Convicted sex offenders are barred from surfing at the famous pier in this Orange County city。

　　In nearby Dana Point, they are prohibited from casting a fishing line in the harbor。

　　And if they wander into a public park in Mission Viejo, they could be shipped back to jail for six months, following the City Council’s vote this year to ban them from a host of places where children congregate。

　　“We need to protect our kids,” the Orange County district attorney, Tony Rackauckas, had told the Mission Viejo City Council. “The danger is very real。”

　　Orange County finds itself at the enter of a new wave of laws restricting the movement of sex offenders. The county government and a dozen cities here have banned sex offenders from even setting foot in public parks, on beaches and at harbors, rendering almost half the parks in Orange County closed to them. Ten more cities are considering similar legislation。

　　And Orange County is far from alone. In recent years, communities around the country have gone beyond regulating where sex offenders can live and begun banning them outright from a growing list of public places。

　　From North Carolina to Washington State, communities have designated swimming pools, parks and school bus stops as “child safety zones,” off limits to some sex offenders. They are barred from libraries in half a dozen Massachusetts cities, and from all public facilities in tiny Huachuca City, Ariz。

　　“Child safety zones are being passed more and more at the city and county level,” said Elizabeth Jeglic, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. “It’s becoming more and more restrictive. They’re not only limiting where sex offenders can live, but they’re limiting their movement as well。”

　　The proliferation of such restrictions reflects the continued concerns of parents and lawmakers about potential recidivism among sex offenders. But it has also increasingly raised questions about their effectiveness, as well as their fairness。

　　Opponents have dismissed “child safety zones” as unenforceable, saying they are designed to make politicians look tough on crime and drive sex offenders from the area, not make children safer。

　　Irene Pai, a lawyer with the Orange County public defender’s office, said “child safety zones” give parents a false sense of security, punishing many offenders who are not dangerous without actually stopping predators from entering parks。

　　曾被定罪的性侵犯者將被禁止在美國橘子郡的著名碼頭沖浪。

　　在附近的戴納波恩特市，他們被禁止在海港釣魚。

　　如果他們無意間走進米申維埃荷市的公園，他們可能會被送上船去蹲6個月監(jiān)獄，因為市議會今年投票通過一個法案，禁止性侵犯者踏足兒童聚集的多個地方。

　　橘子郡的地方檢察官托尼•拉考卡斯書告訴米申維埃荷市議會說：“我們需要保護我們的小孩。危險非常真實地存在著。”

　　橘子郡正迎來一系列限制性侵犯者行為的新法律。郡政府和十幾個城市已經禁止性侵犯者踏足公園、海灘和海港，這一法規(guī)已經在這些城市附近的公園施行，覆蓋了橘子郡近一半的公園。還有另外10個城市正考慮實施相近的法規(guī)。

　　實施這一法規(guī)的并不只有橘子郡。近些年來，美國各地的社區(qū)不但對性侵犯者的居住處進行限制，而且還開始禁止他們進出越來越多的公共場所。

　　從北卡羅來納州到華盛頓州，社區(qū)將游泳池、公園和學校公車站設定為“兒童安全區(qū)”，禁止某些性侵犯者入內。馬薩諸塞州有六個城市的圖書館都禁止性侵犯者進入，亞利桑那州的華楚卡小城的所有公共設施也都不對性侵犯者開放。

　　約翰•杰刑事司法學院的伊麗莎白•杰格里克教授說：“越來越多的城市和郡縣通過了‘兒童安全區(qū)’法案。現在對性侵犯者的限制越來越嚴格。他們不僅限制性侵犯者的居住地，還限制他們的行動。”

　　這種限制令的推廣反映出父母和立法者對于性侵犯者再次犯罪的潛在可能性的持續(xù)擔憂。不過它也日益引發(fā)人們對其公平性和有效性的質疑。

　　反對者認為“兒童安全區(qū)”無法執(zhí)行，稱其只是為了突出政客打擊犯罪的業(yè)績、將性侵犯者趕出管轄區(qū)，而不會讓孩子更安全。

　　橘子郡公設辯護律師事務所的律師艾琳•派說，“兒童安全區(qū)”給父母一種錯誤的安全感，懲罰了許多不危險的性侵犯者，但是卻不能真正阻止“捕食者”進入公園。