What are your thoughts on house arrest and electronic monitoring?

Hi swtrose, I agree with you about criminals being given a slap on the wrist. If someone takes someones life..THEY SHOULD BE IN PRISON SERVING THERE LIFE SENTENCE! Thats why there are so many rapes, molestings and murders going on in this day & age because there is no real punishment for these criminals actions. They get no punishment so there out the next day doing the same dam thing..why? because they havent learned there lesson...THE SYSTEM HAS FAILED US! House arrest for KILLING an innocent person.are you kidding me? giving the murderer house arrest it shows that the innocent life taken had no value at all!! The way to change all this is to MAKE THE PUNISHMENTS FIT THE CRIME. You take a life and your sentence is LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE! You molest a child and your sentence should be LIFE IN PRISON! You rape someone and your sentence should be LIFE IN PRISON! (if they are convicted of all these crimes) Theres so much more I wanna say but I get so angry that I have to stop LOL

It sounds like the courts are very forgiving to criminals. It does not make sense if these are the kind of punishments handed out to criminals. This will not stop them from committing crimes, since it will be easier for them to escape and enjoy their life at home. One of the main reasons for having prisons, is to isolate the people and make them realize the magnitude of their crime when they are alone.

I have to agree with you here. For me, house arrest would not be a big deal because I rarely go anywhere anyway. Besides all my favorite stuff is here. I can watch movies, read, take a bath, relax, etc. That hardly seems like punishment. I am sure house arrest is a bit inconvenient, but for certain crimes like the ones you were describing, they need a stiffer punishment.

I agree, housearrest wouldbe ok for certain crimes - but if u have commited a crime that has killed someone you belong in jail. U say that the sentencing system is bad in US and Canada - well u should come to sweden =) Lifetime here is 12 years and itis not likely that u will even serve that. People here get between 4-8 years for shooting and killing someone. U would almost have a serialkiller to be able to sentence him to lifetime.

It's an odd and screwed up thing, our justice system here in the U.S. If a person steals from the Federal Government, they most likely will serve life in prison. (Look at Al Capone. Not convicted for the dastardly criminal he was as a gangster boss, but for income tax evasion!!!) Yet, if they take a life or ruin a life by raping someone, they most likely will be walking the streets too soon. Our justice system protects the rights of the criminals more than it does those of the victim. House arrest reminds me of giving a child a "timeout". Obviously, it doesn't work quite as well as the timeouts do with children. Martha Stewart received a bracelet and house arrest to finish up her sentence. They spent more time watching her than the violent criminals!! PEACE

for the crimes that you are mentioning i definitly think that there should be a tougher sentence i mean come on if you are pulled over and have drank pretty much just one drink you are over the legal limit to drive and can serve instantly 60 days in jail, and that is only if it is the first time. But you go and shoot a guy or rape a woman and you get a pretty little accesory and have to stay in your home. And you are right there are definitly cobwebs in the systems because there are some that never go off and then there seems to be some that go off without needing too. I know of a juvinile that had one he had a small offence theft or something like that and everytime he would go from his living room to the bathroom it would go off. then you got the ones that like you mentiones who can go out of their boundry and have them never go off. I think that the cold hard criminals need to put in jail or worse depending on what there crimes really are.

I think it can be good for those less serious crimes, and i guess it all depends on response times if the criminal is going to try to get away. You'd like to hope the authorities could get there in les than 10 mins to keep us all safe!

This is a touchy topic to say the least. One reason a lot of courts do the monitoring and/or house arrest is due to the finacial cost of housing criminals. Now days there is treatment available for most every thing done while done in a criminal act it seems. People who kill someone else be it murder, drunk driving, speeding, or even a passionate killing still killed. I say JAIL. Lots of jail time in my eyes. Don't leave them out to committ another crime please. HAPPY POSTINGS FROM GRANDPA BOB !!~

In California where I live we have more prisons than any other state in the nation. Obviously, house arrest does not work in California as not many people are given that sentence. We have the 3 strikes and your out policy and they do go to prison.

I agree with you on this one totally. They have to get alot tougher with criminals in both Canada and the US. I find they go to easy on the young offenders as well. Not giving a tough enough punishment for crimes committed is one of the major causes of reoffended i think. They believe oh well i only got this little bit for doing all of that so lets go out and do it again if was worth it. But that is just me and as well they do not offer enough on the inside to help reabilatate either they should not have it so easy. If someone has no money and no home they reoffend just to have a roof over there head and food tv and a bed and stuff that is not a punishment to me.

I have always thought that there could be good uses for the electronic monitoring devices....the examples that you have given do somewhat change my opinion..... Misdemeanor crimes might be able to utilize these devices but I see no reason to allow use of electronic monitoring devices with felony charges....I can not even imagine a judge allowing such.... I also do not think that a person who has had the advantage of these devices should be able to use them more than one time either...because if they need them again....then they did not learn anything...

I think it stinks, whats the point? I like being at my house, and they probably do too, so why are we rewarding them? I imagine it's to save the money having to support them in the system but still it seems like a luxury to go home. And like you said, soemtimes they dont even work, thus rendering them useless. Makes you wonder if it's like a placebo pill, maybe they never work, they just assume no one will try to go out with them on.

I've only known a few people to be placed on house arest and the crimes were not very serious in nautre. One went joy riding in a car, the other got busted drinking underage, and the last one stole a dirt bike and went on a joy ride. To me those aren't very serious crimes, and to sentence them to 60 days house arest was a good punishment. None of them were over 19 so to make them stay home for 60 days with their parents I think was punshiment enough. I don't know if its different in Canada then here in the states but I know that alot of first time non-violent crimes tend to get house arest type things.

I'm not aware that house arrest and electronic monitoring devices are as common here in the US as in Canada or for the same types of crimes. In both states I've resided they prefer incarceration and long-term when it involves the loss of life. I'm aware of some cases of it for non-violent crimes only, those without loss of life, rape, pedophelia, etc. I think there was a celebrity recently that had that but the offense was not against any life, it involved insider information if my memory is accurate. Canada is starting to get tougher than they have been in past years. I don't mean to come across as blind or know it all of your judicial system. I am a Canadian descendant and still have most of my extended family in your country. Comparing our judicial systems has always been a discussion during family visits. They used to say if someone takes another life in Canada they only serve 7 years in prison and then they're done. I remember reading about that couple in Toronto that killed several people (including her sister) after raping/sexually molesting them and didn't she just get out in 2006 but he's still incarcerated? And I believe their killing spree was more than 7 years ago, wasn't it?

I would rather see the person serving jail time than doing house arrest. People seem to find a way to break the bracelet or other device that they are required to wear and then are able to be free to commit more crimes. They should be locked up in jail or a mental institution instead. Putting people on house arrest does not prevent people from committing more crimes. Our justice system does not do enough to protect the innocent people.

Here in Philippines some famous political personality including our former resident Joseph Estrada is brought into house arrest after the alleged corruption in the government. I think it is only ok if the president or any political criminals have failing health. Besides they should still be given due respect until the result of crimes would be given due course already.

House arrest and electronic monitoring may be appropriate for some criminals, such as those who vandalize property or steal property, this type of monitoring will ensure that they stay in their own homes away from other people's property. However, the prison system in the U.S. is so over crowded that community corrections is playing an even bigger part in sanctions against criminals. If overcrowding continues, there may be even more criminals on "house arrest," community service or a multitude of other community "punishments." And no, a six month house arrest and 10 year driving ban is not justice for taking an innocent life.