Ineffectiveness of GPS Monitoring System for Sex Offenders - Research Paper Example

Ineffectiveness of GPS Monitoring System for Sex Offenders Ineffectiveness of GPS Monitoring System for Sex Offenders Cruelty and severe punishment to sex offenders has become a controversial issue in the society. Sex offenders tend to subject torture and rape to young children. Sex offenders to young children portray the inhumanity of people in the modern society. It becomes a pity to hear of a twelve-year-old child’s abduction or rape. The reason as to why these people perform such animal behaviors remains a question at hand. Technological change has induced measures on how to monitor and take actions upon sex offenders in the society. Although technology has improvised these devices, the major problem remains their effectiveness in the society. Most of these devices despite their use lack efficient supervision and therefore remain inconvenient in their work. The GPS is a device improvised to track and monitor sex offenders and ensure that they do not commit any other associated crime. However, this device has significantly portrayed its ineptitude in monitoring the sex offenders (Agan, 2011). This paper discusses in depth the ineffectiveness of using the GPS in monitoring sex offenders. Despite the optimistic effects of technology in the society by improvising the GPS devices, understanding the restrictions of this technology remains essential in maintaining the safety of the society. A case is depicted of a sex offender who cut off his GPS monitoring device and eluded authorities. Although the device still warned the police to keep an eye on the sex offender, the device remained incompetent since the sex offender was able to roam around and carry out his inhuman acts again (Gordon, 2010). Using a GPS requires free flow of information to those responsible to make sure that the task is accurately carried out. Therefore, using the GPS to monitor or track a sex offender does not entirely depend on the technology but responsibility of those using the device in order to ensure its effectiveness. GPS monitoring device only acts as a part of the solution to sex offenders. They only track where the individual goes, but in essence do not deprive him the ability to find their next target. John Albert Gardener depicts a sex offender who had a GPS device to monitor his tracks and make sure that he never went near any young woman. However, still having the device, Gardener was able to rape and murder two helpless teenagers back in 2009. How did this happen, if the GPS was effective enough to monitor all what the Gardener deed? It is evident that the paroled felon was not at any chance under careful supervision as officials thought (Payne & DeMichele, 2011). It can be depicted that these two victims could be alive if only the devices were effectively used. As a dangerous sex offender, John Albert Gardener still roams in the streets without anyone knowing his whereabouts or his actions. Any sex offender who wears this tracking system should not have an opportunity to escape or repeat his transgression but this always happens often. Failure to value the tracking system and follow the necessary monitoring skill gives felons an opportunity to go undetected. Scholarly research depicts that some people view the GPS device insufficient to administer justice to the sex offenders. They ought to be thrown in jail and hauled out in a casket (Gaylene & Freeman, 2011). They completely lack a second opportunity in the streets or in the rehabilitation centre. Research depicts that even with the GPS device, these sex offenders always think about their next victim. Therefore, strict measure should be taken on the sex offenders to make them realize the extent of their actions and never think of repeating the actions. It becomes ineffective to use the GPS on sex offenders since they never get to pay for their actions. How can someone guilty of molesting a child, rape, or even murder and be instituted a device to monitor his or her way? Is this the best way to administer justice? Sex offenders are people who commit serious offences and must pay for their lustful desires. Cases are denoted where a sex offender commits an offence, he/she is jailed for a while then released with a GPS (Garber, 2012). After another offence, he/she goes through the same procedure then goes free. An example is Sanford a sex offender who was released three times before ultimately being detained for committing murder. All the three times he had a GPS, which did not quite help in solving, the problem associated with sex offenders. Consequently, sex offenders have the highest rate of recidivism among all offenders. Therefore, they ought to end up in jail for good or put out to the pastures. The cost depicted by the GPS devices make them ineffective in their use. For instance, it tends to cost quite a lot of money to purchase a GPS for all sex offenders in the society. Moreover, the maintenance of the GPS is very expensive thus making them an unreliable measure to deal with sex offenders. Since each sex offender is assigned to one GPS, it is therefore hard to share and this results to purchasing of a GPS at any single occurrence of a sex offender. Repairing which also involves purchasing parts of a spoilt GPS requires a professional hence becoming very expensive (McLaughlin & Oppmann, 2002). In order to maintain a lifelong monitoring with the GPS and enhance its efficiency, therefore, there has to be considerations on the workload require in maintaining and implementing the system. Moreover, scholarly research depicts that the effects of using a GPS are currently underdeveloped to recommend swift enactment of legislation mandating utilization and implementation of the GPS in cost-effective manner. As a change in technology, the use of a GPS requires someone competent and well learned in its advancements. Lack of technological knowhow hinders an individual from using the device. In most case, very few people are able to use the device effectively. Therefore, if individuals do not understand how to use the device, then it becomes hard using the device to monitor sex offenders (Gordon, 2010). People ought to learn how to use the GPS especially the police in order to enhance its effectiveness. This makes them able to track the sex offenders wherever they go and whatever they do. The use of GPS is limited making it ineffective. As evidenced in San Diego County, only those with a handful of high-risk probationers and in parole have GPS devices. This means that the rest associated with sex offences are let free in a society with no action taken upon them. Only a third of those registered sex offenders wear a GPS (Agan, 2011). Parole and probation officials denote that although the GPS is a useful tool, it is not a guarantee for sex offenders since it can tell where an individual is but cannot tell what he/she is doing. This therefore makes the device ineffective in use. In conclusion, GPS devices pose inefficiency in monitoring sex offenders. They only give a false sense of security to people. Researchers argue that the GPS is a under researched device for giving criminal justice and solving sex related crimes but a tool to enhance community supervision. To enhance a safe world stay and help curb sex offence and violence to both men and women, it requires the commitment of each individual in the society. Scholarly research depicts that evident in Washington D.C, cases of sex offenders re-offending is high to those subjected to the GPS compared to those without the GPS. This is because those with the GPS feel isolated and publicized. They re-offend due to psychological, social, and financial torture therefore view a crime-free life less desirable (Payne & DeMichele, 2011). This makes the GPS not effective in monitoring the sex offenders hence severe measures should be taken on them. Reference Agan, Y. A. (2011). "Sex Offender Registries: Fear without Function?" Journal of Law and Economics 54:1. Garber, P. 2012. GPS tracking used for sex offenders hampered by technology, resources. WINSTON-SALEM JOURNAL. Retrieved from http://www2.journalnow.com/news/2010/nov/21/limited-system-ar-555861/ Gaylene, S. A. & Freeman, B. C. (2011). Examining GPS monitoring alerts triggered by sex offenders: The divergence of legislative goals and practical application in community corrections. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39 (2): 175-182. Gordon, S. (2010). REGION: GPS monitoring of sex offenders is useful, but limited, experts say. NORTH COUNTY TIMES. Retrieved from http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/article_f5a1ebb3-ed8e-5f48-8aac-888778e2fa9b.html McLaughlin, C.E. & Oppmann, P. (2002). Sex offender kills teen while under GPS monitoring, police say. International CNN.com/crime. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/12/sex.offender.gps/index.html Payne, K. B. & DeMichele M. (2011). Sex offender policies: Considering unanticipated consequences of GPS sex offender monitoring. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16 (3): 177-187. Read More