Why is curfew bad

This approach cannot be a general answer to all possible problems. Teens that want to participate in negative activities can do so at school, from home, and at any other time during the day. If communities rely on this structure to keep people safe, then it represents a lack of familiarity with the limits that families need today. Most curfews are set from an autocratic standpoint. Some parents and communities set the rules of a teenage curfew without any input from those that the rules effect.

When you hand down rules like this in such a fashion, then it removes the opportunity to bring developing negotiation skills.

It helps to speak with kids, parents, and community members to understand their desires and needs while still providing a certain level of structure for everyone. If we fail to listen to opposing viewpoints, then the message presented to teens is that their point of view is unimportant. When that outcome occurs, then there is a reduction in the levels of respect experienced in the family environment. It also creates a communication barrier that can be challenging to overcome.

Some teenage curfew rules can encourage rebellion. Teens that receive a curfew will usually see that structure as something of a consequence. Teens need a chance to offer input or opinions to prevent unexpressed destructive emotions from forming. It often stops the development of maturity because it communicates a lack of trust. There is no way to develop independence or responsibility if parents or the community expect someone to be home-bound by a specific time.

There can be legal consequences for violating curfews. Several municipalities across the United States have instituted ordinances that govern teens and curfews. Families that live in these communities must ensure that their kids are abiding by the rules. Even if you do not agree with the principles behind the laws, failing to follow them can result in fines — or even jail time in some situations. It impacts minority teens more than any other demographic. No other country in the world uses the same approach to implementing a teenage curfew as the United States does.

It has become a way to respond to the problems of society that blames young people for all of the problems that happen without affecting the adults in the conversation. Hispanic youth see the same problem in San Diego.

Another six would be picked up throughout the evening, and that is the average number for each night. The record in San Diego for the southeast division is 50 encounters. Police officers say that these contacts are not failures. It is a reflection of them doing their job. The reality of this disadvantage is that it creates what are often needless encounters with teens. It places them and the officer at a higher risk of a violent encounter over the idea that someone is away from home too late at night.

The data to support the idea of curfews is lacking. Monrovia, CA became one of the first cities to claim success with the institution of a teenage curfew. This summer at least one city—Austin—has decided not to sound the alarm. Police Chief Brian Manley was persuaded, and asked the City Council to rescind the juvenile curfew law. Juvenile curfew laws are ubiquitous and deeply entrenched. They remain an alarmist staple in communities across the country.

A voluminous body of research has cast strong doubts on the claims that juvenile curfew laws prevent victimization or reduce juvenile crime, but these findings have received scant attention from policy makers or police. A systematic review of research literature on juvenile curfew programs was published in by the Campbell Collaboration, a nonprofit that synthesizes research studies for policy-makers. Campbell examined over 7, studies on juvenile curfews and synthesized the 12 most rigorous studies.

The average effect on juvenile crime during curfew hours was slightly positive — that is a slight increase in crime — and close to zero for crime during all hours.

Similarly, juvenile victimization also appeared unaffected by the imposition of a curfew ordinance. The Campbell findings followed a systematic review of juvenile curfew literature published in by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Why are juvenile curfew laws ineffective?

Another factor is that on empty streets there are no witnesses. Urban activist Jane Jacobs theorized that well-populated streets are safe streets; deserted streets invite crime. A study published in tested the effect of Washington D. Using ShotSpotter audio sensor data, the authors found that gunfire incidents were significantly more frequent when the curfew was in effect.

Curfews remove bystanders and witnesses from the streets, reducing their deterrent effects on street crime. Youth curfews are also logical. If youngsters are getting into trouble, it makes sense to get them off the streets. Juvenile crime dropped 6 percent during the curfew hours, but it increased 13 percent in the midafternoon. Nationwide, more than 80 percent of juvenile offenses take place between 9 a. Nor do we have any solid evidence that youth curfews lower the overall rate of juvenile crime.

In a close study of Monrovia, Calif. In July and August, when the curfew was not enforced, non-curfew youth crime went down 12 percent. Mayor Nutter recently extended a 9 p. Constitution and the U.

Convention on the Rights of the Child state that freedom of movement and association is an important right. Federal courts have also recognized that curfew-imposed restrictions are a violation of First Amendment rights such as free speech and assembly, and therefore have struck down many curfews that fail to give free speech exemptions.

Along with First Amendment rights, curfews violate fair and equal treatment under the law as well as substantive and procedural due process, making them unconstitutional in other ways as well. Curfews are ineffective at reducing crime. A recent review of several studies on juvenile curfews stated that they are ineffective at reducing both crime and victimization.

In fact, some studies do show that curfews can lead to a rise in crime. For example, in the District of Columbia, there was a significant uptick in the number of gun violence incidents after extending the curfew by only one hour. Curfew violations are a type of status offense, which means they criminalize behavior that is only illegal because the person involved is under eighteen.

Status offenses unfairly punish young people for activity that is not considered dangerous to society otherwise it would be illegal for everyone to do it.