GPS tracking for sex offenders okayed in FL.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

If you get the same sentance for taking dodgy photos as for full on assault then why not just move straight on to the more serious offences? What have you got to lose.

Am I hearing you imply that you think we want life-time jail for taking a photo of a kid?

 

You're way off.

 

And, unless you are going to run your MASSIVE no-release prisons like something out of a sci-fi novel then you need to have the prospect of release and rewards for good behaviour to allow you to control the prisoners. Otherwise they might as well kill each other, guards, try and escape etc... all the time... after all, what do they have to loose.

Privilegues inside the jail, as you said.

I've been locked up myself, although not in a jail (it was a high-security psychiatric hospital unit), and trust me, there are other things than being released to look forward to and be good for. Getting to go outside is one...

 

As far as i'm concerned "taking them out of circulation" is the ONLY advantage of jail.

Nope. There's education (which is given in jails), security (food, water, shelter, and protection), rehabilitation, work offers (yes, many jailed people have jobs inside the jail), and many other things.

[SkinWalker]

As usual, people comment on the topic without actually making note of the information at the link. Let me quote from the source:

 

It establishes a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life behind bars for people convicted of certain sex crimes against children 11 and younger, with lifetime tracking by global positioning satellite technology after they are freed.

 

Until the new law goes into effect Sept. 1, molesting a child under 12 is punishable in most cases by up to 30 years in prison.

 

It seems that there is an assumption by some in this thread that every person convicted of a sex crime with a minor is going to automatically be given the sentence that includes a monitoring device.

 

The article didn't go into details about which "certain sex crimes" would receive the 25 to life + GPS. But I would have to assume that someone that fondles a niece and is convicted on circumstantial evidence would be given different consideration than someone who penetrated an eight year old and was convicted based on DNA left behind.

 

Moreover, I would want to know where this latter individual was in my neighborhood. Not to drive he/she out, but so that I might be familiar with the person enough to keep my daughter from his/her house, etc.

 

In Texas, you can look up convicted child molestors on the internet based on their mandatory-reported addresses and see where they live. My wife and I found one in our community and the community by-laws prohibit sex-offenders and felons from living here. He was residing with his mother. "Was" is the operative word, since someone ratted on him. That someone was me. If I didn't have a 3-year old daughter, I probably wouldn't have, but being a dad changes your perspective on things like this.

 

Having GPS tracking device for the most serious child-molesters makes sense. It gives the probation department the ability to verify residence without sending out an officer to see the individual. It allows the P.O. to know in advance where he can find the individual to do spot checks -saving on man-hours billed to the taxpayer. It allows patterns and habits to be established with the offender. And it provides a ready alibi to an offender should a child be molested (or the offender be accused) in his neighborhood.

 

If I were a truly reformed child molester, I think I'd want one of these... just to give myself an alibi for everyone that wanted to pin something on me later.

[kipperthefrog]

I have to agree with Skinwalker now. Before, I beleived "Those people are't animals!" but come to think of it, they're close enough.

 

I remember once my cousin said a guy stopped by his 6 year old little sister and kept asking her name. Then he exposed himself to her, to put it as delicately as I can.

 

Why wold you WANT to shag a kid? I admit they do have pretty mixed up ideas, I'll give you that. It kind of makes you wonder how they (molesters) see the world.

 

Edit: Lets put one on Micheal Jackson too:D

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Edit: Let's put one on Micheal Jackson too

That is the most brilliant idea you've ever had, frog:D .

[ShadowTemplar]

Originally posted by InsaneSith This is taking a small measure in ensuring safety. We're allowing them free, but with one small compromise.

(My emphasis.)[/b]

 

That is a sentiment that I consider extremely dangerous. In my opinion, GPS tracking should be used only as a substitute for prison. The notion that it is a minor punishment could lead to acceptance of its use in many other situations. What about people who drink and drive? Should they not be GPS tracked? Surely, making sure that they did not move faster than 20 km/h after they visit a pub is a relatively minor penalty and would produce huge effects in the form of increased safety on our roads? Oh, and why not extend it to people who have been convicted of thievery or tax swindling? Or everyone? Surely total surveylance would reduce crime considerably.

 

:trooper::trooper:

 

"He who is willing to sacrifice his freedom for security is deserving of neither."

 

- Franklin

 

EDIT: Putting these things on prisoners, on the other hand... And making them out of reinforced steel so they can't be broken open... Now that would put a sharp stop to escape attempts...

 

And one might also consider using them instead of imprisonment of people waiting to stand trial when the risk of their tampering with evidence is minimal but the risk of escape is substantial.

[kipperthefrog]

My Dad just told me it is a violation of civil rights. I agree with shadow templar that when people get used to this, we will exept more types of people to be GPS tracked. eventually everyone could be GPS tracked.

 

this can't be good considering government wants more power. don't expect government to do anything good with more power. that is why our founding fathers originally gave the power to the people.

 

simular to the Bible prophecy "mark of the beast", the government puts a chip in your hand and keeps a record of everything you do for more control, tax you ETC... and if you don't have one you can't buy sell or trade. (if you beleive in that sort of stuff or not, it is simular to the concept of "mark of the beast".

[jon_hill987]

Originally posted by ShadowTemplar

Putting these things on prisoners, on the other hand... And making them out of reinforced steel so they can't be broken open... Now that would put a sharp stop to escape attempts.

 

They could have explosives in them and be programed to take your leg off if you try to leave the prison.

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by kipperthefrog

My Dad just told me it is a violation of civil rights.

So are the crimes these people commited. Can't accept the punishment, don't do the crime. They know the consequences.

 

And I think considering they know the consequences, that's a fair warning. Therefore they're taking away their own rights by doing such things. I could claim the banning of marijuana is violating my civil rights because it's criminalizing my ability to the pursuit of happiness, but I know it's illegal and accept punishment should I be caught doing it.

Originally posted by kipperthefrog

I agree with shadow templar that when people get used to this, we will exept more types of people to be GPS tracked. eventually everyone could be GPS tracked.

Except not.

 

 

We've had these trackings for years, so far it hasn't been put on innocent civilians. Looks to me like it's being limited to, proven, dangerous people.

[ET Warrior]

Originally posted by ShadowTemplar

The notion that it is a minor punishment could lead to acceptance of its use in many other situations.

 

Slippery slope argument eh? Well if we look at the fact that alot of people under house arrest have, in the past had to wear anklet devices that monitor their locations, I don't see why we can say that this use of them will lead to use for everyday civilians, just to ensure that they aren't doing things they shouldn't be doing. These people are sex offenders, and like Sith said I belive they forfeited alot of their civil rights when they chose to flagrantly ignore a law that isn't even culturally relative. They have broken a law that humans as a whole do not tolerate.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

This can't be good considering government wants more power. don't expect government to do anything good with more power. that is why our founding fathers originally gave the power to the people.

I'd say you should spend more energy on wiping out the "Patriot" Act and less energy on protecting criminals from surveillance.

 

(...) the government puts a chip in your hand (...)

I've nothing against an implant if it only shows 100% vital things like name, blood type, etc. that could aid rescue workers if they find me unconscious.

 

Other things, no. An implant that tracks my position? Definite no.

[toms]

I usually don't buy the slippery slope argument. But there has been a definate trend in the past few years of people being willing to give up more and more "minor" rights in return for percieved security. Sure there is a balance to be struck, but we are already in a state that would have been thought of as unthinkable a decade ago... and it shouws no sign of slowing down.

 

Its unlikely the government would cone stright out and chip everyone. But they are definately moving in that direction with biometric RFID passports, a recent school that RFID tagged it's pupils (til the parents complained, but the company is still working on it), GPS in phones etc..

However i suspect it will be the commercial sector and people's desire for an easy, convienient life that eventually leads to everyone voluntarilly getting tracked. Phones will offer you far more services if they know your location... etc..

Remember the adverts in minority report that talked to you?

Remember how there were concerns about privacy and gmail (or even just cookies)? But when it came down to it it was a choice between a possible, hard to pin down privacy worry and a tangible cool gadget/service.. and people opted for the later.

 

The issue with GPS, biometrics, etc... isn't really the ability to track you. Its what they do with the data. People already track lots of stuff you do, and if we could trust them to use the data in a responsible way then it really wouldn't be an issue.

 

The problem is, when all this tempting data is sitting in a database somewhere it is very hard for corporations or government depts to resist peaking, and then rules get changed so a few people can use the data, then a few more, then a feww more.

 

ANd soon the data that was collected to monitor your road usage to ensure a fair road tax starts getting accessed by police, fbi, ins, republican party central etc...

 

Its both humerous and scary to think that the US used to point at communist countries and decry the lack of freedom and privacy that the citizens had, and now the us and uk and others are fast overtaking them.

[ShadowTemplar]

Originally posted by jon_hill987

They could have explosives in them and be programed to take your leg off if you try to leave the prison.

 

I call that barbaric overkill. And quite apart from that, you assume that such devices would be ifallible. That no odd currents or freak EMP could trigger the alarm. No, charming(?) as the idea might seem at first glance, it simply isn't a viable option.

 

So are the crimes these people commited. Can't accept the punishment, don't do the crime. They know the consequences.

 

And I think considering they know the consequences, that's a fair warning. Therefore they're taking away their own rights by doing such things.

 

IIRC, the opening line of the human rights charter says something along the lines of:

 

"These inalienable rights are..."

 

The keyword here being: Inalienable. That means that you can't give them up, sell them or loose them. I happen to agree with that phrase.

 

I could claim the banning of marijuana is violating my civil rights because it's criminalizing my ability to the pursuit of happiness, but I know it's illegal and accept punishment should I be caught doing it.

 

But what we discuss here is not whether or not these things should be illegal. They should be. I'm not even arguing against the notion that motion-trackers could be used to track the type of offenders in question. What I rail against is the notion that it is a light punishment. It is not.

 

We've had these trackings for years, so far it hasn't been put on innocent civilians. Looks to me like it's being limited to, proven, dangerous people.

 

People who drink and drive are dangerous as well. As are people who abuse psychoactive drugs. Should they be tracked as well? Of course not. What I'm arguing is not that it should not be used in this particular case, but rather that we should make a decision about what kind of crimes we should punish by surveylance.

 

Well if we look at the fact that alot of people under house arrest have, in the past had to wear anklet devices that monitor their locations, I don't see why we can say that this use of them will lead to use for everyday civilians, just to ensure that they aren't doing things they shouldn't be doing.

 

That is in and of itself correct. But again, my point is not adressed: As a substitue for prison and/or manual surveylance, it is fine. But it is imperative that these measures are used only as a substitute for imprisonment, manual surveylance and house arrest. Basically, whenever you lock a tracking unit around someone's ancle, you place a virtual police officer two steps behind him. Every minute of every day of every year. That's imprisonment.

 

If we can agree on that, then we can start debating whether or not imprisonment (or its equivalent) is appropriate punishment for these kinds of crimes. For the record, I believe that it is.

 

These people are sex offenders, and like Sith said I belive they forfeited alot of their civil rights when they chose to flagrantly ignore a law that isn't even culturally relative. They have broken a law that humans as a whole do not tolerate.

 

And yet it is the most sacred foundation of Democracy to protect the rights of everyone. Even the most heinious criminal.

 

I'd say you should spend more energy on wiping out the "Patriot" Act and less energy on protecting criminals from surveillance.

 

Zero-sum logic. The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

Its both humerous and scary to think that the US used to point at communist countries and decry the lack of freedom and privacy that the citizens had, and now the us and uk and others are fast overtaking them.

 

Now, that's an overstatement. But you made your point.

 

And on the issue of biometric passports: That's just stupid in so many new and innovative ways. Passport security has always failed mainly because control routines were sloppy. It's virtually impossible to believably forge passports as it is - if, that is, the guy who checks it is remotely competent and bothers to run it through the mandatory control routines.

 

And at the other end of the line, the issuing authorities are, on many occasions downright lazy when it comes to identity verification. So what's the point of forging a passport, when the local police station can make you a perfectly genuine, false passport?

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Basically, whenever you lock a tracking unit around someone's ancle, you place a virtual police officer two steps behind him. Every minute of every day of every year. That's imprisonment.

No. Imprisonment is being confined in a prison, not being allowed to walk around where-ever you want to "with a police officer two steps behind you".

 

Zero-sum logic. [Ankle-bands and the Patriot Act] are not mutually exclusive.

No, but the "Patriot Act" is far more dangerous and thus deserves your attention much more than this does.

[Lady Jedi]

Just because it's okayed for crazies/previous crazies doesn't mean that everyone is gonna have to be tracked. Personally I'm not in favor of a all time tracking thing for everyone. I happen to like a feeling of anonymity.

 

I don't think that tracking everyone is right. It's rather invasive, ane I don't think that that it's going to happen. It seems really far fetched to even think that it would go that far. And if it does indeed go to that extreme, then it'll just further prove to me that the government is screwed.

[ET Warrior]

Originally posted by ShadowTemplar

If we can agree on that, then we can start debating whether or not imprisonment (or its equivalent) is appropriate punishment for these kinds of crimes.

 

I agree with that, it is a form of imprisonment. My contention is that these people deserve imprisonment, but if reformed deserve imprisonment to a lesser degree, IE GPS tracking.

[Lady Jedi]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

I agree with that, it is a form of imprisonment. My contention is that these people deserve imprisonment, but if reformed deserve imprisonment to a lesser degree, IE GPS tracking.

 

I aggree. Say someone does something absolutely horrible and totally violating to another person, serve their time, and turn from their ways. Good for them, but turning away from their wicked past doesn't change the fact that it happened. So I say keep track of them; don't ever let them regress, or think that maybe they could do it just once more.

 

I think that it's far more cruel to the rest of (or a good number of) humanity, to let these previous criminals go without some way of keeping track of them, and keeping them from doing something awful. What's even worse is when a sexual crime/s has been commited and reported, yet it goes ignored. That is despicable.