Electronic Monitoring Essay Research Paper Electronic MonitoringLast

Electronic Monitoring Essay, Research Paper

Electronic Monitoring

Last twelvemonth, province prison systems were runing between 14 % and 25 % over their reported capacity ; the federal system 26 % over the reported capacity. On norm, the incarcerated population has grown 7.9 % yearly since 1985. The inquiry is: what do we make with the addition flood and what do we make with those expecting test when the gaols are filled with a batch of non-violent condemnable wrongdoers? Tracking devices such as ankle watchbands and implants could allow low hazard wrongdoers be put safely on the streets alternatively of in prisons or gaols.

Types of Electronic Monitoring

Electronic monitoring equipment is normally classified in footings of its signaling features. One type is a receiving system which requires the wrongdoer to react on cue when directed. This type of monitoring is referred to as a & # 8220 ; inactive & # 8221 ; system. If the wrongdoer is have oning a wrist band, he/she must reply the phone and so skid a part of the wristwatch-like device into a black box hooked to the telephone, that sends a signal to the computing machine corroborating the wrongdoers whereabouts and individuality. A 2nd type of monitoring is referred to as & # 8220 ; active. & # 8221 ; This is a uninterrupted signaling device which consists of three parts. The first is a little sender which is strapped to the wrongdoer around the carpus or mortise joint. The 2nd portion is a receiver/dialer which receives the signal from the watchband and dials to the chief computing machine, and the chief computing machine compares to the informations to the wrongdoer? s agenda and studies on their activities. Another type of monitoring is video cameras, which use picture screens connected with telephones. This allows the supervising forces to really see the wrongdoers in their ain abodes. This system is normally used for low hazard wrongdoers, and those who were granted work release. Ocular confirmation requires no sender to be attached to the wrongdoer. The individual cheques in with the supervisor with a more personal relationship because they are able to see each other. One more method of electronic monitoring is through breathalysers. This is used for those wrongdoers that are forbidden from imbibing intoxicant. The computing machine indiscriminately calls for the wrongdoer to give a breath sample, and the information is transmitted to the cardinal computing machine through the phone line. This method is normally used along with the ocular confirmation method so that the supervisory individual can see that the individual giving the sample is in fact the wrongdoer.

History

Interests in electronic monitoring of captives goes back to at least 1966, when Ralph K. Schwitzgebel described a system in the Harvard Law Review. In 1968, a machine was built utilizing multiple receiving systems to follow the wearer? s motions through a edifice. This method was excessively expensive, and was non followed up on. In 1979, the thought of a wrist watchband was born when

Judge Jack Love of Albuquerque, New Mexico read a amusing strip of & # 8220 ; Spiderman & # 8221 ; in which the scoundrel attached a watchband to his carpus to track Spiderman? s whereabouts. In 1983, a selling representative named Michael Gross started a company based on this thought, and developed the electronic watchband. The first watchband was used in April of 1983, when Judge Love sentenced a 30 twelvemonth old probation lawbreaker to place parturiency, have oning a trailing device. At twelvemonth terminal, 1994, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that 17,548 grownups were under electronic probation monitoring, and 5681 were under electronic word monitoring. Since that clip, usage of monitoring has & # 8220 ; sky rocketed & # 8221 ; as a agency of salvaging valuable gaol infinite. Harmonizing to a February 1996 New Statesman and Society article, there are soon 67,000 units being used in the United States, and the figure is turning quickly.

Cost

The cost of imprisoning felons is steadily lifting. Harmonizing to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, maximal security captivity now requires an norm of $ 25,000 per twelvemonth for one inmate. The cost of local detainment and gaol units are besides lifting, and are now averaging over $ 18,000 per twelvemonth for one inmate. Since these costs are so high, this forces the system to shorten prison footings and release suspects without bond. The electronic monitoring system is one manner to let go of an wrongdoer without seting them straight out on the street. It has been found to salvage between $ 50 and $ 65 per twenty-four hours for each inmate.

Problems

Merely like anything else, electronic monitoring does hold failures and other drawbacks. Some people that oppose electronic monitoring say that one of the grounds for the device is so the wrongdoer can stay in the community, and it makes it a batch harder for the wrongdoer to acquire a occupation. This is because of the early curfews and the overall & # 8220 ; image & # 8221 ; that a individual have oning a carpus watchband has. Another statement against electronic monitoring is that because we know where the individual is, doesn? t mean we know what they are making. For illustration, a drug wrongdoer can still make or sell drugs when they are confined to their place. That is why we have to make things like random drug testing or look intoing up on them. Thingss like this besides cost money, so we are likely non salvaging every bit much money as we had thought.

Electronic minute

nitoring is chiefly being used with major traffic wrongdoers, drug wrongdoers, burglars, and some minor sex wrongdoers. Juvenile wrongdoers and rummy drivers have been targeted as being the most appropriate campaigners for electronic monitoring. Although critics of the plan believe that these wrongdoers are non suited because juveniles frequently have trouble abiding by the conditions of the curfew, and rummy drivers are more likely to be deterred by a short, compulsory prison sentence than by the “soft” option of place parturiency.

Future

As shown by the steady addition in the cost of captivity versus take downing costs of electronic monitoring, the hereafter looks assuring. New engineering is leting the units to be cheaper, smaller, more powerful, and multifunctional. This besides means that we wear? Ts have to engage as many people to maintain path of the wrongdoers either. The & # 8220 ; active & # 8221 ; and & # 8220 ; inactive & # 8221 ; units, which were described earlier, are considered to be & # 8220 ; first coevals & # 8221 ; units, and are fundamentally an mortise joint transporter, electronically linked to a telephone modem. Harmonizing to a July 1993 Futurist magazine article, engineering is now available to let a law-enforcement officer to merely drive by the wrongdoer? s house or workplace to do certain that they are at that place.

& # 8220 ; Second coevals & # 8221 ; units are soon being tested, and are expected to be in usage by the twelvemonth 2000. These systems would let trailing of an wrongdoer over a much wider scope. Computer controlled wireless receiving systems would immediately enter every topographic point the wrongdoer goes, non merely when he or she is out of scope of the unit. This would be the same type of unit that Ralph Schwitzgebel described, but with more engineering. Each unit would hold its ain alone frequence codification that would & # 8220 ; blip & # 8221 ; information every five to ten seconds, leting functionaries to find the wrongdoer? s approximative location on a regional metropolis grid map. Experiment is being done to accommodate the transporters to utilize cellular telephone senders to be even more

accurate. Finally, information could be entered into an wrongdoer? s computing machine file to put off an dismay if the wrongdoer approaches a certain location that is restricted or forbidden. The weak nexus in this state of affairs is the carpus or mortise joint watchband itself because they are non temper cogent evidence.

The & # 8220 ; 3rd coevals & # 8221 ; of electronic monitoring will probably be in topographic point sometime in the following century. It may be possible to engraft the proctor under the tegument, which would cut down the efforts to fiddle with them. Such systems could be used to command the wrongdoer? s behaviour if it was combined with a drug that could be implanted under the tegument. Now, there are systems like this that are soon in usage. For illustration, Norplant ( R ) preventives and some insulin release systems. When unsuitable behaviour is indicated, the microprocessor could trip the release of a mensural sum of the tranquillizer. Such microprocessors and implants may besides let the wrongdoer to be & # 8220 ; shut-down & # 8221 ; by slumber inducement chemicals. This could even let high hazard wrongdoers to be released and be safe in society. Technology would hold to be much more developed than it is now to do these methods work.

Decision

Right now, with the addition in population, offense, and cost of captivity, the condemnable justness system needs a cost effectual and proved manner to command wrongdoers and electronic monitoring seems to be an obvious reply. Progresss in engineering in recent old ages have allowed monitoring to go more effectual in both cost and operation. Federal, province, and local bureaus are all acquiring into electronic monitoring, and that is doing it a really competitory market. When given the statistics being generated by the monitoring systems, taxpayers are more likely to hold that the method is cost effectual. However, there is still some fright of citizens because people that do non do it or follow the footings of their probation are still a menace to the community to be a repetition wrongdoer.

Bibliography

Mentions

Winkler, Max, Walking Prisons: the developing engineering of Electronic Control, The Futurist, Vol. 24, No. 4, Pg 34, July 1993

Chicago Tribune, Audit of captive monitoring sought, September 28, 1990 Issue

Electronic Monitoring of Prisoners, The Futurist, Vol. 24, No. 5, Pg 55, Sept 90

Raider, Melvin C & # 8220 ; Residential Treatment for Children and Youth & # 8221 ;

Juvenile Electronic Monitoring: A Community Based Program to Augment Residential Treatment. Vol. 12 ( 2 ) 1994 PG. 37-49

Brown, Micheal P. & # 8220 ; Crime and Delinquency & # 8221 ;

Electronic House Arrest: An Examination of Citizen Attitudes Vol. 41 No. 3

July 1995 PG. 332-346

Ball, R.A. & # 8220 ; Community Corrections & # 8221 ;

The Development of Home Confinement and Electronic Monitoring in the US 1990 PG 73-92

Sage, A & # 8220 ; House Arrest and Juvenile Justice & # 8221 ; House Arrest and Correctional Police: Doing Time at Home 1988 PG. 44-50

Bennett, Lawrence A & # 8220 ; Corrections Today & # 8221 ; The Public Wants Accountability. Selling it to the Public September Issue

Schwitzgebel, Ralph K & # 8220 ; American Psychologist & # 8221 ; Electronic Innovation in Behavioral Sciences Vol. 22:364-70