Rocky Mountain Tracking

Daily GPS News

Are GPS Trackers Reliable?

August 18th, 2011

A study conducted by researchers at Sam Houston State University in Arizona concluded that GPS tracking devices should not be relied on as the sole method of monitoring sex offenders. “GPS technology is far more limited than anticipated and should be viewed as a tool rather than depended on as a control mechanism.”

The two year study followed the most dangerous of sex offenders where children were the victims after their release, monitoring them via GPS bracelet. State law mandates these criminals be monitored for their lifetime.

The study pointed out that the majority of alerts weren’t because the offender was outside of their specified area, but rather only out of reach of satellite signal. It became like the boy who cried “wolf,” with probation officers facing false alarm after false alarm. The researchers concluded the “findings demonstrated that the responses to non-violation alerts consumed an inordinate amount of an agency’s resources – resources that could be better directed to other case management activities.”

The study then goes on to point out that this could lead to the possibility of the probation officer choosing not to respond, thinking it’s just another false alarm. Imagine the ramifications if it is in fact a legitimate alarm requiring immediate action.

Officials must consider all sides of the issue of GPS monitoring for serious sex offenders, rather than enacting laws that are difficult to enforce. GPS technology has come so far in a few years time, and it would be wise of other states to pay attention to what happens in Arizona and in the field of GPS technology itself.

There will come a time the device is fine-tuned to address these lack of signal issues, and then it will be time to rethink this as a viable strategy for keeping our children safe from known violent offenders.

Article Written by Khristen Foss

A Mother Speaks Out Against Tracking All Sex Offenders.

August 9th, 2011

As a mother of three, two of which are girls, I find myself checking the Watchdog website on occasion to check for any sex offenders who might happen to have moved to my neighborhood. This site is important to me, since there are no laws in New Hampshire (where I reside) stating that citizens must be warned when sex offenders move into town. It stands to reason that some sex offenders should wear GPS tracking bracelets at all times.

However, some crimes that label a person a “sex offender” are somewhat ridiculous. If, for example, an 18-year old is involved in a sexual relationship with his 16-year old girlfriend, it doesn’t matter whether or not both parties consent once the law becomes involved.

Angry parents can easily have an older boyfriend arrested for having sex with a minor. In most cases, a judge has no choice but to arrest the older boyfriend. This arrest will remain on a person’s record for the rest of his life, which, in turn, will force him to register as a convicted sex offender whenever he moves to another town.

This is precisely why Toronto’s Tim Hudak (Progressive Conservative Leader) must rethink his proposed law that forces all sex offenders (roughly 14,000 citizens) to wear GPS tracking bracelets. Further, Hudak wants to open the sex offender registry list to all citizens.

As stated, I do believe that some sex offenders should be tracked. However, it seems unlikely that the 14,000 people on Hudak’s list are dangerous and serious sex offenders. Many of these people are attempting to move on with their lives – something that a GPS tracking device would prevent.

Logically, there is no sense in punishing all sexual offenses. A better alternative to Hudak’s proposal would be to identify those people who are a danger to society and need to be tracked. Otherwise, this proposed law will result in a waste of money and time — not to mention the further humiliation that some convicted sex offenders must endure.

Article Written by Khristen Foss

Ontario PC Leader Promises GPS Tracking for Sex Offenders

July 28th, 2011

PC leading candidate, Tim Hudak, is using GPS tracking technology as part of his campaign. Responding to the calls of Ontario citizens for monitoring of sex offenders, Hudak promises that if he is elected, he will require convicted sex offenders wear a GPS tracking device. “I will lead a government that puts safety first,” said Hudak, while unveiling his campaign pledge during a media event recently.

Monitoring sex offenders with GPS is a growing trend for law enforcement around the world. More than 40 U.S. states use GPS tracking devices to monitor certain offenders. Despite the momentum of this tactic, Hudak’s policy does face opposition. Some people don’t think GPS monitoring is an effective deterrent for repeat offenses. “An ankle bracelet will only tell you where you were roughly after the offense has occurred again,” explained Greg Rogers, John Howard Society’s executive director.

The program would cost a whopping $50 million per year, and the cost is too high according to some. “I think the money should be put into making sure the offense doesn’t occur in the first place,” adds Rogers. Rogers did not offer any alternative plans to deter sex offenses, which he considers more worthy of investment. The problem of sex offenders is quite complicated, but there is solid evidence that those who become perpetrators of sex crimes, tend to have been victims of sexual abuse early in life. Perhaps creating an effective deterrent for sex offenders will be enough to prevent a future generation of sex offenders from entering society.

Another part of Hudak’s plan is to make information about sex offenders available to the public, in an online registry. There is some concern that providing this information to the public would result in vigilantism against local sex offenders. “Good people will not break the law. . . What we’re looking at is protecting children,” offered Gary Ellis, a PC candidate and former head of the Toronto police sex crimes unit.

Article Written by Marisa O’Connor

GPS Tracks Down Sex Offenders Quickly

July 16th, 2011

Any parent of children knows that one of the most disturbing things possible is finding out about the location of convicted sex offenders near your home or near your children’s school. Many single women feel the same uneasiness about this danger. While online maps and databases are helpful for showing the residences of these offenders, they are unable to track specific location, restrictions, or curfews. An accurate solution that provides increased confidence and safety is using GPS tracking devices on sex offenders to monitor their precise location.

These GPS tracking devices are small enough to be installed on a bracelet around the offender’s ankle. Security devices in the bracelet will alert law enforcement of attempts to remove or tamper with the bracelet.

The GPS tracking device itself will provide law enforcement officials with detailed data regarding the whereabouts of the offender. This information is valuable for making sure that offenders do not enter restricted areas, including school zones, as well as for tracking curfew infractions.

Recently, law enforcement officials from over fifty counties in California met to discuss better tracking methods for sex offenders in their neighborhoods and communities.

The CA Department of Corrections also announced an improvement in their offender tracking method. The DOC reported that their parole officers were spending too long with office-bound data reviewing, and too little time on the field. Therefore, California is now requiring the companies that provide offender-tracking GPS units to provide better data, including more accurate alerts and higher priority alerts for more serious offenders.

By making these stricter requests of the companies who provide GPS tracking services and data for law enforcement, California is taking good steps forward in protecting their neighborhoods and communities. The county of Santa Barbara alone has more than seven hundred registered offenders, and tracking those offenders will be much easier for parole agents with this more accurate GPS tracking data.

With GPS tracking devices being used to monitor sex offenders, law enforcement officers have access to more useful data than ever before. They can spend their time on the field visiting the most serious offenders and protecting the surrounding communities. Private citizens, however, do not have access to that level of information nor time to analyze it all. Citizens still have a responsibility to know their areas and protect themselves and those around them. The Megan’s Law website is one of the most valuable tools for families to use to protect themselves and their children.

Article Written by Nichole Decoust

Should Law Enforcement Track Sex Offenders?

July 12th, 2011

Despite widespread use of GPS tracking devices around the world, one particularly prickly application involves monitoring the movements of known sex offenders after they have been released from prison on parole. An increasing number of law enforcement departments are implementing the devices as a twenty-four hour monitoring system capable of alerting police if the wearer violates the terms of his parole, but officials in Queensland, Australia have balked at instituting a similar policy.

Most devices intended to monitor sex offenders take the form of an ankle bracelet. Law enforcement officers can check in on the wearer at any time and can also view a log of activities over time. In addition, they can set up perimeters around schools, playgrounds and other off-limits areas.

If the perimeter is crossed, the tracking device will send an immediate alert to officers. While there have been instances of parolees breaking free from the bracelets, overall the results have been encouraging. In addition, they have provided significant cost savings for cash-strapped departments by reducing the number of personnel needed to monitor paroled offenders.
Unfortunately, that’s not enough for Queensland officials seeking to keep a close eye on some of the country’s worst criminal offenders. While the reason for the decision remains unclear, proponents of the devices point to their reliability, continuous monitoring capabilities, and widespread use in other fields as positive indications that implementation would be beneficial.
In addition to tracking sex offenders, law enforcement departments have also used GPS tracking technology to track down stolen automobiles and other personal property, break up crime rings, recover missing persons, and monitor suspicious activity. In the private sector, the devices pop up in places as diverse as pet collars, fleet vehicles, endangered animals, wristwatches, and cell phones. While widespread use doesn’t necessarily provide the rationale needed to convince lawmakers that they provide the answer for monitoring sex offenders, it does point to the public’s confidence in the devices to provide accurate, reliable location information in a wide variety of settings.
Ultimately the decision that must be weighed by Queensland lawmakers is whether law enforcement departments can provide the kind of surveillance needed to protect children from known sex offenders without using GPS tracking. At the end of the day, it’s safety that matters most.

Article Written by Lynetta Bowen

Queensland Government to Test GPS Monitoring for Sex Offenders

July 9th, 2011

Nearly a month after Queensland Department of Community Safety (DCS) announced that they would be budgeting to include GPS monitoring for convicted sex offenders, a plan is now in place to begin testing the different devices on the market. On June 27, 2011, the DCS released expression of interest documents for vendors who would like to be considered for this project.

During the next three weeks, the department will receive and review proposals for different GPS products, and narrow the list down to a few that will be tested during the trial period. The final list of vendors is set to be selected by July 25, 2011.

A one-week trial period will begin August 8, 2011, which will determine what GPS monitoring system is best suited for the needs of the DCS. Employees of the DCS have volunteered to participate in the trial, acting as the sex offenders the devices will eventually be used on. The DCS employees are a great control group, because they already know what to look out for during the trial.

They will look for how location information is gathered, whether actively, in real-time, or passively, where movements are logged and retrieved at a later time. The trial will also test how the devices perform in different environments, such as the mountains, the beach, or the gym. They will also test how easy the devices are to tamper with, and what kind of alert systems are in place.

Currently, sex offenders in the state are monitored with ankle bracelets, through radio frequency. The technology was once incredibly useful, but now mostly serves as a back-up system for GPS monitoring, a much more advanced and accurate method of tracking. The Queensland government is setting aside $9.6 million over the next three years, to bring sex offender monitoring up to date.

Article Written by Marisa O’Connor

New GPS Tracking Bill Suggests An Eye For An Eye

April 14th, 2011

The Berke Bill passed the Senate on the 7^th of April unanimously, requiring GPS tracking devices for domestic violence offenders, and is on its way to the House Judiciary Committee for approval.

Unlike the usual GPS devices used to for house arrest, this type of tracking will work a bit differently.

Senator Andy Berke (Chattanooga, TN) sponsored the bill, stating “…for years, victims of domestic violence have had to live in fear that their attackers were following their every move. With this bill, the attackers will have to live with the knowledge that their victims are tracking them.”

If this bill clears the House, judges in TN will require those offenders released on bail in a domestic violence-related case to wear a GPS tracking device. This tracker will allow a victim access to information on the whereabouts of the offender at all times.

As there is normally a restraining order in these cases, which mandates how far the accused should be from the victim at all times, this device will alert the victim when the order is being violated, possibly saving his/her life. According to Berke, “in cases of extreme stalking and domestic violence, we need to make sure that victims are afforded every possible measure of security.”

However, this tracking proposal may work the other way around. For example, some of these victims have been beaten severely, and the victim (or those close to a victim) may seek revenge. The new GPS tracking bill allows victims to find out, at any given time, where to locate their attacker. This would make it quite easy to exact revenge, and this is one of the reasons why some oppose The Berke Bill.

Is allowing a victim to view the whereabouts of an attacker going too far? GPS tracking devices can provide a large amount of safety for victims who are afraid to leave their homes, but being under constant watch may not be a good idea.

Article Written by Khristen Foss

Are GPS Devices Too Easy To Remove?

April 7th, 2011

A high-risk sex offender from Fargo, ND was recently found and arrested after he removed his GPS tracking device while on the run from police, according to The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead. The man, Chad Richard Keszler, was arrested on a tip from citizens.

He had not returned back to his home after he forcibly removed his GPS tracking device from his body, Lieutenant Joel Vettel said of the incident.

Keszler, 24, was originally convicted of gross sexual imposition in 2007; his victim was a female under 15 years old, and so he is now a convicted sex offender for life.

What do you think? Is there any way to make GPS tracking devices less susceptible to their wearers forcibly removing them? Any advances in technology that would make this less of a prevalent issue? To my mind, this seems like the “last mile” of GPS tracking devices; something which is not dependent on the wearer deciding not to rip it off.

The success of such a device would be predicated on the following assumptions being met:

The device should be safe to wear. Sex offender or not, humans shouldn’t be subjected to dangerous, or even cruel, devices.
The device should be incredibly difficult to remove.
The device should not be incredibly expensive, relative to current GPS tracking devices.

I’m certainly interested in hearing what your imaginations can come up with when devising safer GPS tracking devices. Let your ideas run wild; I want to hear your ideas in the comments!

Article Written by Greg Minton

New South Wales May Use GPS Tracking To Monitor Domestic Violence Criminals

March 18th, 2011

More and more law enforcement around the world are turning to GPS tracking devices to monitor high-risk convicted criminals. New South Wales courts are in talks of using these devices to keep domestic violence and sex offenders under constant surveillance. This $15.6 million plan was introduced Tuesday morning, March 8, 2011, by Primier Kristina Keneally under the re-elected labor government.

GPS tracking devices are already in use around the world to keep tabs on convicted gang members and sex offenders on parole. This new method of surveillance is being tested on high-risk repeat offenders. It is hoped to serve as a sufficient deterrent to repeat crimes, but if nothing else, the data from the GPS will provide evidence of where the parolee was during any crime he or she is suspected of.

GPS technology has provided law enforcement unparalleled accuracy in gathering evidence to convict criminals. It has stirred up quite a bit of controversy in cases of tracking suspected criminals, where questions come up regarding privacy rights. In the cases of convicted criminals under surveillance, however, there is less controversy, as the public seems to agree that the citizen forfeited some of his or her rights when committing the crime.

The GPS tracking devices are just one aspect of a large plan to combat violent crime. New South Wales has made great progress so far in tackling domestic violence, but as long as there are instances of domestic violence, Kristina Keneally is determined to keep fighting.

During a press conference at a community centre for women and children in the suburbs of Sydney, Keneally explains, “It still remains a challenge for us and there is still more we can do.” The announcement coincided with International Women’s Day. She adds, “Victims will be given the right to present their evidence via CCTV or be protected by screens in court, as well as the right not to be cross examined by the defendant in person.”

Article Written by Marisa O’Connor

Bill Requires Maryland Sex Offenders To Wear GPS Tracking Devices

February 27th, 2011

The Maryland State House is considering a bill that would require all tier III sex offenders to wear a GPS tracking device when they are released from prison or as a condition of probation. The bill is scheduled for a hearing March 1, 2011. While the sex offenders reside in Maryland, the bill would allow global positioning satellite technology to monitor their movements throughout the state.

The bill would only apply to tier III sex offenders. These convictions include a variety of sex crimes including incest, first-degree rape, attempted second-degree sex offense, third-degree sex offense, sexual abuse of a minor and sale of a minor, among others. The cost of the GPS tracking devices would be paid out of the offender’s pocket, a sum of about $10-$27 per day. The bill is quite controversial and one of the first proposals of its kind.

Supporters of the bill argue that it is a matter of public safety. Sex offenders are notorious repeat offenders, which is why some people would feel safer if they were monitored. This is the reasoning behind the current laws that require sex offenders to register where they live and work. Delegate Mike McDermott, R-38B-Worcester, the man responsible for introducing the bill had this to say, “One of the things we can’t do in Maryland, and other states have trouble with, is that we don’t know where bad sex offenders are. We know where they tell us they live and tell us they work, but only know exactly where they are when they come in to register.”

Others, specifically the Maryland American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), oppose the bill. They agree that it might make citizens feel safer, but they argue that it will only appear to protect them and not actually deter any crimes. They feel that law enforcement resources should be reserved for programs that actually prevent crimes. Maryland ACLU released this statement, “While the ex-offender’s location will be tracked, notice of the commission of the crime will not be received by law enforcement until after the crime has been committed. Because it doesn’t actually prevent crimes, this type of legislation as the effect of making people feel secure while not actually achieving greater safety.”

Article Written by Marisa O’Connor