Follow this link to see this comment in the original context.

Through my research on the topic of GPS trackers in enforcing restraining orders, I have found the opinion of journalist Misha Valencia very compelling. Valencia discusses the personal aspects of a restraining order and focuses on stark individual cases. Valencia talks about the rising rates of intimate partner homicide in the United States and the solution that GPS tracking would provide. 

However, I believe that there is a gap that is being overlooked in the current GPS tracking solution. The current solution for GPS tracking applies to repeat offenders of violent or sexual offenses against a certain person. This GPS is an anklet that sets borders, then when tripped, set an alarm. I believe, that to further the potential of this technology in the current day, We must increase the surveillance of offenders gradually. To enforce a first-time restraining order, I believe that both the victim and the offender should have an application on their phones that checks the proximity between each other, and the aforementioned zones, and when dangerous, alerts the police station. If the offender is unaffected by this enforcement, I believe the anklet monitor should be implemented next, along with the victim using her phone to track her location. This solution offers minimal invasion of both parties at the beginning, and when dire, allows the victim to be comfortable with the safety they are provided. 

Below is the source I quoted, both the annotated version and the original.


Youth Voices is an open publishing platform for youth. The site is organized by teachers with support from the National Writing Project. Opinions expressed by writers are their own.All work on Youth Voices is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License


We welcome new members. You can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Help on Youth Voices

Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?


Create Account