The issue here is technological. If the ankle bracelets work and are cost effective they are a good idea. Anyone in the courts knows breaches of release conditions are very common and the police cannot be everywhere checking up on releasees.
That said, the bracelets may not be the way to go if they are too costly or don't really work. Sometimes technology will give a false sense of security.
But the response is to see if they work -- just making fun of the idea isn't productive.
Ottawa's ankle bracelet initiative called 'correctional quackery'
The Globe and Mail
Tue 12 Aug 2008
Page: A4
Section: National News
Byline: Josh Wingrove
It was good enough for Lindsay Lohan, but a Canadian trial program that will fit 30 federal parolees with ankle bracelet tracking devices is just "correctional quackery," one critic says.
The comments were made after Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day announced yesterday the trial "electronic monitoring" program. Beginning next month, 30 federal prisoners in Ontario will be "strongly encouraged" when paroled to participate in the ankle bracelet trial period. If they do not agree, the parole board could view it as a sign of the prisoner being unco-operative, Mr. Day added.
But the irremovable gizmos aren't proven; their signals fade, and their Global Positioning Satellite tracking isn't always real-time, said Craig Jones, executive director of the John Howard Society, a prisoners' advocacy group. He cited a 2007 study that called the ankle bracelets "correctional quackery."
"There's a tendency to go for the technological fix, the technological fetishism. But the technology is really untested, untried," said Mr. Jones, an advocate of "evidence-backed" parole programs such as counselling and training. "There isn't a kind of quick fix available here."
The trial program will run for one year at a cost of $600,000, and is based on a similar model in Nova Scotia. Police are alerted when an offender breaks curfew or location restrictions, such as visiting a children's playground when prohibited from doing so. The cost includes staffing and the one-year rental of the 30 devices from the Nova Scotia government.
2 comments:
haven't monitoring devices been used in the US and elsewhere for quite a while? Of course a prisoner advocacy group is going to be opposed to them and try to discredit the technology. However, a parolee who is adhering to the conditions of their parole should have nothing to fear from the device. It should provide further confirmation that the "evidence-based parole programs such as counselling and training" are working.
It seems to me a better use of resources to have technology monitoring parolees and leave police to doing other things, rather than trying to track down parolees who are MIA.
What company are they doing the pilot program with?
Post a Comment