" This bill is a true game changer on how we monitor the worst of the worst."
In response to the statement above currently 90% of registered offenders in Maryland, are grouped into the tier III status, currently there are over 4,000 in that group. Not any one case is the same, not every person who is tier III is the worst of the worst. In fact many of these individuals are working very hard to reclaim their lives, and be productive members of society. This is why this bill will not work:
RE: HB 594/ SB 208
To provide a brief background on why I feel so passionately about this, my husband is a three time combat veteran, a Maryland, citizen, and a registered offender. He is grouped as a tier three offender, however he is not what Delegate Mcdermott is illustrating in the proposition of this HB 594.
I understand that HB 594 was created to aide law enforcement in ensuring the safety of children. We have a three year old son ourselves, and want the utmost safety for him as well. However there are many issues with HB 594; which outnumber the benefit of this bill for the community.
First, Article 16 of the Maryland constitution states,” No law to inflict cruel and unusual pains and penalties ought to be made in any case or anytime hereafter.” The GPS ankle bracelet inflicts pain, and I could not imagine the horrendous suffering it would cause as a lifetime requirement. I witnessed my husband have difficulties walking, sleeping, and bathing on a daily basis. He also sustained scars from multiple skin abrasions to the same area, from wearing the GPS ankle bracelet. This bill would make daily life and maintaining gainful employment impossible for the registrant.
This also raises the issue of how to successfully manage homeless registrants. There is a large population of homeless individuals currently on the registry. The GPS unit would require the homeless wearer to have ready access, at least every twenty four hours, to an electrical outlet. There would be simply to many issues to introduce this requirement to homeless registrants. However it would be unethical to subject certain tier III offenders to the requirement, and not others, solely based on their housing status. In fact the idea of lifetime monitoring may make the idea of homelessness an attractive alternative, and we could end up with more registrants who are difficult to track.
In fact GPS monitoring would provide no real deterrent for crime. Where the GPS system can inform law enforcement about the whereabouts of the registrant, the GPS can not track the actual activities the registrant is doing. The GPS has no possibility of predicting a new crime before it is committed, or of telling while it is happening.
The GPS technology is also not infallible. The GPS technology relies on cell phone towers, and would be subject to many dead zones, which would render a false alarm signal. Just like any computerized hardware it would also require constant updates, and maintenance The cost of manpower to maintain and repair such equipment would be astronomical.
The requirements of this bill would end up costing our tax payers billions, it is not possible to assume the offender will be able to pay for it. If they are not able to function, they will not be able to work. Is this worth paying billions for when we know it will not deter crime?
I believe our tax dollars are better spent on something that would. I strongly recommend that more emphasis be placed on the funding of mental health treatment programs, prison outreach, community reintegration, for registered offenders. With such programs actively in place, our crime rates would significantly lesson, and we would all benefit.
7 comments:
The writer has made some good points.
We all know Delegate McDermott's bill is a reaction on the Sarah Foxwell murder and an attempt to try and prevent such a horrendous crime from being committed again.
However I am a firm believer in fixing what we have in place before adding new laws to the books. Lets face it the MD Sexual Offenders Registry isn't worth the paper it's written on.
I have always been bothered by the fact that murder defendant Thomas Leggs was picked up in Ocean City in September 2009 with his pants down around his ankles-LITERALLY. Now mind you he was already listed on the MD Sex Offenders list. If this wasn't a clue to whomever that his abnormal sexual hangups were rearing their ugly head than I don't know what would be.
Why in the world was he allowed out on bail ($10,000.00)? 3 months later he went on to murder Sarah Foxwell. Who dropped the ball in Worcester county?
I would really like to know WHY Leggs was let out on bail when it was totally obviously he had rape on his mind in the OC incident and was ALREADY a convicted sexual offender.
I say no more bail for sexual offenders caught breaking into someone's home.
The writer is the wife of an offender and want's to protect her husband. I get that. What if she was the mother of a victim? And stating that this bill would cost the taxpayers "billions" is absurd.
If she was the mother of a victim I believe she would sing a different tune. This law would, in my opinion, curtail the actions of a sexual predator and/or give law enforcement the tools to place a offender at the location of the crime.
I, for one, have no problem with putting an electronic leash on a sexual deviate and could care less about his/her privacy or "rights"! There's a special place in Hell for these scum and they'll get no pity or sympathy from me.
Craig Theobald
Ironshire
I disagree with Craigs comment. Research shows the writters stats are correct and thats a crap load of people on gps. This bill will be very costly and useless in detering and detecting crime! Yet another false sense of votes opps I mean security! Gps will not tell police what the convicts are doing when they are doing it, if you think it does Craig then you are as stupid as the rest. In researching her comments I also read that last year the system failed in 49 states for 12 hours. Every state was running around trying to snatch up the convicts on gps lol, imagine the amount of money police spent on that shit! Everyone is so worried about sex that these new laws have given shelter to the actual predators, overloading the system with consensual sex and young adults. It needs to stop so that we can protect our children NOT elected officials VOTES
What's to stop the offender from just cutting off the gps tracking bracelet? The way I see it those most dangerous of sexual offenders are not going to be deterred by something that can be snipped off. The sickness these preditors exhibit is alot stronger than the bracelet.
And like the poster who wrote this comment said, the gps tracking can not tell what someone is doing only where they are located. It also relies on cell phone towers. In this area alone there are alot of dead areas. Then what happens? If the offender goes into a dead area what's the plan then? Does LE try and find them?
ok how about this question.
This is not to be argumentative just food for thought.
Where do MOST child sexual assaults happen?
Answer; In the childs home normally with someone that lives there.
If that's the case how effective will the bracelet be anyway?
PPE, I too was wondering what the statistics show concerning what you said. I've heard an overwhelming number of child sexual assaults and murders occur by a relative, step parent or by someone who was invited into the home.
I voted for Del McDermott and I know his intentions are sincere, but I think more study needs to be done on this issue.
My name is Kristin , and I was the author of the original post. I am not making an attempt to defend my husband, he owns up to his offense, and he has given his life to Christ. I care equally about the safety of our children, because I have one myself. I am writing because I have first hand experience with the GPS system. I am writing again, today, because I vehemently oppose house bill 594, and senate bill 208, more than ever, and I feel that all Maryland citizens should as well. The house bill 594, went for its first reading on March 1, 2011. There were many groups who were in strong opposition to this bill including the ACLU of Maryland. This bill was so opposed because it will not protect our communities, yet we the tax payers will be forced to pay for it. What Maryland citizens are being told about this bill is that it aims to use GPS monitoring to track a large percentage of all tier III registered sex offenders, in our state. However, Maryland citizens need to know why this bill will not benefit us.
If enacted into law what would prevail is a false sense of public security, that law enforcement,would be able use this to prevent crime. When in fact the GPS technology can only tell the location of the offender, not the activities they engage in. It can not be used to prevent new crimes from being committed. It has been statistically proven that most offenses of a sexual nature are first time crimes. In this case, we would have no way of knowing before a new crime is committed, by using this tool. Also, statistically, studies have proven that the rate of re-offense is lower with registered sex offenders, than with any other criminal offense category. The representatives in favor of this bill would have us believe it is the other way around, however when testifying on March 1, 2011, they brought with them no scientific studies or documentation to support their claims. This is because there is no study which currently supports what they allege, and in fact many which support the contrary.
This bill aims to keep our children safe, however we are more likely to have our children be injured by a drunk driver, or be offered drugs by a drug dealer; yet, lawmakers are not subjecting these offenders to this requirement.
The technology is also not fail proof. The GPS would render countless false alarms, have technical issues, and require millions of dollars worth of man power to manage. In an economic state where police departments are being downsized, where government programs are being cut in half, how do they suppose we will afford this? Can we afford something that will not keep us safe? It has already been shown that it is nearly impossible for many registered offenders to find gainful employment. We as tax payers would end up with paying an estimated 19.6 million, for this.
If these registered offenders pose such a risk to our community then why are we letting many of them out of jail without permanent residences?
As it stands now, Maryland has very little in the way of reentry programs for the formerly incarcerated, and no state managed halfway houses. If we want to constantly know where these offenders are then why are we sending them out into society with no stable residences? So many of the registered offenders included in these bills are homeless. Our representatives are not commenting on how they would track homeless offenders, and this is because they could not use current GPS technology to track homeless offenders at all.
This bill would be in violation to article 16 of the Maryland constitution, and would be highly punitive to registrants who have already served there time, and are obeying current laws.
We need to tell our lawmakers we oppose HB 594, and SB 208.
Post a Comment