The Lighter Side of Electronic Monitoring
History shows the benefits of positive reinforcement for Ankleted-Americans.
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Blogger
StumbleUpon
Digg
Delicious
Reddit
Google(Page 3 of 3)
As fast as the correction system’s version of electronic monitoring has grown over the last two decades, Facebook, Twitter, and other less overt forms of electronic monitoring have grown even faster—and they’ve done it in part by avidly incorporating mechanisms for positive reinforcement into to their systems. That the corrections industry has largely ignored this approach may not rise to the level of a crime, but it sure seems like a missed opportunity.
Contributing Editor Greg Beato writes from San Francisco.
Editor's Note: This article originally stated that BI, Inc. was first known as Boulder Industries. The company has always been called BI, Inc.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
-
I know a few probation officers, both for adult and juvenile offenders. They generally seem to like their home monitoring systems, but I can't imagine what they would think of Gables' ideas of positive reinforcement. That's vastly different from the current concept of just corralling menaces outside of prison and charging them for it.
-
"A person may conform to rules to avoid punishment, but once the threat of punishment is removed, the original behavior is likely to reoccur."
Conversely, if the person is conforming to rules to obtain a reward, once the rewards are removed, is the original behavior likely to reoccur? If that's the case, which I think seems likely for the same reasons that the opposite is true, then the positive reinforcement method wouldn't be any more likely to be successful once the monitoring and reward system is removed. So unless you're talking about equipping people with this positive feedback system indefinitely, which is a chilling thought right out of dystopian fiction, how would this be any better or even any different than the monitoring system as it exists today?
-
Usually you are such a dumbass. Congratulations, PM.
You can even take your criticism a step farther. People in the "delinquent" program will want to be in the program, for the perks, and so will people who are otherwise law abiding. This sets up a bad incentive. I've never been taken to work in a limo.
However, the plain fact is that government only punishes, it rewards almost nothing except martial bravery in its defense, and even those medals aren't worth much on the open market. I'm not saying pride in great service is unwarranted, just that government's reward is simple recognition.
But I don't see how it is dystopian to say that people without felony convictions get more Social Security than others, and people without felony convictions get "full" Medicare/Medicaid, while others don't get the $100,000 life-saving operation, just their $20 pills. And, in the most anti-libertarian notion of all, people who join their local community center and participate in politics and do all the other things that we want people to do, aren't rewarded with small payments.
I'm not advocating for that, but if someone tried it, I'd pay attention. Heck, I might even move there.
-
The trouble with this is that I can't think of any kind of favorable behavior that I would want rewarded by law. I'm thinking about victimful criminals, and what sorts of affirmative acts I'd want to reward them for. For instance, what would you reward a thief for -- an act of charity?! Or movement away from an establishment they'd robbed?
-
The device had a range of http://www.vendreshox.com/nike-shox-oz-c-6.html approximately 150 feet. When a person wearing the anklet strayed further than that from the phone jack, the radio signal could no longer reach the receiver and the system would
-
Spam
-
Their system positioned electronic monitoring as a tool in the process of positive reinforcement rather than a means of deterrence, a way for individuals to document instances of good behavior. http://www.petwinkel.com/pet-gucci-c-35.html (The Gables’ original surname was Schwitzgebel. They legally changed it in 1982.)
-
Spam
-
The revenue-raiser argument is really creepy. It's one thing to free governments of the budgetary burden of punishing people. It's another thing to give them a financial incentive to strip people of their liberty.
Government already has a strong incentive to flex muscles and punish people; turning the budgetary drag into a revenue raiser is not going to discipline the state's misbehavior in this area.
-
strips and envisioned a more benevolent application of the Kingpin’s technology. In Love’s estimation, electronic monitoring could help alleviate overcrowded jails while simultaneously allowing individuals convicted of minor offenses http://www.riemeninnl.com/riem-hermes-c-18.html a chance to serve their sentences in a manner that was “less degrading than being confined in prison.
-
For a health care or clinical qualified, you know the benefits towards your vocation and life style with regard to your Nike Free 7.0 footwear http://www.freerunningnike.org.....-c-10.html . Your footwear you end up picking should really be the choice for you. One individual pair of sneakers is not going to suit everyone.
-
Thanks
