A Stitch in Haste

To review: certain localities, in an effort to protect children from convicted sex offenders, have established zones in which such offenders may not reside, and in some instances may not even enter.

At first, such zones were limited to the immediate proximity of schools and day care centers. Over time, however, cities have realized that, if you define the zone broadly enough, you can in fact render an entire town off limits.

But why stop there?

In the past month, nearly two dozen [Iowa] cities and counties, from Des Moines to the little town of Garrison, have approved or considered restrictions on where convicted sex offenders may live.

The rush came after a federal appeals court, in the first such ruling in the nation, upheld a 2002 Iowa state law that bars sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or day care center. Emboldened by the ruling, Iowa cities and towns are drawing their own buffer zones around parks, playgrounds, trails, swimming pools, libraries and school bus stops.
...
Last month, Ely, a town of 1,500 without a single school or day care center, became the first Iowa city to pass tougher new rules. It banned sex offenders from living near the city park, playground and library — in effect, making nearly the entire town a sex-offender-free zone.
...
Garrison, a town of just 413 people about 20 miles northeast of Cedar Rapids, made it illegal for sex offenders to live within 2,000 feet of the city's only park and playground, library and two school bus stops. Des Moines, the state's biggest city, drew a line around parks, swimming pools and recreational trails.

Think what you will of convicted sex offenders, the simple truth is they have to live somewhere, and they have a right not to be burdened with a new form of NIMBY gerrymandering that ceases to be rationally related to the legitimate government interest of protecting children.

A safety zone around schools might — might — be an acceptable restriction on the post-incarceration liberties of convicted sex offenders. But if 2,000 feet suddenly becomes 5,000 feet or 50,000 feet, and when the list of off-limits points is redefined to include pools, bus stops and recreational trails (next will likely be video arcades and movie theaters), then "reasonable precaution" devolves into "vindictive spite." Which, as anti-gay bigots are learning, is not a valid excuse to pass whatever laws you like in an attempt to keep "them" away from you (or, supposedly, from your families).

The more flagrant these red-lining abuses become, the more legal challenges, on "as applied" bases, will be filed (complete with the inevitable subsequent laments of "activist judges" overriding "the will of the people," and perhaps with state constitutional amendment proposals sent to voters as ballot initiatives, and so on).

The residents of these localities should bear in mind that are other threats to their communities besides sex offenders. Foremost among them is the threat of oppressive law — it can end up harming more children in worse ways than any molester ever could.

---

Just a quick addendum — Switzerland has banned the practice of children sitting on Santa's lap. After all, Santa could be a pedophile. Like I said, there are other ways to harm children besides molesting them...