MONITORING TRACKING SEX OFFENDERS

MONITORING TRACKING SEX OFFENDERS
Name:
Course:
Professor Name:
(July 15, 2012)
Monitoring Tracking Sex Offenders
Introduction
Sex offenders can be defined by their characteristics towards sexual behaviors. In the US, on average, 5% of convicted sex offenders will be rearrested for additional sex crimes within 3 years of being released from prison. When you consider the nature of these crimes and the fact that many may go unreported, the percentage may be much higher and the cost to victims staggering. These sex offenders are monitored using electronic tracking devices, which are used to enforce the conditions of release for a sex offender, which strengthens the ability of corrections by officials and law enforcement authorities to supervise offenders in the community by keeping them under closer surveillance than they otherwise could. Most of these devices use either radio frequency (FR) or GPS technology. RF transmits a signal from the bracelet worn by the offender, usually on the ankle, to a receiver connected to his home telephone line. This signal has very limited range, thus if the sex offender leaves home the signal is broken and the authorities are alerted immediately.
Main Body
In the US sexual offenders are monitored using tracking devices. Law enforcement agencies, with the encouragement and support of victim advocacy groups, have begun implementing structured electronic monitoring programs for effectively monitoring. While offender monitoring programs, in the form of GPS tethers and GPS ankle bracelets, have proven to be an invaluable asset in the success of sex offender monitoring, not all electronic monitoring solutions are the same. These ankle bracelets are a benefit because they give officers the ability to monitor an offender from the moment they leave jail, regardless if they are indoors or outdoors. Just to say it will keep sex offenders from potential victims. Another benefit is by tracking and recording offenders` movements, electronic monitoring can also make it very difficult to engage in criminal activity unnoticed, thus acting as a powerful restriction (CBS, 2009). Because it can help law enforcement agencies corroborate complaints and solve crimes by matching offenders` whereabouts to the locations of reported incidents and crime scenes, and then assist in apprehending offenders who recidivate or commit other violations, EM has the potential to make re-offending a very unattractive decision—much more so than it might otherwise be. By generating large amounts of analyzable data, EM further offers corrections officials the ability to know which locations offenders most often frequent, to learn more about their movements and activities generally, and to intervene accordingly if the need arises. However these trackers can be hacked into or tampered with by the sex offenders who are very psychotic in a very tricky way. Example, pedophiles sex offenders are usually very clever, hence weakness of EM. IACP (2008) shows us the costs of electronic monitoring are very high and some of them are paid by the offenders themselves, if they can come up with the money for it.
The question here is whether active or passive monitoring is the cheaper GPS alternative. In Florida, for example, a...