GPStraq

GPS trackers have long been a staple for modern law enforcement. Few devices have so extended the reach and investigative capacity of police and parole officers than the GPS-enabled ankle bracelet. Yet as states and communities eye the aggregated cost of employing these devices on thousands of cases, some have decided to question the reliability of GPS tracking systems, while others still sing their praises.

Some have questioned GPS trackers most recently in regards to the passage of Chelsea’s Law, a measure soon to be implemented in California. The law imposes stricter tracking requirements on a greater number of sex offenders in the state, as well as better defined monitoring regulations for parole officers. Yet police unions and other organizations have criticized the measures, saying that such requirements would chain parole officers to their desks, staring at data from GPS trackers and not staying in the field.

Media reports to the contrary, these criticisms aren’t primarily directed at GPS trackers, but rather the implementation of the technology to track a large number of offenders. California currently tracks over 7,000 registered sex offenders, and keeping tabs on their movements is certainly a huge burden. Part of the reason for Chelsea’s Law was to tighten up the laxity in monitoring which resulted from parole officers having far too many parolees to track.

Perhaps what California’s GPS tracking system needs is a dedicated monitoring center like those set up in other states, one which coordinates with parole officers to determine tracking requirements and notifies authorities quickly when offenders wander outside of their approved areas. Specialization and the division of labor is often a better solution than discarding valuable technology entirely.

For those investigators and prosecutors who have successfully used GPS trackers to prevent crime and violence, the technology is more than worth the initial investment. Recently in Modesto, a convicted sex offender equipped with a GPS tracker ankle bracelet was put back into jail as a result of evidence gathered from the device’s tracking data. The data proved that he was close to a particular stalking victim’s house and school, and prosecutors corroborated this information with witnesses’ testimony to keep him from striking again.

As new as GPS tracking technology is to the field, its benefits are clear. GPS trackers have made their impact on law enforcement doctrine and they’re here to stay. What remains for police officers, prosecutors, and law makers to determine is how best to implement this technology to keep our neighborhoods and communities safe.