Sure, consider the human rights abuse that is the online mug shots industry in the US for example. There's no sympathy for those people, the assumption is guilt. The superficial tough on crime types revel in the notion that those people get publicly humiliated (and it fulfills the deranged lust for snooping, nosing into other people's business). Mug shots don't tell the story of whether someone is innocent or guilty and yet your photo might end up on the Internet regardless.
> the human rights abuse that is the online mug shots industry
The way we treat people with a mug shot is horrendous. But mug shots per se serve a vital purpose: they are a public record of persons the state is holding. That makes “disappearing” them later on harder.
The way mug shots are handled goes back to this shitty attitude that police have regarding citizens' rights. Any time they are legally forced to do something, they try to make it as humiliating as possible as an additional punishment.
Any sane government would find a way to both protect the identity of the accused while also ensuring the the appropriate family members can get access to this information if necessary.
While we're at it, the way normal people get arrested is fucking horrible too. It's not like in the movies where they lightly cuff your hands together. The police have specifically designed their handcuff procedures to be as painful as possible and to make it look like you're resisting, when in fact, you're just responding to pain and trying to maintain balance.
If I were an oppressive state, I'd make sure to publish mugshots of most people, to create a "public trail" of "we don't disappear people" but only actually disappear those few that I really wanted to disappear.
I certainly agree. I think it makes sense to photograph anyone arrested, for numerous logical reasons (not least of which is because I don't trust the authorities; the photos should also be protected from tampering by the same authorities). My contention is of course that mass posting them online is a human rights abuse. I think it's a form of cruel and unusual punishment, where someone has not necessarily been found guilty of any crime and they're being assaulted by the state (their image, reputation). My opinion is that online mug shots rather blatantly violate the eighth amendment.
> mass posting them online is a human rights abuse
Where would you prefer they be posted? Would you be prohibited from photographing them?
The core problem is how we treat people accused--not even convicted--of crimes. Socially. But also legally. That's a better place to address the issue than trying to gerrymander the Eighth Amendment.
