Why only child molestors? Why not robbers as well. This way we can know whenever they get close to a bank? Or we can track rapists and see when they get close to a bar holding ladies night. The problem is where do you draw the line. Isn't the justice system supposed to mean anything anymore. This tracking punishes former criminals for potential crimes or criminality. It is functioning on the idea that they have some form of incurable behavior which is disease like in its nature. Thus we wan't to hold them responsible for their actions so we can't consider it a form of mental illness, but we want to keep them under our watch indefinitely, something only permissible in the case of a mental illness and not a crime. So how can we maintain a civil society and prevent children from being molested. Perhaps actually looking at the nature of the majority of molestations and realizing it's a lot more complex than roving pedophiles hunting out victims. It so much easier for people, especiaally legislatores desperate to get votes for "protecting our children" to label anyone convicted of child molestation as evil and seek out a way to protect society from them. Actuall looking at the problem would require way to much thought and might loose the votes of those who hear the occasional horror story on the evening news.

Nobody likes kiddy fiddlers. The reason for this is political, it's an easy score plus one for the person implementing it because everyone hates kiddy fiddlers, the word pedophile causes people to lose all reason and vent their frustrations in a socially acceptable manner. What are you supposed to do with them though? They do post significant risks of re-offending. If theres DNA proof they fiddled the kiddy then they should either be exiled to an island with all the other perverts or given to the most sadistic group of faggots about to be turned out like a little sissy eye-for-an-eye style and then given counselling in a real touchy-feely sort of way to bring them around to seeing the error of their ways.

Don't think Geneva would go for it though.

The nation is moving in creepy ways away from the notion that State punishment serves any rehabilitative purpose. An aspect of this is increasingly invasive state involvment after jailtime. Not just invasive monitoring like this, but invasive drug testing, blow-to-drive devices for DUI convicts, web-based mapping services to illustrate where convicts of certain offenses live (leading to violence against them, and mistakes that cost innocent people seriously).

These are not the signs of a civilized society. If this is desirable, I'd rather harken back to a more honest time, and restore scarlet letters, or hand/facial branding. At least the cruelty is obvious.

Leave it to people here to rise up in defense of child molesters.

Since rehab pretty much doesn't work for those people, GPS would be nice if you're going to decide to let them out of prison to begin with.

You are brave and right. Parents want the molesters tracked because they are only interested in protecting their children. But what about the parent of a molester? or a responsible member of society who cares about all members?

Fast short answers are in vogue, as if one fix is all we can deliver. It is the very opponent of a complex society. We need to admit it is complex, it needs complex answers and certainly more than one.

You are right! Prioritze AND consider all steps needed to respect each citizen, young and old. Keep the school safe, treat the molester, break the chain of molestation.

Why draw the line at criminals? We could all have GPS chips to help resolve crime, find run aways etc...

research shows these types of offenders don't respond well to any type of treatment. they continue to abuse, and many many people are affected by this abuse. so why not track them? why not protect the children? you seem to be saying that this is a bad reason to track the movement of offenders. since treatment doesn't work, it seems that tracking offenders is appropriate and, hopefully society would also work on educating people to decrease abuse.

and being abused is not the same as being robbed and other types of crimes(it seems odd that one would have to point that out). the behaviors, motivations, and effects are different. therefore the responses would have to be different to be effective.

It seems creepy to me, too. I do understand that there's a high recidivism rate for sex offenders--but that might have something to do with the system not exactly rehabilitating them. And it's clear that they have a disorder.

I also know of a few cases where a guy was taking a drunken piss behind a lamp post and got pegged as a sex offender--exposing himself in public and all that. It seems like there are a lot of instances where this wouldn't be appropriate and could definitely be abused.

Tough subject, though.

If your interested in actually reading research into this issue I strongly recomend Amitai Etzioni's The Limits of Privacy. Chapter two discusses sex offenders and their right to privacy in light of megan's law. I know in forums like this people like to throw out claims about "these types" or "child molesters" or any number of way of homogenizing people based on a crime they commited. One of the problems with these legislative measures and the arguments people make in favor of them involve their vague definition of offenders and recidivism. That being said, many recent meta-analysis of recidivism rates have found the rates to be lower for those that undergo treatment. One found a rate of 25.8 for untreated pedophiles as compared to 14.4 for treated pedophiles. Why has WI not proposed treatment and instead a GPS system then? Also note that this means even in the untreated population you are punishing 75% of the offender who will not commit a future crime. Furthermore the recidvism rate for sex offenders has been found to be much LOWER the rate for violent offenders and in some studies robbers. That is people who commit other crimes are more likely to repeat them. Thus what drives our desire is not the untreatabiliy of the offense, because other offenses are more untreatable if you look at the actual numbers, but the nature of the offense. Thus tracking criminals for other crimes would make sense under the logica of unaavoidable recidivism. It is difficult to whether a assault is more repulsive to us than a a molestation, especially given the subjective nature of individual crimes. While it may seem odd to cadge to have to point out other crimes are fundamentally different it is not odd to me. I'm not sure how we can gauge trauma and it's effects based on a type of crime. Furthermore, many studies show that what shapes the psychological response of children molested at very young age (I'm talking infants) is more the response of society than the actual act. Also, be beaten by a robber is a very traumatic invasion of ones sense of security. It's just because this involves two things that scare us that we desire such a sharp punishment regardless of effectivness or deservedness...the safety of children and sex. If we stop putting things in black boxes and vaguelly discussing statistics about them maybe workable solutions will be found.

My father-in-law is a prisoner in a facility which primarily holds sex offenders (no, he isn't one). His last letter to me posited that the government uses prisoners to test the waters on civil rights violations. His theory runs like this: first it will be applied to domestic animals (on the basis of protecting one's property, such as id tags and chips), then prisoners (on the premise of protecting society), then children, then the whole population.

We've so demonized prisoners, and sex offenders in particular, that we feel free to do just about anything to them or have just about anything done to them, all the while ignoring the fact that once the door is open to do this to ANYONE, it can be used on everyone eventually.

While I intend to check out the book you recommended, Stu, I'd also like to check out the response to the book in academic journals. I have to wonder what statistics contradict Etzioni's research.

Maybe I'm a bad liberal, but I just don't give a crap about child molesters, their privacy, etc. Yes they served their time, but how many of them each year fail to register - as per their sentence - when they are released? As far as I'm concerned, these pieces of crap gave up their rights to control where they go when they took away a child's right to grow up safe and healthy.

I say this as both a victim of one of these monsters and a mother of two children who deserve better protection than my generation had.

Child Rapists and "Molesters" have a 90% recidivism rate; 70% officially, but 90% in estimate. There is little to no treatment and children are incredibly vulnerable to these predators. I know that the critique of the threate to civil liberties is valid, but in cases of sex offenders, the pathology involved questions our contemporary system of justice as "crime" and "punishment." Punishment says, there is a set amount of time equivalent to the act itself in retribution. This does nothing toward treatment and any treatment available are being cut by efforts to privitize our prison systems of efficiency. Predators such as these need to be monitored; rapist should be monitored because the nature of their crimes and the rate of recidivism is so high that our broken prison system just makes them more broken people. We do not prosecute, or treat, such criminals at the rate they should be because their primary victims are women and children and the primary offenders are grown men. This pattern, this permissiveness in the patriarchy, toward sexual violence needs to be addressed by feminist and civil libertarians. Despite the attention of the Kobe Bryant "trial" and the Duke case pending, little real attention is paid to sexual violence; there is the occasional Amber alert and tragic death of a child to a repeat offender, common on the cable news networks, but why sexual violence occurs, how to address the root causes and conduct real research into the treatment of such persons? Well, that's alot harder than a GPS device. For now, I'll take the device, but tomorrow, I'm working for justice.

Uh-uh, Heather, don't you dare blame this on any "permissiveness in the patriarchy."

Take this to any site that Feministing would accuse of being patriarchal oppressors or whatever, and I guarantee there won't be this outpouring of grief for sexual predators that we're witnessing here. "Teh injustice! They've already done their time!" This is all about people on the left coddling heinous criminals out of some perverted sense of justice -- well, justice unless you happen to be a past or future victim.

I have friends that have really been hurt by sexual predators, and so this is a pretty important issue for me. On the other hand, I'm a pretty hardcore civil libertarian, so I've been thinking about these sorts of creepy government issues as well.

I discussed some of the complications with sentencing sex offenders at my blog earlier today (it's surprisingly tricky, as things like this GPS issue suggest). The main goal is obvioulsy preventing sexual violence, but it's not always clear how to do that and sometimes there are other considerations as well. I'd be interested in hearing what you think, if you'd be willing to take the time to read it. There are a couple of anecdotes you might not have seen before and I discuss one issue (chemical castration) where I think the "orthodox" feminist viewpoint could potentially be harmful to women. Still, most of what I wrote is pretty tentative, since I don't think it's obvious what the best policy is. Sexual violence is a huge problem (or set of problems) and I think more dialogue about what to do about it could be really fruitful.

Here's where I add my two cents and probably offend many here (on both sides of the issue).

I think pedaphilia is as treatable as homosexuality, heterosexuality, beastiality, foot fetishes, or any other sexual preference. You can stop the behavior, but you can't stop the desire. If the 90% recidivism rate is correct, I'd guess that the 10% still have the impulses, but have learned how not to act on them.

Just as I don't think homosexuality (or heterosexuality) is a choice, I don't think pedaphilia is either (many were victims themselves when they were children).

So on the one hand, I have a certain sympathy for them.

But on the other hand, the only way to ensure against repeat offenders is to lock 'em up and throw away the key.

It's a very tricky issue, and I really don't know how to proceed.

In order to pass any judgement on whether GPS tracking devices are an appropriate "punishment" for sex offenders, we first need to decide what the purpose of State punishment is. For some segment of the population, it's glorified revenge of the "they did something wrong, they should suffer" sort, which victims and their families tend to point out doesn't actually fix the the fact that the crime happened or make anything better. Others tack on a clause about discouraging others from committing the same crime. I take the stance that the purpose of State corrections is to prevent, or at least reduce, further harm to society, as well as making any restitution possible. Any crime perpetrated by the State in order to reach this goal, such as tacit acceptance of prison rape, only takes us backwards.

When someone commits a violent crime I think we have two steps to take: bar their access to weapons with which to commit further violent crimes, and treat them. In the case of a sex offender, their primary weapons are their genitals, which also happens to be their primary motivation. If castrated, a sex offender not only loses their weapon and their primary avenue for gratification from the crime, but a complete castration removes the glands that produce their admittedly dysfunctional sexual desire and many of the hormones that lead to aggression. In places where castration is practiced for first offenses, the recidivism rate is extremely low. Among other benefits, castration for male or female offenders is far less expensive than incarceration and arguably more humane than exposure to prison conditions, including violent rape.

But I fear our legal system is in need of an overhaul anyway. Non-violent crimes probably shouldn't be punished with jail but with restitution and community service to make up for the damage they caused to society. We ought to repeal our myriad sex offense laws and reduce it to simple sexual assault, possibly with degrees such as we give murders. I cannot for the life of me justify a law that increases the penalties, or creates penalties for what would not ordinarily be a crime, based on age alone. Statutory rape is a crock that diminishes the crime of rape itself.

What I meant by "permissiveness in the patriarchy" was not a traditional liberal diatribe. I'm not trying to coddle. But partriarchial concerns privileges the power of the vicitimizer (traditionally adult men) over the victims (women and children) and it is in that permissive.
The second post after yours mentioned LGBT persons. Child molesters and child rapist tend to come from dysfunctional and abusive backgrounds. Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Transgendered persons come from all kinds of backgrounds, religions, regions, ethnic groups, and so. The argument that pedophiles are equivalent to the LGBT population is insulting. Pedophilia is criminal, though also pathological in nature. LGBT persons are expressing, living, and loving persons, hopefully in healthy and sane relationships (but of course, how many hetero couples are healthy and loving? Its a crap shot either way you play; hopefully you encounter someone of worth and wellness, but everyone's got some issues). Anyway, the point being: LGBT person should not be brought up in these discussions because it just plays into the right wing's hand...pedophilia is about power, re-enacting abuse, and violence.

I was sexually assaulted (raped) when I was 2 going on 3 years old. My growing up pains - have been watching pedophiles satisfy their sexual needs over and over again, and it seems to never end. Everytime I hear of another child assault, I feel the pain and confusion I did when I was assaulted.
I don't feel these monitoring devices will cure the problem because they can be cut off and the pedophile will assault again, or most will. It is a false sense of security (much like what President Bush and his Congressional bullies think they are fooling us with right now, porous borders, etc).
For a trial run period of say 10 years, I advocate surgical removal of the glands that produce the sex drive for a first time offender, followed with the monitoring device. Second offense deserve's permanent (no chance of parole) incarceration. Hopefully, after the first offense there will be no second offense. And the resulting actions to be taken for the first offense would deter the first offense.

I have tried desperately to have a healthy heterosexual relationship (several times) throughout my life and have failed miserably. I cannot get passed the lack of intimate trust required to have a healthy heterosexual relationship. I suppose that when it comes to the physical aspect of a relationship - my trust was destroyed. I am leary of casual relations as well, due to rape.

I have found peace with another woman. I truly believe that some homosexuals are born this way, but for me, it is about intimate trust. This barrage of insults hurled at the LGBT community by our President and controlling Congressman is insulate, at best.
To prey on a minority group in order to garner votes tells me they lack genuine substance needed to govern the worlds problems and lead the world into prosperity and humanity. People should think about - that while a team is playing defense, playing offense isn't an option and this barrage of insults puts me and others on the defense. Some LGBT people such as myself will never succomb to yet more forms of Rape, and that is exactly what our President and Congressman have been doing to the LGBT community, and women's civil rights. We are Consenting Adults, not Raping Pedophiles, nor do we promote Beastiality as some would like to project, that is nothing more than hateful misguided lies.

And for the bible believers that have used the bible to justify hatred toward the LGBT community, Let me give you some bible substance. Yes I have studied, and especially concerning this issue.
Traditional theologians and bible scholars accept that the sins of Sodom were homosexuality and rape. However debatable these are, these definately were not the only sins:
JUDE 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to FORNICATION, and going after strange flesh (beastiality), are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Biblical scholars debate the proper English interpretation of this passage. Most scholars feel that "strange flesh" is a reference to homosexuality, while some feel that the "strange flesh" involved refers to beastiality.
EZEKIEL 16:49-50: Now this was the sin of Sodom: She and her daughters were ARROGANT, OVERFED and UNCONCERNED; THEY DID NOT HELP THE POOR AND NEEDY. THEY WERE HAUGHTY AND DID DETESTABLE THINGS before me. (Sounds like our current President and controlling Congressional leadership! arrogant, overfed, unconcerned, haughty, detestable). Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
This idea is paralleled in the Gospels when Jesus compares an inhospitable reception to Sodom:
MATTHEW 10:14-15: If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, IT WILL BE MORE BEARABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRAH ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT THAN FOR THAT TOWN.
Given Mathew 10:14&15, lets just suppose, for the moment, that the gay haters are right and God destroyed Soddom and Gomorrah because of the homosexuality. These same haters allow rapists, murderers, thieves, fornicators, adulterers etc. to thrive and get married and they forgive them and encourage them to live their life with equal protection under the laws of the land but advocate to leave homosexuals vulnerable with no protections and no rights. I would like to know how they can biblically justify their preferences and bias's when the bible clearly shouts "there is no sin greater than another! Sin is sin!" JAMES 3:9 If you have respect to persons, you commit sin and are counted a sinner.

Next is a copy of a letter I wrote to an online Pastor - ministering hatred using the bible. I thought Jesus said "spread the good news"?!!

Dear Mr. Michael Heath,

On your website it say's "Homosexuality is a sin that arouses God’s anger in a special way."
http://www.cclmaine.org/Record/Stories/02%2003%2005.htm

I would point out to you sir, that while they were "eating, drinking and marrying (heterosexuals)
the floods came upon them" in Noahs day (Book of Genesis), God flooded and drowned the entire human race – except Noah and his - because of their abominations. I'd say heterosexuals arouse Gods anger in "special" ways, too. Your hatred toward a specific culture is not justification for discrimination, inciting hatred and not especially sanctioning such via Gods Word. Besides, Sodom and Gomorrah was about rape, depriving the needs of the less fortunate poor people among other factors and you should "take care of your OWN Salvation in fear and trembling", book of Mathew. Do not judge or you'll be judged (in like measure)as harshly.

I knew I'd be misunderstood. I don't claim that homosexuals are equivalent to pedaphiles or beastiality. The point I was trying to make was that pedaphiles have no more control over their sexual desires than do heterosexuals, homosexuals, or foot fetishists. They don't choose to be that way, they just are.

"I have found peace with another woman. I truly believe that some homosexuals are born this way, but for me, it is about intimate trust."

I've never heard this from a non gay-basher. Are there any other members of the LGBT community who agree that homosexuality can be caused, and is not just how you were born? And if it can be caused, doesn't that mean it can be "cured"?

For the record, I don't think they can (or should be) "cured".

I note that the discussions above regarding surgical and chemical castration all assume that the convicted person is actually the person who committed the crime. However, juries make mistakes often enough to keep organizations that work to overturn wrongful convictions rather busy.

So, what about the wrongly convicted? What margin of error is acceptable when using castration as punishment? Is it ok to castrate 1,000 people who were wrongly convicted? 100? 10? 1?

I do not mean to reduce, in any way, the disastrous effects that these crimes have on the victims' lives. And I am not standing up for people who commit such crimes, either. I am, however, concerned about state-sponsored mutilation given my own doubts regarding the accuracy of our criminal justice system.

so...for the people who believe child predators can be successfully treated: does this apply to offenders who don't "grow their own victims". by this i mean pimps, traffickers, johns, pornagraphers, etc. of children. do they also suffer from a disease that can be treated? i'm really interested in a response, not just trying to be controversial.

gotta agree with some others here. pedophilia is not treatable and what can we do to try to protect children from sexual predators??? there's no easy answer. we're working with an imperfect system...but we've got to start somewhere.

"The nation is moving in creepy ways away from the notion that State punishment serves any rehabilitative purpose. An aspect of this is increasingly invasive state involvment after jailtime. Not just invasive monitoring like this, but invasive drug testing, blow-to-drive devices for DUI convicts"

are you kidding me? ignition interlock devices are "invasive" and meant to "punish"

how invasive is it to require a (usually multiple offender) dui convict to exhale into a tube? how is that INVASIVE? they don't stick a tube into the convict? is there some kind of sacrosanct right to privacy as to the breath alcohol content?

this is a NONinvasive, simple, and effective technique and it is ONLY used on convicts, as opposed to say - seatbelts - which are also noninvasive prosafety devices, that we all have to use

I don't believe child molesters can be treated. I think they are sick individuals who should be put to death. I hear many people standing up for the child molesters. Lets remember that these people had a choice and they chose to prey on an innocent victim. Who is standing up for the little ones without a voice? The ones that didn't have a choice in the matter. These people should never leave prison but if they do, let's track them and do whatever means are necessary to protect our children.

I know this was a post a while ago but to keep anyone reading this updated, they now want to do a similar thing on immigrants!

Check out the link and enjoy the pleasurable slide down the slippery slope.

http://www.hispanicprwire.com/news.php?l=in&id=6406&cha=10

Stu - Just to clarify, Applied Digital is touting it as a possible application for their technology. I would be suprised if any govenrment official would have the nerve to even mention this, much less support it.

Of course, I have been wrong before...