Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Woooomp! (Original Post) madamesilverspurs May 31 OP
Is that a size 34? lame54 May 31 #1
This is what I actually want to see on him, BlueKota May 31 #2
Bwhaha+1 Emile May 31 #3
Excellent fashion accessory 😆 sheshe2 May 31 #4
gilded and guilty consider_this May 31 #5
? we can do it May 31 #6
Clever. Each pair should come with one of those. littlemissmartypants May 31 #7
Neat. Tracking of the wolves. SWBTATTReg May 31 #8
👍🤣fuckin' ace! bringthePaine May 31 #9
well, if the shoe fits ... DoBW May 31 #10


(2,452 posts)
2. This is what I actually want to see on him,
Fri May 31, 2024, 01:49 PM
May 31

as it is unlikely we will seem him behind bars where he really belongs.


(23,467 posts)
7. Clever. Each pair should come with one of those.
Fri May 31, 2024, 03:19 PM
May 31

If only they could be sufficiently monitored in real time. Plus the ACLU has concerns about their uses.

It could be said that wolves in the wild are monitored better.

This image of GPS tracking of multiple wolves in six different packs around Voyageurs National Park was created in the framework of the Voyageurs Wolf Project.

The authors of the ACLU’s new report interviewed three different people about their experiences on ankle monitors.

September 29, 2022
In 2020, as the world grappled with the emergence of COVID-19, prisons and jails became hotspots for outbreaks. Looking to slow the spread of the disease, and under the threat of litigation, some jurisdictions began to look for alternatives to incarceration, turning to electronic monitoring as the answer.

Electronic monitoring typically uses GPS tracking systems in devices referred to as ankle bracelets, ankle shackles, or tethers to record the location of their wearers. This includes people awaiting trial, serving probation and parole, and facing immigration proceedings. Jurisdictions use this tracking technology to limit how long a person can stay outside and where they can go. Although COVID-19 created an even larger market for electronic surveillance, the government’s use of electronic monitoring was already on the rise. From 2005 to 2015, the number of active electronic monitors in use rose by 140 percent.
Jurisdictions’ decisions to normalize this technology is troubling for several reasons. Studies show that monitors fail to demonstrably meet their stated goals of ensuring court appearance, protecting public safety, and advancing rehabilitation. Instead, electronic monitoring expands mass incarceration, operating as a form of digital incarceration known as e-carceration, and leading people to physical jails and prisons for minor technical violations, charging malfunctions, and false alarms.

Electronic monitoring also exacerbates systemic inequities along lines of race, class, and disability. For example, in Detroit, Black people are two times more likely than white people to be electronically monitored. Depending on the jurisdiction, fees to wear these monitors range from $3-$35 a day, often in addition to initial setup charges, which can range from $100 to $200. The expensive fees compound and can amount to hundreds of dollars per month, overburdening households already dealing with the return of loved ones from incarceration. Furthermore, research shows that the stigma, social isolation, and stress that results from being monitored exacerbates depression and anxiety for wearers.

In 2013, it was reported that many electronic monitoring programs throughout the US were not staffed appropriately.[27] George Drake, a consultant who worked on improving the systems said "Many times when an agency is budgeted for electronic-monitoring equipment, it is only budgeted for the devices themselves". He added that the situation was 'like buying a hammer and expecting a house to be built. It's simply a tool, and it requires a professional to use that tool and run the program.' Drake warned that programs can get out of control if officials do not develop stringent protocols for how to respond to alerts and do not manage how alerts are generated: "I see agencies with so many alerts that they can't deal with them," Drake said. "They end up just throwing their hands up and saying they can't keep up with them." In Colorado, a review of alert and event data, obtained from the Colorado Department of Corrections under an open-records request, was conducted by matching the names of parolees who appeared in that data with those who appeared in jail arrest records. The data revealed that 212 parole officers were saddled with the duty of responding to nearly 90,000 alerts and notification generated by electronic monitoring devices in the six months reviewed.[27]

One more move toward making us a surveillance society. No, thank you.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Woooomp!