrest isn't news because it was a DUI, but because it is an arrest at all.
The argument that the arrest is a matter of public record is valid, but there is a vast difference between having open records and working to publicize a select segment of the arrests. Why DUI arrestees? It can't be said that first-time DUI arrestees pose a threat to the community. These are not violent criminals on the loose nor pedophiles living next to schoolyards. If you want to stop second offenses, merely add a breathalyzer start device to every car. That will cut down those DUI arrests committed by non-alcoholics.
We have made great strides educating adults to the dangers of drinking and driving. However, as every addictions specialist knows, the alcoholic does not make informed decisions once she has started drinking. She is not thinking of the possibility of future shame when ordering her third beer.
Setting up a virtual stocks is not the answer. Count me on the side of using more modern, and useful techniques to reduce DUI crimes.
Posted by: Chuck Welch | December 27, 2009 at 03:25 PM