I've never been in jail. Seems to me that if given my choice, I'd prefer a monitoring bracelet over jail any day. If Lonni Ashlock and Ronald Buhler were out on the town going to movies and restaurants, as was stated in the paper, then they certainly did not abide by the rules as I understand them.
The article mentioned that they would probably receive four months off their sentence for good behavior. How can this be? I have no objection to nonviolent prisoners being out with bracelets, as this should be cheaper than keeping them in a cell, but let's use GPS to monitor them. Also, as they can sleep in their own beds, eat whatever they want when they want, watch TV, shower in privacy, keep their jobs and do whatever else they can do that a person in jail can't, there should be no reduction in the sentence for any reason. In fact, the sentence should be longer to make up for the fact they have so much more freedom.