12-13-2007 Ohio
There are few crimes as serious as sexual offenses, especially against children. It is understandable society has a desire to be protected from these perpetrators.
Recently, a state lawmaker invited a company to demonstrate its "personal threat detection system" to legislators. The fob-like device would alert the holder when a paroled sexual offender wearing a court-ordered ankle bracelet monitoring device is near. It also would warn the bracelet-wearer that a device-holder is near.
The device would alert someone without singling out the nearby offender, supporters say. The hope is to offer a balance between protecting privacy and safety.
The idea comes amid talks of requiring bright green license plates for some sexual offenders.
But one senator wondered whether the alert would go off repeatedly in high-traffic areas, negating any protective value.
A representative of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center reportedly called the idea "utterly ridiculous and absurd."
The Cleveland Rape Crisis Center's Lindsay Fello-Sharpe said nine in 10 sex crime victims are assaulted by a person they know or trust.
"This just plays on the great myths out there, such as the stranger danger myth that's not true," she said. "It's sending the wrong message and setting people up with a false sense of security."
Just as people have asked about the green license plates (would a child have a false sense of security if a car does not have green plates?), will a child or parent feel safe just because no signal is sounded? There are sexual offenders who have not been convicted or those who have but do not obey the requirements imposed upon them. What if the technology, as all does from time to time, fails?
Besides, even with a warning, without identification of the potential perpetrator it seems such a device will simply result in people scurrying away in worry.
Tough penalties for sexual offenders, especially the cruelest of these, sexual predators, are right and proper. Restrictions on these offenders -- how close they can live near places such as schools, for example -- are worthwhile. Being able to find out where sexual offenders live, through sheriff's registries, allows concerned citizens to take appropriate precautions for themselves and their families.
But this latest suggestion does not appear reflective of a society that prides itself on its freedom. Relying on a device to alarm the wearer there might be some unidentified person "out there" who could be a danger seems more likely to create a sense of fear rather than a blanket of safety. ..more.. by The NewarkAdvocate
1 comment:
if people want to be stupid enough to purchase such a device, let them. it's their problem if they don't understand that it's not strangers on a sex offender registry they need to worry about offending against their children. i genuinely feel sorry for those that aren't smart enough to realize this based on the facts on recidivism and who is most likely to offend against a child. again, focusing on stranger danger is not a way to protect our children. it's just much easier to find a scapegoat and lay all the blame on them, lock them up or keep them under civil confinements, and then just FEEL that their kids are safe going to play outside or at friends' houses, at sports practice, etc. people are just ignorant of the facts and are just not willing to learn. that saddens me.
the only problem i have with this stupidity (the device) is the fact that some places may ban sex offenders that are not breaking rules by being where they are because of the business they may lose due to the device going off and driving people out of stores, malls, etc. that's the next logical step in this whole sex offender witch hunt agenda.
Post a Comment