Councilman Wants to Shame Drunk Drivers by Posting DUI Mug Shots on Facebook

Huntington Beach city councilman Devin Dwyer is calling on local police to begin posting mug shots of repeat DUI offenders on Facebook. Dwyer's proposal initially called for all drunk drivers to be publicly shamed on the social-networking site, but he eventually limited it to those who have been arrested more than once. "If it takes shaming people to save lives, I am willing to do it," Dwyer told the AP. "I'm hoping it prevents others from getting behind the wheel and getting inebriated."
Fortunately, the police department is vehemently fighting the proposal, on which the city council is set to vote today. Police spokesman Lt. Russell Reinhart says that the department occasionally posts mug shots of drunk drivers on its Facebook page, but only in situations where the public could be at immediate risk. Regularly posting photos of arrested individuals, he argues, would risk desensitizing the public, and could negate a powerful tool.
Councilwoman Connie Boardman thinks that Dwyer's proposal wouldn't do much to deter people from drinking and driving, and would actually do more harm than necessary. "People who habitually drink and drive are alcoholics and are not going to be shamed by this," she said. "But their parents and their spouses would be mortified. That is going to result in tremendous humiliation for a kid who has no hope of controlling his parent's behavior."
Dwyer may have the best of intentions, but his proposal clearly goes too far. Yes, drunk driving is morally reprehensible, and those who do it should be punished according to the law. But they should also be given the opportunity to learn from their mistakes, change their ways, and become contributing members of society. If their face is immortalized in Facebook infamy, that recovery process would become significantly more challenging. Dwyer shouldn't let the court of public opinion interfere with the court of law, because, as Lt. Reinhart said, "Law enforcement is not about public shaming."





'Undercover Boss': Top 4 Moments From Season 4 [VIDEO]
Las Vegas Court Officials Accused Of Covering Up Sex Assault [VIDEO]
Walmart vs. Costco: How Do They Really Compare?
Groomers Lose Dog, Claim Not Responsible
The Story Behind Shapewear: From Girdles to Spanx
'Grease' Cast: Where Are They Now?
Oklahoma man allowed to sue state over native american rain god on license plate
Microsoft E3 2013 Xbox liveblog!
Living in a Van Was the Best Financial Decision I Ever Made
7 Myths of Long-Term Care












Comments
13
Subscribe to commentsCKJan 18th 2011 8:24PM
"Drunk driving is morally reprehensible" sounds a little too judgmental for liberal ears and sensitivities. It might be clearer to them if you instead said "drunk driving is the act of a homicidal maniac". They would have a harder time brushing aside the logic and significance of that description.
bkwormsjvJan 19th 2011 2:27AM
@CK
How inflammatory were you trying to be, and how much of your tone was just habit? I wonder...
subtosubJan 18th 2011 8:50PM
Do you know how Europe with their lower drinking age handles drunk drivers? When someone gets a DUI they lose their license. For LIFE. With NO chance of getting another one. I think that would work really well here in the states. It would definitely make people think twice before being stupid.
The way it is now is if you drive drunk and kill someone its 45 days in jail a 10K dollar fine and a guilty conscience.
What a load of crap.
JRSJan 18th 2011 9:03PM
@subtosub European countries have different laws concerning punishment for DUI.
RichardJan 18th 2011 8:56PM
DUI laws, like most laws, are inherently ineffective, and are not, on their face, just laws.
Justice is to penalize people for either personal injury/loss, or property damage/loss. So-called "preventive" laws are 100% theoretical, cannot be proven to be effective, and at best, are extremely circumstantial.
Justice is about just/fair compensation for a loss. Not fines that go to the arbitrary, impersonal state...but compensation that goes directly to the victims of a crime. Convicted persons should pay back what they have stolen, whether life, limb, or property. Prison does the opposite. Working it off, over a lifetime, if necessary, will impress itself upon society (detterent) far more than the current ridiculous system.
JRSJan 18th 2011 8:58PM
Sex offenders are in online databases/registries because they have a high rate of recidivism. It has been determined that reckless/aggressive drivers (including those who have DUI's) also have a high rate of recidivism. I've been advocating for years the creation of an online registry/database also for reckless/aggressive drivers. I would like to input my zip code and find out who in my neighborhood killed someone, crippled someone, or caused property damage with this vehicle. Postings should include photo, address, make/model of vehicle used during the crime, make/model of current vehicle, and list of driving infractions.
GooberJan 19th 2011 12:28AM
Drunk drivers are murderer's waiting to happen. When they pull into a bar, they know what's going to happen. They know they will be leaving in a weapon and that they may kill some innocent people, but they continue anyway. They should go to prison the FIRST TIME, and the second time go to prison FOR LIFE. The only reason there are not laws like that, are most politicians are drunks, and therefore, don't want harsh penalties for that offense.
GooberJan 19th 2011 12:36AM
The other thing is, EVERY drunk driver, IF given a second chance, should, for LIFE, have to have a easy to see designation ( like some sort of sign, or special license plate) that says " I have been convicted of drunk driving". As we all know, driving is a PRIVILEGE, NOT a RIGHT, if they don't agree to it, they DON'T DRIVE.
Steven R. RussellJan 19th 2011 2:19AM
Thankyou Lord.
DaveJan 19th 2011 3:30AM
I'd rather see the pictures published of parents whose under-aged kids cause crimes...
emighellJan 19th 2011 5:56AM
I think that posting pictures of people arrested for DUI is abominable. I might take to the idea of repeat offenders, but, at the same time, these people need help, not scrutinizing. I don't think that most of you understand the DUI laws. There is NO "legal limit"! Check all of your law books, DMV books etc. None of them "really"say. That is because it is a gray area, on purpose. You can get arrested for a .03 if the officer wishes. That means that you probably only had half a drink in a 2 hour period! You could be a very fine, upstanding person in your community, only have one glass of wine at your grand daughters wedding, get into your car, drive away, not turn on your blinker in front of an officer and get popped. That's all it takes. Do you think that is worthy of splaying your picture for all to see? And, yes, I know a few that this has happened to.
Do I think that repeat offenders need their picture spread? Hmm, I don't know. But what I do know, is that over 90% of them are alcoholics and are already shamed by their disease. Do they need to be shamed more? I don't think so. Offering an alternative for help would be more beneficial. The stats say: "Most people that are arrested for DUI have driven at least 87 times before being arrested" Ask yourself: what number are you on?
emighellJan 19th 2011 6:07AM
Oh! Forgot to add! Statistically-wise, Texting is now the leading factor in accidents and deaths on the road. Just thought ya want to know.
charlieJan 21st 2011 1:56PM
This councilman who want to do this does not realize one day it will be his own picture or a sibbling close to them and will regret gettin this done on facebook.