INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (AP) -- Six sex offenders sued the city Wednesday to block a new ordinance that bars them from venturing within 1,000 feet of parks, pools and playgrounds when children are present.
The plaintiffs went to federal court to argue that the law is unconstitutionally vague, violates their rights to vote and attend church, and prevents them from freely traveling on roads that may pass within 1,000 feet of the affected sites.
The ordinance was approved May 15 and took effect immediately. It carries fines of up to $2,500.
The law includes an exception that permits sex offenders to visit those sites as long as they are with another adult who is not a convicted sexual offender.
The six, who include convicted child molesters and rapists, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.
Tenley Drescher, an attorney for the city, said officials planned to defend the ordinance. "The important part is protecting kids," she said.
What do you guys think about this article? I understand the argument that this law would prevent sex offenders from voting, access to the public roads, etc. However, certain precautions need to be taken to protect society, and I believe molesters/rapists give up these rights when they commit these types of crimes.
Also, off topic, what would happen if you were a lawyer and these people became your clients? If you were morally against your client’s position, would you represent them because your firm wanted you to or risk getting fired? I would risk getting fired.