So this kid Kenny Glenn (in a ski mask) punches and abuses a cat on-camera, posts it on YouTube, gets his identity found out by enterprising Internet users. Somebody starts a website with his name on it that posts all his personal contact information (including that of his family).
Here are the questions:
Are you cool with posting personal info like that on the web with the purpose of harassing someone who has committed a heinous act?
Are you normally not cool with doing such a thing (because of due process, etc), but the kid seemed like a creep anditwasadefenselesscatforgodssake, so just this one time you will look the other way on it?
Would you be less cool about posting the info if there was no video-tape in the Kenny Glenn case, but only testimony from an eyewitness, etc? Did the videotape "sell" this case to you?
Would you be ok about posting the identifying information of registered sex offenders --not just having a list of names, but having one web page for each person, completely "outing" them? And contact info on their families, if they were harboring the offender?
If somebody said something racist, sexist, or homophobic on YouTube, would you be ok with posting all their personal information on a website so people could harass them?
If you disagreed with somebody strongly on political issues, would you be ok with posting their contact information on the Internet, under the theory that it might embarrass them and cause them to rethink their position (or just be a lot more "underground about it")?
Do you think Kenny Glenn or a member of his family might get possibly physically hurt by the posting of this public information?
Do you think that what Kenny Glenn was so heinous that only "Internet Justice" could ever really punish him? Or do you feel that there is never a call to post anybody's personal info online for the purpose of harassment?
Hey, that movie critic Glenn Kenny must be having a great week, huh? (I almost totally wrote his name instead of Kenny Glenn in this post).
My only opinions on this issue is that it was truly a horrific beating for the cat on the Kenny Glenn video, and also that the way the 14-year-old hit and yelled at the cat strongly resembled something he possibly observed an adult do -- and I hope, in the investigation, that angle will be explored (as I'm pretty sure it will be, with psych evaluations etc.).
Please Google the referenced site and video to find out more.
I'd say once you abuse an animal, and then post a video of it, you've pretty much lost any right to internet privacy.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, political comments or even racist ones don't physically hurt anyone directly, that this little sh*t needs to learn that hurting animals ain't cool.
Deep down, I think I don't mind vigilante justice. In fact, I probably would condone it or engage in it myself, if the reality wasn't that most vigilantes of the past were usually the KKK or other racist, evil types.
ReplyDeletePosting his personal info? I don't know. Sending his personal info to a mental health facility would be more likely to get something done. It's a dangerous world out there, especially for cat beaters.
I guess I wouldn't feel too bad for him, though.
Does that make me a bastard? Dang.
I'm fine with someone tracking down the kid's info, but *not* fine with publishing it. Turning the info over to Kenny's local cop-shop and making sure they follow up is all that's necessary.
ReplyDeleteNot that I'm gonna lose sleep over the kid's plight. Given what we know about childhood animal-abuse and the psychological issues it reveals, he needs some sort of intervention.
If he cops a beating for this, I won't shed any tears for the little shit.
ReplyDeleteThat said, next time he's just going to not post a video if he tortures an animal. And I'm pretty sure that this kind of behavior in kids is usually escalates into adulthood.
The kid needs to be reported to the police before he does anything worse.
Better yet...
ReplyDeleteCreate website featuring video from YouTube. Create a comments area.
Take said video and personal information. Create press kits for all local media. Send copies to local ASPCA/Humane Society, police, school, and employers of child's parents.
Create a bulk mailing detailing what this boy did, with an URL to your website. Mail letters to all neighbors.
If media and public demand, organize a protest march and rally.
Run it all by a lawyer first.
Vigilante justice is better when the law is on your side. Speak softly and carry a big stick, as Teddy Roosevelt said.
By posting the video on Youtube Kenny gave up his right to privacy. He became as much a public figure as any politician or celebrity. As long as the people running that website aren't actively advocating violence they aren't doing anything illegal. In fact they are using their right to free speech as much as anyone writing a letter to the editor of the local newspaper.
ReplyDeleteBack in my freshmen year, there was an asshole down the hall that had himself filmed while biting the head off a hamster. I'm still unclear on who first released it, but the video went viral on the school network.
ReplyDeleteOne guy in the dorm sent the video to PETA along with the asshole's contact information. They filed suit, he left school.
That, to me, was the correct way to handle it. Bring it to the attention of someone inclined and equipped to legally deal with it.
Of course, this is a little different case. In my example, the people around him knew what he did and some wanted to see him punished for it. In Kenny Glenn's case, it was a community effort to find out his identity. In any case, Kenny was arrested, so it's being dealt with in the system.
Also, Valerie, the sex offender registry is already public, and has most of the information you listed in your hypothetical.
That kid's right to privacy flew out the window the moment he thought it'd be kewl to hurt a defenseless animal. I don't condone releasing his personal information to the public, but his parents, his friends, his school, the media of his small town, and the police? Have at 'er.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to be some kind of perverse fad for certain YouTube types to post some truly horrific things(there was a case where a teenage girl was lured to another girl's home and recieved a viscious beatings). Anything that can be done to curb this sort of thing and prove definitively that it is unacceptable and reprehensible is fair game in my book.
Stac
Community ostracism & consequence have always been a big part of the unofficial justice system; the internet doesn't invent anything new.
ReplyDeleteOf course, it is also weird to have this conversation when you've already contributed; I mean, you selected a memorable image with the kid's name, you reposted the kid's name, right?
ReplyDeleteMy responses:
ReplyDeleteA general response. Whether posting the information is OK depends in part on how it was acquired. Also, all my opinions are of the nonlegal variety.
"Are you cool with posting personal info like that on the web with the purpose of harassing someone who has committed a heinous act?"
If it looks real, absolutely. Also, the act of posting personal information is certainly less heinous than that of punching a cat.
"Are you normally not cool with doing such a thing (because of due process, etc), but the kid seemed like a creep anditwasadefenselesscatforgodssake, so just this one time you will look the other way on it?"
First, people who put videos of themselves on the web, have arguably abdicated at least some of their privacy rights. Second, he chose to place a video of himself committing a crime on the web, so I believe he abdicated the remainder of his privacy rights.
"Would you be less cool about posting the info if there was no video-tape in the Kenny Glenn case, but only testimony from an eyewitness, etc? Did the videotape "sell" this case to you?
I would absolutely be less cool to the point I would advocate against it as eyewitness testimony is notoriously inaccurate. The video does sell it.
"Would you be ok about posting the identifying information of registered sex offenders --not just having a list of names, but having one web page for each person, completely "outing" them? And contact info on their families, if they were harboring the offender?"
Honestly, I am not sure. But first, isn't this already the case? I thought people could look up who the registered sex offenders were in their neighborhood now.
A couple questions: (1) does someone remain on the registry forever; and (2) would the web page list the actual crimes for which they were convicted? If the answers are no and yes, I would have a lot less trouble with this idea.
Issues I have: to my understanding and I could be wrong, the sex offender registry does not treat different offenders differently. It's one thing if we are talking a child rapist. It's another if we are talking about a 19 year old receiving a blowjob from a 15 year old that is consensual in every way except under the law.
Second, and this is a weaker argument, but I believe it has some validity, the person served their time. Yes there is a high rate of recidivism for many crimes, but not everyone.
Assuming you are talking about real pedophiles or multiple rapists, I would have no problem with it.
"If somebody said something racist, sexist, or homophobic on YouTube, would you be ok with posting all their personal information on a website so people could harass them?
"If you disagreed with somebody strongly on political issues, would you be ok with posting their contact information on the Internet, under the theory that it might embarrass them and cause them to rethink their position (or just be a lot more "underground about it")?"
I come down on the side of "no" for both questions because I support the marketplace of ideas and I want to know what people are thinking. If people want to post anonymously, so be it.
"Do you think Kenny Glenn or a member of his family might get possibly physically hurt by the posting of this public information?"
Possibly, and I hope not, but a cat was already hurt and who knows how many other animals. But it's not like someone posted a video of Kenny beating a cat. Kenny did.
The problem with vigilnte justice is not a moral one, it's a utilitarian social contract thing. You cannot have vengeance killings and rampant thievery and maintain a civil society. That's why I get pissed when these religious nuts want the Ten Commandments in courthouses because "it is a basis for our laws." It really isn't.
ReplyDeleteI am not a fan of the concept of vigilante justice outside of comics and movies and tv, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think it is absolutely appropriate to go to the authorities. I do not think it is right to post personal information in situations like that.
I think it is best to call that sort of retaliation off limits as it is really easy to falsely accuse or implicate people, but not easy to undo the effects of such an attack.
I don't condone cruelty to animals or people, but I think we are better as a people when we handle things within the law and the systems we have in place. Due Process is the way to go.
We can choose, as a society, to identify disturbed individuals like this kid and help them so that their violence isn't carried forward into adulthood.
ReplyDeleteWe can also choose to explode into public outbursts of rage and self-righteousness so we can feel better about ourselves before we completely forget about the underlying causes until they blossom into shootings and bombings.
But fuck it, the guys on /b/ said posting his contact info was made of win and God and that's what really matters here amirite?
The sh*t that is about to fall on this kid and his parents is FAR more deadly than anything any internet vigilante can do to him.
ReplyDeleteWhen you post your insanity online - you're asking for sh*t.
This is scary as hell.
ReplyDeleteAlso I just found out I can totally look up the kids house on Google maps now...
I would make a argument on why this is so wrong and scary (Wow I am looking at my house right now with that map thing... I have a crappy yard.) but it would be drowned out by the chanting anditwasadefenselesscatforgodssake.
Plus I have already argued about this kind of thing here before anyway.
Still just for old times sake.
Weither the kid has it coming or not is not really the issue. The Issue is when other people are targeted this way. The odds of this kid getting jumped are now very real as well as the odds of someone getting hurt.
What do we do when we have vigilantes start targeting murderers, thieves, rapists, suspected rapists, Gays/child molesters, and that guy taking pics at the playground of his own kid.
I don't know about the rest of you but I don't want the power used against my loved ones or myself.
As scummy as cat-punching is, I'm also not a fan of mob justice in any arena. Report the kid to proper authorities (he is committing a crime after all) and let them deal with him.
ReplyDeleteah the internet..the great equalizer...you may refute my words but you can't refute the video evidence. When he recorded it he wanted attention and he can't really bitch when that attention is negative. Welcome to you wake up call! Not losing any sleep over his info being put out there.
ReplyDeleteWell, I see your point...but I love cats and I'm not all that fond of people,in general. So, I can't really claim the moral high ground here. I'd have contacted the ASPCA instead, but I don't feel sorry for the kid. Hopefully this kind of heat will get him off the road he's on
ReplyDeleteDifficult.
ReplyDeleteBelieving in justice doesn't mean I have the right to administer it myself.
I don't think Superman would try to punish the guy. I think he'd try to rescue the cat, give it a good home.
Could be wrong, though.
Well, I think here the reason why internet justice happened was because he chose to make his crime public. He showed the world what he was doing under the assumption that he was anonymous, and well, that's why he got exposed in such a fashion. The cops have been informed, and media as well, and I remember reading that one of the vigilantes called his parents first. This whole thing leaves a bittersweet feeling when you think about it too much, there is pride in the idea that a bunch of strangers online came together to save an innocent cat, but then again, that is vigilante justice, and I prefer those who do that to wear a nice red cape. (then again, it's the internet, some of them might have been wearing a red cape at that moment...)
ReplyDeleteNot bad.
ReplyDeleteI have been reading for a while but I never really commented.
I like the fact that you took a stand on this issue. One that is probably not going to be popular on the internet.
I am with you on this.
I think the proper thing to do in this situation is contact Animal Control and show them the video and the evidence you have. Posting the kid's personal details to the Internet is a bit much.
ReplyDeleteAnd, honestly, I feel that way across the board. If a senator or representative spouts off some bigoted diatribe, sure, give us their office number so we can voice our displeasure, but don't dig up their private home address and number. Some business owner gives money to a political cause you strongly oppose? Boycott their business, don't work out where they live and send threatening letters to their house.
If there's a crime involved, and you can identify the person who committed it and get their personal details to the proper authorities -- do that. But I think a line has to be drawn, and opening the kid and his family up to harassment is taking it too far. I love animals, and this kind of thing really, really upsets me, but there are laws in place and suitable authorities ready to enforce them, and we shouldn't go exact some crude vigilante justice.
"Vigilante justice is better when the law is on your side."
ReplyDeleteNot looking to start a fight or anything but it's not exactly vigilante justice with the law on your side. Gotham City is the only place you can dress up as a nut, beat up strangers, leave them tied to lamp posts with cute letters, and NOT be shot on sight when you meet the police commissioner on a rooftop to discuss the Joker's next caper.
Now, I won't argue that it's not justice but, by definition, that isn't vigilante justice.
What you're advocating is a grassroots campaign and activism for animal rights as well as intervention for human mental health.
I'm with you all the way on that!
The risk is that a more fucked up individual uses these details to do something appalling.
ReplyDeleteYou also have to consider how it'll affect his family. Do they deserve the abuse that could potentially come their way? Fuck no.
And of course, what if you made a mistake? Even if you felt that vigilantism was acceptable mistakes can occur. They might not all be as stupid as this though:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/901723.stm
I will agree that his information should not have been posted. But it's hard to feel sorry for someone who hurts animals. I didn't Google either links because I didn't want to give either of them any traffic.
ReplyDeleteFuck this kid. Let this be an example to anyone else who thinks they can cause harm, show it off, and think nothing of it.
ReplyDeleteI have studied psychology for over 11 years. Many of you have watched moves, or read books, but the story is the same. We all know he learned this and we all know it leads to other, more harmful things.
What can be done? Are you gonna talk the kid into being normal? Are you going to make his parents pay whatever amount and that's the end? The judge is just going to talk and wag his finger.
Come on.
Beat his ass and beat the ass of those who try to help him. Proper avenues my fucking eye. Kid didn't go through proper avenues to hurt something that is defenseless.
Don't give me he's just a kid, or any kind of crap like that. People always want to call and hand it off to somebody else.
Too many people get a free pass for this kind of shit. Beat his ass down hard so if he thinks about trying it again to an animal, or a kid, or a woman, or any another person, he'll think twice.
Just one note "posting personal information" is not "vigilante justice"
ReplyDeleteIf you disagreed with somebody strongly on political issues, would you be ok with posting their contact information on the Internet, under the theory that it might embarrass them and cause them to rethink their position (or just be a lot more "underground about it")?
ReplyDeleteThis is already happening in California, where contributors to Prop 8 are being outed. I was totally against Prop 8, and I have no problem with corporations or organizations such as the Mormon Church being identified as backers of Prop 8, but I'm a little queasy at the idea of individuals potentially being harassed or even injured because of their political views. Kind of goes against the whole "secret ballot" thing.
"Just one note "posting personal information" is not "vigilante justice""
ReplyDeleteIt is to the internet.
There's always someone out there who will act.
It's the same principal as posting the personal information of an abortion clinic's head doctor.
They tried going to his mother first. She took away his dirtbike. WTF?
ReplyDeleteWhen you record activity such as this and make it public, you 'll reap the rewards, positive or negative. There's a big, big difference between giving an opinion and harming a living being.
"It's the same principal as posting the personal information of an abortion clinic's head doctor."
ReplyDeleteAre the people who murder in the name of life also so stupid they cannot use a phone book? or Google?
This is a sticky situation. On one hand, I deplore what he did to the cat. My gut reaction is to pop the kid one. But meeting violence with violence is pretty asinine and primitive.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I'm afraid that posting his personal information and thereby inciting people to take vigilante action-- and why else would someone post the personal info if not to do just that or at least create the terroristic threat of the possibility of that kind of action-- could lead to things much worse than animal abuse, and not just in this case.
Why do I need to know this kid's personal information? I can't think of a valid reason.
There's definitely a level of outrage warranted by what the kid did, but as we've seen repeatedly, these things tend to be exacerbated by certain conditions of the Internet until the response ends up far outstripping even the initial crime. Too many wannabe bad-asses out there who really aren't any different from this kid, looking for justification to beat someone up or make themselves feel powerful.
Fortunately, most of them are all talk. But still...
Also, relying on street justice is too much like that dumb "If everyone were carrying guns, criminals would be too afraid to commit crimes" argument that crops up from time to time. That's not the way to maintain society and once we resort to rule by fear or rule by the mob, we ourselves have abdicated civilization. Certainly, there's some satisfaction when a jackass gets a comeuppance but that's only in the short term.
Do you obey the law because you merely fear punishment, or do you obey the law because we live in an orderly society?
And what's the relevance of this "His mother only took his dirtbike away" stuff? Who cares? Does her perceived failure as a mother-- bear in mind we don't know anything about her or the rest of the family and precious little about the kid other than his apparent lack of empathy towards living things-- then make it totally okay for the rest of us or some stranger to mete out a punishment? Or at the very least, create this atmosphere of threat or fear that someone might print out a Google map and come calling one moonless night?
What was that old saw about two wrongs... not making... something... something?
Because-- and this is what I consider central here-- it's not as if there were no recourse in the first place, no laws in place about animal abuse. There are ways to handle this through legal channels. For example, as others have posted here, finding out his private info and reporting him to the police and ASPCA. That should've been the next step when appealing to his mother seemed to fail, not this craziness.
But I guess doing the right thing in the right way doesn't allow various people to vent their spleens and scream and yell at their computers in a cathartic way. It's not juicy or glamorous.
As far as the kid giving up a certain level of privacy by posting his video online-- I doubt posting anything online entails giving up that level of privacy or safety. For example, celebrities' home addresses are generally protected and they're much more public figures than this kid.
No, I don't particularly feel sorry for the kid but I certainly won't confer hero status on all the other people involved on the other side, either. And I'm way more afraid of them.
Well, the damage is done and it's out there. First the cat, now the dumb kid, now a little piece of mind for us all. To me, this is an altogether poor showing all around.
Sorry this is so long but it's a complex issue.
Even longer... Just the image accompanying this article gives me chills by its implications.
ReplyDeleteFor every injury he gave that cat, I'd do the same to him before dragging his ass to the closest jail.
ReplyDeleteWow, I didn't expect someone to so thoroughly illustrate my point immediately after my comments.
ReplyDeleteWolverine, what does the next person do to you after you do that and where does it end?
Although I find this behavior reprehensible, I can’t find it in myself to be cool with someone posting a 14-year-old kid’s information on the internet. Many people have mentioned vigilante justice. Are they suggesting someone go over and beat this child? What’s the goal here, a terse letter-writing campaign? Call the police, the ASPCA, hell, call the local news, but don’t post his information on the internet. Even if he was an adult, what if someone posted the information on the internet and someone went over and beat him to death? Are they culpable? Let the authorities handle it.
ReplyDelete"Many people have mentioned vigilante justice. Are they suggesting someone go over and beat this child? What’s the goal here, a terse letter-writing campaign?"
ReplyDeleteThe goal is to watch and see what effect it has on the world. People are watching and waiting for something to happen to this kid and that is very scary.
Bloody hell. The people advocating going to his house and beating him, claiming he deserves whatever he gets -- that's absolutely terrifying to me! Yes, the kid committed a crime, and he should be punished. Not by us. You do not reasonably respond to a theft by tracking down the culprit yourself, distributing his personal information, and giving people free reign to go to his house, steal his crap, and beat the crap out of him. You do not reasonably respond to an assault with murder.
ReplyDeleteWe are BETTER than that, people. There sure as HELL is something to be said for taking the high road. If we all take the law into our own hands, pretty soon we won't have so much as a somewhat lawful society.
I realize it's been a little while since this article was posted, but I'd like to add a few comments.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a kid, about 11 or 12, I killed a chicken in a prolonged and somewhat tortured fashion. I thought, erroneously, that there might be something magical about killing something with my bare hands. I'd read a fair bit about the passing of life, the circle of life, predators and prey, etc. I decided I'd find out for myself.
We had a lot of chickens and I performed the act in the woods, out of sight. I buried the body afterwards. I was unsatisfied by the whole thing and never repeated it.
I post this to refute the oft-repeated claim that any child who would torture an animal will escalate and go on to worse things. I didn't. I don't even spank my kids. I've had loving relationships with pets of my own (including chickens).
It was a CAT. I know that most people in our modern world value a cat more than a person, but that is a sick point of view. At least, so I believe. But was it his cat and his property to treat as he wished? Was it someone else's cat? Was it no one's cat? Had it attacked him? Was it harming other animals? (It's funny how some bird-lovers hate cats and might find such a video amusing.) Was he from a culture that didn't value cats as pet animals?
The boy should not have posted the video. The most sure sign there was something wrong was his inability to understand the likely consequences. My parents wouldn't have cared about the chicken much, but they would have punished me for indulging my curiosity in such a way. I was smart enough to hide. This boy was not smart enough to hide. Yeah, he wore a mask, but he was not savvy enough about the internet he was on. Someone needs to find that kid and show him how to hide his trail. I'm told there are programs out there that can help.
I would like to remind that the child did try to hide his identity. Although he posted the video, he clearly did not intend to be discovered. That he did is due to his incompetence, not his intention.
I feel it was wrong to post his personal information. It is wrong to post the personal information on sexual offenders, with or without details of their crime, so long as our society does not do the same for other offenders like muggers, thieves, murderers, domestic batterers, tax evasion, etc. (Yes, I have young children and I still think it is wrong that I can look up where the local sex offenders live.)
What superheroes do is a fantasy. Vigilante justice is ugly, very, very ugly.