Teenage Curfew

4 Pages 1017 Words

Teenage Curfew

Thomas Jefferson, one of the founders of this country, said that “ Those who would sacrifice a little freedom for a little security will lose both and deserve neither.” We are not a socialist state, the desires of the many do not out weigh the rights of the few. The rights of all groups and all individuals no matter how small, poor, weak, or unpopular, are sacred. Those rights are sacred regardless of what the majority believes will increase public safety. That is one of the founding principles that this country is based on. The individual’s rights are sacred, they are beyond question, and they are most certainly beyond arbitrary time restrictions, set by intolerant politicians.
The evidence that curfews have any effect on crime is non-existent, the claim that they reduce victimization does not stand up to the simplest logical test, and that is that most victimization of young people occurs in the home, not on the streets or in places of business. The Report in the January 2002, edition of the Western Criminology Review, states plainly and simply that curfews have no effect on juvenile crime. Why then are these laws still routinely being passed around the country? Why have several cities that have had their laws challenged successfully, immediately rewritten the law and passed it again?
They are not effecting crime, they are not protecting young people from victimization, the answer has eluded me for some time. My theory at the moment is that curfews are not especially harmful, but they are not too helpful either. They appear to be another high profile gimmick designed to get votes rather then make neighborhoods safe. Sports, recreation and family oriented policies can better increase community safety without sacrificing the freedom in our society. Like so many laws in the United States today, curfew laws are weapons of cultural aggression against youth. They go right along with sk...