Streets of shame?

As regular readers will know a few weeks ago we blogged about the potential use of high-visibility clothing to 'shame' offenders on community service and highlight the work they are doing to the community. Needless to say it drew some debate from several quarters as we noted.

As of yesterday the new scheme which sees offenders in bright orange tabards started and the debate went from hypothetical to reality.

Jack Straw said of the scheme and its goals: 'They're not medieval; it's not to do with the stocks. It's not to do with shaming. The shame the offenders feel is the shame and humiliation of having committed the offence and then going to court and having a criminal record. What this is about is enabling the public to see that justice is being done.'

A strong argument you might think, but clearly some disagree. But what do you think about this? We are an industry involved with high-visibility clothing in its more traditional uses but this is an emotive subject and one could run and run.

Dressed to shame?

Sir Ian Blair has brought a debate back to the fore that's been bubbling away for many years. He called for criminals on community service to wear uniforms so that, "people can see those people (offenders) have been sentenced to a community project."

However, as long-time readers of Company Clothing will know, this is not a new topic. In 2005 Hazel Blears called for a similar scheme and much backlash ensued, from MP Ann Widdecombe ("it might be worn as a badge of honour") to civil rights group Liberty ("degradation is no way of engendering a culture of respect").

In America this type of activity already exists, in a predictably bizarre way, with people being made to wear chicken suits to be shamed for their crimes. While it is obvious the UK would never take things to this extreme the question is still yet be resolved around uniforms for offenders on community service.

What do you think? Is this something that should be brought in or is it a step too far? What if the uniform was made to be tasteful and smart rather than designed to be bold and make them standout for the wrong reasons? Would that make it more acceptable?

Jackets and knives

Yet again, the idea of offenders wearing jackets as part of their punishment has risen it's fluorescent head. This time, an offender who was made to wear a jacket has been told he doesn't have to as the ruling to wear them came in after he was convicted.

A thorny issue, and one that draws emotive responses on both sides. Ironically the young lad in question said he didn't want to wear it as it's "embarrassing and humilitating" and "you don't want the whole world to know". By protesting against the decision he has ended up with his faces plastered across papers and websites across the land. So you'd think a lot more people will now know then before. Ho hum.

What do you think anyway? Is it right to make people wear such jackets if they have committed a crime? Or is it unnecessary and degrading?