U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary
 [Register]
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary The Triangle Area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-19-2015, 03:58 PM
 
1,917 posts, read 1,089,752 times
Reputation: 2064

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by McWallace View Post
I don't understand how doing his job was a bad decision. He basically pasted in a script that informs the user they are being officially warned -- he didn't even add personal commentary in that case. It's the same wording most of us use (sometimes with some variation depending on circumstances).

I understand it's going to be harder for others to relate to my interest in all of this, but believe me if you performed the same role, for the same employer, it would strike a nerve with you.
It's crazy that people defend this obvious abuse of power by the police.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2015, 04:10 PM
 
166 posts, read 113,519 times
Reputation: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Profiteering from government transparency to the detriment of the citizen should be civilly actionable, IMO. But, how to enforce such? Websites are scraped and archived endlessly. And, we need some transparency. Of course, the door is either open or closed.
I couldn't agree more, only issue is that civil action gets expensive. If scraping of websites can't be stopped, we need to be more careful about what's put out there for the scraping. At a minimum, the same governments that publish the mugshot should be responsible for making sure the declaration of innocence for a given individual is given the same transparency as the mugshot. If I search for John Doe, and I see his mugshot in the first search result, they should make sure the results of the case are no further down than the second search result. If they do not have the technical know how to make that happen, they shouldn't be allowed to publish photos.

Agree about some transparency but I don't see that publishing photos of yet-to-be-convicted does any real good. Yes I'm sure once every 5 years someone sees a DWI suspect and identifies them as potentially having been involved in something slightly more serious, but probably just as often it's a case of mistaken identity. Besides, with so many people getting arrested I don't think it makes sense to believe the average citizen is examining each one of them every hour for purposes of hoping to help link them to another crime.

Even if they just limited the mugshots to felons / violent criminals, etc. it would be an improvement. Or provide a mandatory way for the citizen to remove theirs without being blackmailed for the rest of their life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2015, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Morrisville, NC
7,705 posts, read 10,094,589 times
Reputation: 6913
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Profiteering from government transparency to the detriment of the citizen should be civilly actionable, IMO.
But, how to enforce such? Websites are scraped and archived endlessly.

And, we need some transparency. Of course, the door is either open or closed.

"FOIA" on the Federal level.

Public Records Law on the NC State level.
Chapter 132
Seems like it would be relatively simple for the legislature to pass a law stating that duplication of mugshots and/or offering to take money in return for removing them is against the law. They can still allow cities and counties to have them on their site and block opportunists. Obviously it would be impossible to stop all of them, but it would be a start. Maybe when some relative of a legislator runs into this they will suddenly think it's a top priority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2015, 04:18 PM
 
166 posts, read 113,519 times
Reputation: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherifftruman View Post
Seems like it would be relatively simple for the legislature to pass a law stating that duplication of mugshots and/or offering to take money in return for removing them is against the law. They can still allow cities and counties to have them on their site and block opportunists. Obviously it would be impossible to stop all of them, but it would be a start. Maybe when some relative of a legislator runs into this they will suddenly think it's a top priority.
Making it illegal to duplicate would be tough on the news media (they tend to not abuse the information, showing pics only of serious or truly newsworthy possible criminals, and not making it quite so easily searched in archives).

Making it illegal to duplicate with offers for renewal would be a start. At least then they could work with search engine providers to block illegal websites. I'm sure overseas operations would keep popping up at first, but once Google/Bing etc declare war on them it's mostly over and they would have no reason to continue. Also, doing so would help people recognize that if they do see someones mugshot online, unless its a government site it's from a source that's not to be trusted at all and the info should be disregarded. Not perfect but a start as you said.

On the other hand I'm not sure I want to entrust all this to the same people that would arrest site administration employees from warning users about an impending ban!?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2015, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Sodo Sopa at The Villas above Kenny' s House.
2,492 posts, read 2,216,788 times
Reputation: 3859
The Slammer and other crime porn websites are a shaming device. Simple as that. I in no way believe that the intention is to connect crimes or alert the public about dangerous persons. It's for one person you know to see it and then effectively spread the news to everybody else. I wouldn't be surprised if half of them are bought specifically because so and so said a particular person was in there. Hell I've known people who bought copies of the issue their picture appeared in as a souvenir of sorts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top