The Bangor City Council is expected to vote to adopt a new ordinance that prohibits those convicted of sex offenses with victims under the age of 14 from living within 750 feet of parks, playgrounds or schools – places that are predominantly used by children.
Eight councilors voted to go forward with the ordinance, and one voted against proceeding with it.
The intent of the ordinance is to keep offenders away from potential victims. The argument against the ordinance is that it drives sex offenders underground;
that is, they may fail to register with law enforcement, as is required.
Will the ordinance make children safer, less safe or have no effect at all? Extra-credit question: Is it
politically possible to vote against such ordinances, even if they are shown to be ineffective?