3mo ago

Florida sheriff questioned for posting identities of teens who made school shooting threats

www.theguardian.com Florida sheriff questioned for posting identities of teens who made school shooting threats

Experts criticize Michael Chitwood’s ‘shaming’ tactic of uploading videos and mugshot of teens to deter gun crime

A Florida sheriff’s novel approach to countering school shooting threats by exposing online the identities of children who make them is drawing ire from juvenile justice advocates as well as others who say the tactic is counterproductive and morally wrong.

Michael Chitwood, sheriff of Volusia county, raised eyebrows recently by posting to his Facebook page the name and mugshot of an 11-year-old boy accused of calling in a threat to a local middle school. He followed up with a video clip of the minor’s “perp walk” into jail in shackles.

Chitwood, who has said he is “fed up” with the disruption to schools caused by the hoaxes, has promised to publicly identify any student who makes such a threat. On Wednesday, another video appeared onlineshowing two youths, aged 16 and 17, in handcuffs being led into separate cells, with the sheriff calling them “knuckleheads”.

43 comments

You're not going to publicly humiliate any potential school shooters into not doing so. You might, forever, get innocent kids harassed and harmed.
Kids say things. They're in the school 180 days a year and their companions are 25 11-year-olds who are likely to report them for it, legit or not.
Trying to target these kids with stochastic terrorism and bullying isn't the solution. Though I know cops love to bully.
- I just had this nightmare a couple days ago. I was in a convenience store joking around and somehow it slipped out “this is a robbery” and everyone panicked. Sometimes it’s even just your mouth outrunning your brain, even in dreamland
- Threatening to shoot up a school isn’t just “kids saying things.” Dismissing this as such is woefully irresponsible.
  
  I don't think the previous comment was saying to not do anything at all about a threat like that. Just that publicly humiliating them isn't the way to go about it.
- Generalizations are fun.
- You will stop most the fake threats though, which seems to be the intent.
  
  You'll hide them, maybe. The threats aren't the big problem here.

I’m thankful that Canada has laws protecting minors from this sort of thing. Something needs to be done about that problem, but this is not it.
- We have laws like that in America too. That guy's just a dick.
  
  Sheriff is above the law

I'm going to vote for bad idea on this one too. Teenagers make emotional decisions, and I only see this encouraging kids to make bad decisions to receive attention.
Interesting article: https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051
In fact, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently. Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain’s rational part. This is the part of the brain that responds to situations with good judgment and an awareness of long-term consequences. Teens process information with the amygdala. This is the emotional part.
- Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain’s rational part.
  Hmm, must've forgotten to include some republicans in the study
- The prefrontal isn't fully-formed until 25.

Imma go with bad idea on this one. While one could think this will work for the individual kid, if any of those kids gets any accolade from some peers or possibly even receive money from a lawsuit, they become some version of "hero status" and the antics could become admired by others and more kids might want to do it.
One thing to always remember is, kids are idiots.
And a second thing to remember is, adults are idiots.
Just like school/mall/concert shooters or even worse, Kardashians, they should never be allowed time in public media.
- Yep this is a level of vindictive punishment-obsession taken too far. Children are treated differently by the law for good reason. Their brains, wisdom, and maturity are not at the level of adulthood, and their understanding of risk and consequences is not the same.

The USA continually surprises me with more creative ways to approach the problem with anything but "remove access to guns".

Yeah as much as I think we should be aware of the dangers that these kinds of threats pose, putting this kid up online is like a "dangerous: stay away" sign, and that'll only further alienate an already troubled kid.

“He doesn’t need to parade this kid, this 11-year-old child, in front of a camera to achieve his purpose. Just do traditional things – arresting, charging – that don’t add this layer of shaming, embarrassing, humiliating and traumatizing.”
And whats your solution? This isn't like... throwing a rock through a window or graffiti tagging a wall. Consequences need to be swift, decisive, and ensure no one gets any ideas to copycat them.
- What about the kids who are wrongfully accused, since all that's required here is someone reporting that you made a threat? Seems like a new avenue for bullies to exploit.
  
  They can enjoy possibly multiple large piles of money off lawsuits. Unlikely in the case noted in the article though-
  In the video, which had more than 270,000 views on Facebook as of Monday afternoon, the camera pans across a conference table covered in airsoft guns, pistols, fake ammunition, knives and swords that law enforcement officers claim the boy was “showing off” to other students.
- Maybe keeping the kids privacy will:
  deprive a potential shooter of their publicity
  let an innocent accused resume their lives
  allow someone in a crisis more opportunity to get treatment/recover without making it worse
  What does this humiliation do?
  let the sheriff enact spiteful revenge against someone not convicted
  ruin the life of an accused innocent
  force someone in a crisis into a more desperate state
  help a perpetrator achieve notoriety
  
  deprive a potential shooter of their publicity
  Remove a potential shooter from the field you mean?
  let an innocent accused resume their lives
  Or let potential shooters know they aren't being ignored until they start blasting.
  allow someone in a crisis more opportunity to get treatment/recover without making it worse
  Jail can also provide treatment, without the possibility of them snapping and murdering people. Seems reasonable to me.
  let the sheriff enact spiteful revenge against someone not convicted
  Identifying threats to society is "spiteful revenge" Do you think we should have referred to him as O.B.L. instead of Osama Bin Laden because he wasn't convicted yet to keep his anonymity? That it was "spiteful revenge" to let folks know who he was? Cmon now.
  ruin the life of an accused innocent
  or stop a copycat killer.
  force someone in a crisis into a more desperate state
  who will be locked up and thus unable to act on those urges.
  help a perpetrator achieve notoriety
  Least sensible of the lot. They'll be notorious for making threats and going to jail. Much preferrable to murder and jail.
- Have to say I agree. This seems like a good deterrent. Not sure of the legality of it, but then “legality” is open to interpretation lately in the US.

I can see both sides of this argument and honestly I lean toward allowing this shaming to continue. At least this sheriff is trying something other than tots and pears.

I'm shocked it was not Grady Judd (the sheriff). He is a piece of work.
- The correct word is shit

43 comments