Global Positionaing Systerm (GPS)

Law enforcement authorities are giving an expanded role for electronic surveillance technology in crime fighting. After its initial use to track sex offenders, electronic monitoring systems are now monitoring criminals released on probation, perpetrators of violence against women, and other high-risk individuals. Its supporters say the technology can save lives. Its detractors warn that the sense of protection is illusory but the assault on civil liberties is very real.

GPS

The center of this surveillance system is a familiar technology: the global positioning system.

GPS monitoring is a cheaper alternative to incarceration. The cost of GPS is about $3,400 annually, but the cost of incarceration can run to $30,000 or $40,000 yearly.

At the same time, it gives offenders the chance to continue working and remain at home. The technology allows law enforcement authorities to establish “electronic fences” around areas designated as “exclusion zones,” and once the offender breaks through that fence, the GPS system automatically alerts police.

In 2006, Massachusetts became one of the first states to utilize the technology. The enabling law allows judges to order electronic surveillance as one requirement in implementing a restraining order. In April, the Oklahoma Senate voted unanimously to deploy GPS technology to give better protection for domestic violence victims. The Illinois House of Representatives also approved surveillance legislation in a unanimous vote last month.

For years, technological advances have been used to benefit the criminal justice system and law enforcement efforts. Fingerprint technology, crash data recorders, and DNA analysis have become important tools helping police in solving crimes.

Detractors say these technologies threaten the right to privacy.

In North Carolina, it is the police and not the courts that determine who should be subject to GPS surveillance. This is a nuance that alarms civil liberties groups. The American Civil Liberties Union believes this determination should be assigned to independent judicial officials, not the police whose job is to investigate crimes and not to dispense justice.

Officials of the Massachusetts Probation Service also say that although GPS surveillance is intended to protect the public, it cannot guarantee anyone’s safety.

Since it monitors movements in real time, if offenders enter an exclusion zone there may not be enough time to stop them before they start getting violent.

The device really serves more as a deterrent since the tracking data can be correlated with local crime reports. The GPS surveillance system removes the anonymity of crime.

Safety Tip:

* Stay alert. Though an offender may be under GPS surveillance, there is still the chance to perform a violent act before police arrive on the scene. You could still be at risk.