February 11, 2012
The Sex Offender Debate
Posted on June 23, 2009 in GPS Tracking Systems | by RMT GPS News
EmailBy Harriette Halepis
The idea of using GPS technology to track sex offenders has been sparking a lot of debate recently. In essence, there are three sides to this debate. While the debate continues, more and more governments are beginning to lean towards the use of GPS tracking technology to keep sex offenders in the public eye.
Human rights activists believe that convicted sex offenders that have served jail time deserve to be left alone. Human protection activists state that tracking a sex offender once they have been released from prison is a lot like “…shutting the gate after the horse has bolted… (Hetty Johnston, child protection campaigner, ABC News).” Meanwhile, government authorities are concerned with the cost of implementing tracking systems.
A Second Chance
Do convicted sex offenders deserve a second chance? Is there a way to determine what kind of sex offender should be tracked, and what kind of sex offender should be left alone? What about child sex offenders? Should they be allowed to roam the streets freely?
The biggest issue out of all the issues involving sex offenders is whether or not these criminals should be allowed to mingle with the general public at all. While numerous offenders often claim that they have been reformed after serving jail time, many sex offenders repeat their actions – sometimes, these actions are never reported. If there were an easy solution to the world’s sex offender problem, shouldn’t that solution be seriously reviewed from every possible angle?
Why Tracking?
Implementing a GPS tracking system that would keep tabs on all sex offenders may be one way to keep society safe. If a sex offender can be monitored at all times, they are far less likely to commit a second offense.
However, the question arises: who will keep track of all the sex offenders out there? Who will be able to monitor them? Many have also been quick to point out that GPS systems aren’t perfect, and that technology can make mistakes. All of these things should be considered, but maybe not to the point where GPS technology is disregarded altogether.
It’s hard not to imagine that the world wouldn’t be a better place if all sex offenders could be tracked at all times. Authorities cannot keep track of all the sex offenders that are released onto the streets, but a simple GPS system can. Modern technology has made it possible to create a safer society – shouldn’t we take advantage of this possibility?
25 Responses to “The Sex Offender Debate”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
toGuide Introduces GPS Guided Tours
Email Guided tours using GPS tracking devices add a new dimension to sightseeing, and toGuide...
Recommended
News
toGuide Introduces GPS Guided Tours
Email Guided tours using GPS tracking devices add a new dimension to sightseeing, and toGuide...
NTIA Says “LightSquared is in Wonderland”
Email Let’s get the critical, boring information out of the way first: OSTP is a...
GPS Devices: A Tremendous Benefit to Commercial and Government Fleets
Email A fleet of cargo or freight trucks no doubt provides an incredible logistical challenge...
LightSquared and GPS Play the Blame Game
Email For more than a year, LightSquared has been fighting for the right to develop...
Supreme Court Ruling Could Make or Break First-Degree Murder Trial
Email In wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling, calling warrantless GPS tracking unconstitutional, attorneys...
I love the intelligent, informed comments to what appears to be a paranoia-driven effort to sell a useless, expensive fraud of a product.
Nice little bit of advertising for the National Alert Registry too, a company that the BBB gives an “F” rating to and cannot get in contact with to resolve customer complaints. Also kind of telling that they go by about 15 different names. You want to slap a GPS tracking device on someone, start with those guys.
Or maybe they should just change their motto to a statement that they really endorse: Be Afraid, Be Compliant, Buy Our Products.
Oh Yea, my crime was intrafamilial, So please tell me how does GPS protect my family or friends?
I would love to debate the reliability of these devices. I personally have had one of these things for 4 years, I can’t tell you the problems I’ve had with them. They can personally be attributed to losing me 2 jobs due to “motion no gps” errors requiring me to go outside for 10-15 minutes for it to reconnect to gps. The cell phone provider was changing out some equipment which messed up my connection and my “box” couldnt call in, somehow this is “MY” fault and I had to stand in front of a cell tower for 2 hours between1:30 -3:30 in the morning, My wife was there too. I was made to walk around the parking lot of the probation office in the rain because my, “box” couldnt get a signal, finally they replaced it. Actually, I’ve had 6 different “boxes” in 4 years.. Yea these things are reeeeely reliable. They are an FCC part 15 device which means they cannot cause any interference, and must accept any interference even if it causes undesired operation. This “undesired operation” can land me in jail!
The FACTS are the FACTS. Many people are making money off of sex offender laws. Former Sex Offenders are NOT the problem. Their risk level is LOW! These are the facts from case studies from reputable scores. And these facts do not rely on VOODOO!
In my EDUCATED opinion, your company is pandering to fear to gain MONEY, nothing less. The same as you are Doctor!
The recidivism rates fluctuate among different types of sex offenders and are related to specific characteristic s of the sex offender and the offenses. After 15 years, 73% of sex offenders had not been charged with, or convicted of another sexual offense, Hanson 2004.
A TEXAS study, 2004. There is an inherent societal assumption that the sex offender recidivism rates are a fixed rate that will not change. This supposition is just not accurate. The rate of re-offense is likely to change over time due to social factors and the effectiveness of treatment strategies for managing this population, Hanson 2004.
Oh please let me go on here. A study from Alaska in 2001. In the case of re-arrest for a new sex offense, there was a slight but statistically insignificant difference between the sex offender group 3.4 percent and the non-sex offender group 1.3 percent.
From a very detailed 2007 Minnesota study. Sex offender recidivism for one year, 2% five year 7.4%.
In a study by the Sentencing Guidelines Commission, for the State of Washington found, and this is a direct quote, Murder, robbery and Sex offenders were the least likely to have current” criminal behavior that was the same type as that committed in the past. Sex offenders 3.5%
I am so glad to see this article titled, “The Sex Offender DEBATE”.
For far too long this issue has been so one-sided because the term Sex Offender has been associated with the most heinous of crimes.
The public image is of the kidnapper, murderer and body-disposing of innocent children which the media feasts on. No wonder the public will gladly fork over every bit of the billions of dollars spent to keep their own children safe. Who wouldn’t? But if, everyone who is labled a Sex Offender were of this type, there wouldn’t be time enough to air any other nightly news!
The best solution to this problem is the word, “Separation”. If legitimate facts would be presented to the folks, they would learn that the huge majority of the people they are taught to fear, are first timers who, in many cases, used poor judgement in consensual activity. What got them convicted was not violent nor assaultive behavior, but the AGE difference of the participants. Legislators and Prosecutors are all too happy to use over-hyped language to describe even minor activities where “sex” is involved. Selling FEAR is a lucrative industry.
“Create a need and fill it” is what drives the fear to the public, and propels the “tough on crime” images and the high salaries of those who created it in the first place.
Are there Boogymen out there? Sure! But nowhere near what you have been led to believe exists..
I read alot of stories that claim 90% of sexual abuse goes unreported but you do not have to be a genius to know those numbers are pulled straight out of the air with no basis in fact.
I am sure that a lot of cases do in fact go unreported but the very fact they are secret would make them impossible to count.
Furthermore that has nothing to do with the fact based peer reviewed studies quoted here that deal with actual “offenders” and their actual PROVEN rate of recidivism.
“1 in 3 sex crimes are not reported” could be balanced with the assertion that ” 1 in 3 sex crimes are false accusations.
It would seem that the good Doctor is not as educated as he would like to put forth or he is bias due to making his money off of sex offenders. I could not list all of the studies but a quick internet search will give you the FACTS, if you are looking for the FACTS.
Also I would like him to prove that “1 in 3 sex crimes are not reported”, are you a palm reader also Doctor?
For the record I’ll start off that I’m also in the GPS business, and yes, “offender tracking” is a means of potential revenue. Let me take a stab at some of the less obvious facts:
- GPS offender tracking is very reliable for the most part and it’s performance may vary from solution provider to solution provider.
- as with everything else going on right now in this tight economy, departments and agencies are re-examining as to how best they can reduce their spending.
- while I’m not going to comment on who should be monitored with GPS tracking (e.g. every sex offender released back into the community, etc.) or which class of offender should be, I will comment that it is a more economical means of monitoring an offender versus the cost of daily incarceration.
- the cost of prison/jail housing a low-risk offender varies anywhere from $40 to $85+ per day (varies from state to state and institution to institution)
- even at $9/day for GPS monitoring for low-risk offenders (please note I’ve stated “low risk” and that definition also varies from state to state) that there is a substantial savings versus the cost of prison/jail housing this same offender (i.e sex offender, drug offender, crime offender, etc.).
- some states pass the cost of the GPS monitoring directly to the released offender so they may enjoy the “freedom” of being back in a community, working and paying taxes.
- in some cases, the offender may not have such funding, in which case the department or agency may fund their monitoring (in which case, it is still a significant savings vs. the cost of incarceration).
- in all cases, the departments/agencies assess the risks involved in releasing a low-risk offender back into society.
- GPS offender monitoring for the most part is automated, with immediate alarms and notifications should the offender tamper with the device, not adhere to his/her restrictions or travel into or out of areas permitted or not.
- I’m not going to debate the “privacy issues” that an offender’s whereabouts can be monitored or he/she should have full restored freedoms when they have violated others; what I will state is that it is nice to have this technology available that can be beneficial when used properly in the right circumstances.
How can something be effective when its cost outweighs its use? Also as pointed out earlier, why just single out group of criminals out? Why do we not have legislation that pushed for GPS tracking of gang affiliations, drug dealers, etc.? I’ve looked at the DOJ research and it just amazed me at how right most of these people here are. The recidivism is so low I have to think why the uproar, and why single them out. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t sell your product, after all it is a capitalist society we live in, but what I’m asking is that you don’t do it with fear, hysteria. I think its time that we as Americans start thinking with our minds and not our emotions. After all, how much damage do people do to their children when the transfer this kind of fear onto them?
Dr. James,
There are approximately 700,000 registrants that are NOT in prison. And first time offenders have a VERY LOW rate of recidivism. That is a FACT.
Even if you locked up all 700,00, you would still have the same problem because 93% of all new sex offenses are committed by those NOT on the registry. They are family members and friends of the family. There is where the HUGE threat to our children are. So in effect, we would be better off putting GPS on every member society. Sounds ridicules doesn’t it? Well, it’s just as ridicules as the program that is now in effect.
What the law makers have failed to do is use “evidence based research” when making these laws that actually endanger children and society. Knee jerk, feel good laws can never be good law.
Dear Dr. James,
You have quoted one source, I read a lot of information there and the latest study I could find was in 2000, most were 1984, 1989, 1994 etc.. One statement even said that the offenders put fear into the community. I challenge that, I think it’s people like yourself who put fear in the community, most offenders just want to lead a normal life. You threw out some numbers then you nullified them by your own statement about innaccurate recivitism rates. Your reference did not even look at false allegations.. that kinda throws a kink in your 1 of 3 statement. Again, all recivitism aside, PLEASE tell me how GPS tracking is going to help prevent the 90% of crimes committed at HOME?
The statistics that Dr. James wants quoted come from Center for Sex Offender Management, which is an agency that gets it’s money from, works for, and needs to justify it’s existence to, the Department of Justice. It actually gets money for running training programs for how to handle sex offenders. I would tend to surmise that this information certainly has a great potential for bias. The statistics being quoted by most of the others who have commented are from the Department of Corrections. Those who actual handle numbers only based on actual convictions. Recidivism is often talked about using different forms of measurement. It may count the number of technical violations of those on parole or probation, it may only count the number of arrests, or it may count the only the actual number of convictions. The other important point at looking at recidivism are the percentages counting former offenders who have committed another sex offense or are they actually reporting percentages of all new crimes committed.
Let me preface this by saying, I’m not sure which side you guys are on, but many of you clearly haven’t done your research.
Only 1 out of 3 sex crimes are ever reported. Of the sex crimes reported, the sex offender recidivism rates have been at about 40%. However, it’s most important to point out that due to the seriousness of this violent crime, most offenders are incarcerated for a significant amount of time. So, here’s my question: how can one accurately measure the recidivism rate when the offenders are incarcerated and only 1 out of 3 crimes are ever reported. Obviously, the recidivism rate is much higher than we predict.
For those who want to challenge my statement, I recommend your review of this publication: http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html
As noted, former offenders are not likely to reoffend, Government studies have proven that. Your statement that (many) reoffend is false. False statements are harmful and can be considered as LIABLE in legal and court terms.
Your company is in business to make money, of course you want people to respond in the way you desire, however the public is beginning to wake up to the fact that sex offender laws are HATE based and the cost of these laws is tremendous.
Please, use facts when writing these articles and look for money from the private sector, the government is already over its head in debt. We are asking for accountability and companies like your are asking for pork.
As for any HATE groups that may find this discussion, please feel free to spew your HATE and Propaganda! The truth is coming to the fore!
All the recivitism statistics aside, it has been known for a long time that 85-90% of these crimes are committed by family or friends. Tell me please how tracking someone at their home or friends/neighbors is going to help prevent anything? This whole tracking thing is based on stranger danger which is a myth, however it is very profitable at the expense of people who cant even get a job because of the hysteria propigated by greedy corporations such as the news media and yourselves. Florida charges $9.00 a day for EX offenders to be monitored so they can tell the public it is now safe while counting the cash all the way to the bank. I found it interesting in Florida the former govenor who pushed for the gps tracking holds a high percentage of stock in the company the state has contracted to perform this service. It’s not about safety there’s no way your service could provide that, it’s about cash in your pockets period.
The BIG question no one seems to be looking at here is just WHO is going to be paying for this! Registered Former Sex Offenders! Don’t bet on it!
Since the Registry for Former Sex Offenders became a reality and public a majority of those Former Offenders have become homeless and jobless. Many losing good paying jobs and have gone from productive taxpayers to relying on the “Public Assistance Programs” in already financially strapped communities living off unemployment, food stamps and housing assistance. And now they want them to wear GPS devices that they can’t afford so guess who is going to pay for it, the taxpaying public.
So if you support this nonsense be prepared to pay for it out of your own pocket, cause Registered Former Sex Offenders are not going to have the money to pay for it themselves. And the GPS companies and shareholding Politicians that are demanding this wants to make money, a lot of money off your fear and ignorance, and your gullibility believing it will “Protect Our Children”.
“Watching Those Who Watch Sex Offenders.” A very good article.
http://cfcoklahoma.org/New_Site/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=0&func=view&id=11&catid=21#11
Let’s see can you be more biased? You stand to make tons of money if “all” former sex offenders have GPS tracking. Why is this one group always singled out? Because no one cares and they think all people who have done time for a sex offense are horrible monsters out there lurking and waiting to snatch another victim. Why not suggest tracking drug dealers, DUI offenders or thieves all re-offend at rates nearing 50% compared to 3.5% for sex offenders? See the DOJ’s own studies to verify these statistics. I feel if someone has done their time it is time to leave them alone. If you disagree with how much time they served, lobby for longer sentences, oh wiat tht wouldn’t make you ny money would it?
Recidivism for first time offenders is very low as Tony has indicated.
To my way of thinking, those who perhaps need tracking are
1. The offender who DID NOT KNOW their victim.
2 The REPEAT offender.
3. The VIOLENT offender.
The remainder should be allowed to rejoin society in order to provide for their own families. There are approximately 2 million innocent plus that are negatively effected by these “emotional based, feel good” laws that do more harm than good.
Here are a few studies that I wish people would understand so that we might have “evidence based” legislation. Because the laws as they are written today are not “evidence based. What a huge waste of BILLIONS of tax payers monies.
STUDY’S
http://cfcoklahoma.org/New_Site/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=0&func=listcat&catid=83
Every single study ever done on RSO’s prove that recidivism is actually very low and that children are 95% more likely to be violated by someone known to the family rather than a stranger.
You are in the tracking business and can hardly be objective about this subject please list your independent sources that claim that recidivism is high and/or that tracking is any kind of deterrent.
I think the Alycia Nipp case pretty graphically proves that GPS is a waste of money and reasources.