IL: Why doesn’t Illinois copy Missouri’s Strict GPS “Sex Offender” Law?

Source: 5/5/23

Will there be a time when Illinois passes the same strict law that Missouri has when it comes to Sex Offenders? People are questioning why doesn’t Illinois have the same law. What is this law exactly? Here are the details…

North Carolina has just joined Missouri, Wisconsin, and other states as states that can legally GPS Strack Registered Sex Offenders for the rest of their lives. When I saw that headline, as a resident of Illinois, I thought to myself, why don’t more states have that law? As far as I can tell, now that North Carolina has passed the law, there are now 7 states that say you can legally GPS track certain sex offenders for the rest of their lives.

Most states allow you to use GPS tracking for probational periods and for a designated amount of time after they are released from prison, but only Wisconsin, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ohio, Colorado, Florida, and now North Carolina allow for lifetime monitoring. 

Read the full article


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If I remember the text of Jessica’s Law correctly, California still has such a law on the books for at least some sex offenses but it is not enforced except when these sex offenders are paroled. The 2000 ft. exclusion zone around schools and parks where sex offenders may not live was tossed in 2015 by the state supreme court but I believe the rest of the law still stands. I do not believe that sex offenders who are on probation are usually being tracked with ankle monitors, at least the sex offenders I’ve met who are on probation. I can understand why California does not enforce that law on members of our peculiar fraternity who are no longer under any form of supervision: it’s simply a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Parolees have few Fourth Amendment rights. Once that obligation is discharged, the full set of rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizures comes into force and NO ONE loses that right.

I tried to leave a comment. But you have to have Facebook. I don’t have that. If anyone wants to leave an anonymous message, leave this for me.

You want my point of view. I’m in Wisconsin, a PFR convicted of possession. On lifetime GPS, but the latest lawsuit has brought down most of the lifetime requirements. So I will soon loose the GPS. In the almost 5 years wearing one. I have had 19 different units on my leg. At over $1k each, tax payers have spilled $20k on units. And monitoring cost over $500 a month to monitor me. So what…$30k to monitor me. So in 5 years tax payers have spent $50k to monitor me! Sweet deal. All for police feeding me illegal pictures!!!  

Two things;
1) If a person is so dangerous, that they need to be monitored for life, then they shouldn’t be out of prison. The amount of time they should be monitored, is decided by judges when they hand down the sentences for prison.
2) These types of laws are based on the erroneous myth that all sex offenders have a compulsion that they can’t control and therefore they need to be monitored for life. There is absolutely no evidence for this whatsoever. These people need to stop watching crime shows on TV. Anyone who does have a compulsion should get treatment not prison. However, the fact is most sex offenses are crimes of opportunity, and the correct answer is prison. But there should be an opportunity to re-join life once you’ve paid your debt. It is an absolute myth that “once an offender, always an offender”.

Last edited 2 months ago by Jimwymr

This guy is a complete ding dong. You can tell he did zero research and is completely uneducated on any of the laws or issues. This is just a cracker jack article with him trying to play some sort of deep thinking journalist on an emotionally triggering topic. Shame on him, he should do some homework to understand what he’s talking about – lazy arse!

And I agree – “what do you think”, but no where to tell him. Typical.

Translation: Why doesn’t Illinois become more dependent upon the purveyors of the DDI?

Mark Hespen

You can take your thoughts about GPS monitoring of registrants and stick it up your behind. I don’t care about the feelings of some guy working at a radio station. I do know that you are probably a coward which is why people can’t give you their opinion.

Mark, you’re a piece of sh*t. You’re surprised that “sex offenders” aren’t wearing ankle bracelets for life?. For one, there’s constitutional issues against privacy. And people on the registry have a low recidivism rate regardless if they’re strapped with a bracelet. You’re also a liar, Mark. Most people on ankle bracelets for life committed non-violent offenses, not violent as you erroneously report. In those states you praise, many are on ankle bracelet for looking at dirty photos online. That’s not violent. And your comparison of a multiple count DUI offender losing their drivers license with a person who has to wear a ank!e bracelet for life? That comparison is totally stupid. Mark, you are a moron.

Last edited 2 months ago by Doc Martin