Way back when I lived in good old Bowling Green, Ohio, the citizens came together to vote on a smoking ban. It passed, forcing smokers to corral themselves to bars and sidewalks, smoking next to doorways and shivering in the winter outside the Corner Grill. It was a “Nanny Law,” to be sure, and several businesses circumvented it with their liquor sales and zonings, but it was still there. It kept the smokers away from the non-smokers in many places and kept the air inside certain establishments a little cleaner. My only problem with it was that it forced the hands of business owners. _It was too much,_ even if it was for our own good.
Now, in Brook Park, there’s a new law keeping sex offenders out of all city parks. You can view the Cleveland Plain Dealer article [here](http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1127899801163700.xml&coll=2). Basically, any registered sex offender is banned from the city’s parks and recreation centers. _Any_ registered sex offender. This goes for your college buddy, whose sweet little girlfriend _swore_ she was eighteen, as well as slimeball child sex offenders and rapists. _Any_ registered sex offender.
I understand why this is an important issue. As a mother, I want to do everything I can to protect my little girl. If I had magical slimeball detecting powers that could _see_ sex offenders, you better damn well bet I’d have a vicious snarl and claws out, prepared to defend my baby from harm and evil. However, is this law going to change anything?
Sex offenders are already branded. Their neighbors know who they are and they are logged in databases, their crimes publicized and most likely the offenders are treated like pariahs. They are marked for life. For habitual offenders (and let’s face it, many of these _are_ habitual offenders), it’s a good thing that they are identified, so that people know who and what they are dealing with. I won’t debate that. But for your college buddy, the one whose girlfriend wasn’t _quite_ on the legal side of “barely legal”, that status will stick to him like stink on a monkey. It will be with him his entire life. Now, if your buddy lives in Brook Park (or Cuyahoga Falls), he won’t be able to see Junior’s little league games because they are in one of the city parks. Seems a little harsh, but a law is a law, and there are no special cases.
So how much is too much? I understand why Brook Park is doing this. Child molesters and rapists are despicable people. There’s no grey areas about that. Allowing these people to have access to parks and playgrounds is like giving Kirstie Alley “all you can eat” access to a Godiva chocolate factory. It’s not smart and you know that Kirstie won’t be hearing the Jenny Craig voice of reason when faced with those milk chocolate twists. Knowing that, do we ban sex offenders from city buildings (except for the jails, police stations and court houses) as well?
While I sympathize with the city of Brook Park’s motives, this action throws up a yellow flag signaling that, perhaps, they’re treading a little close to the edge of “too far.” I don’t have the solution for this situation. I don’t know where, exactly, the line needs to be drawn between acceptable and impinging on personal freedoms. I only know that it needs to be drawn _somewhere._