Should there be a curfew for people under 18 years to reduce crime?
Do you think that having a curfew for those under age of 18 would help keep the crimes commited down?
Yes, they need to be home
Side Score: 24
|
 |
No, the kids arent the problem
Side Score: 28
|
|
|
|
|
A while back I was staying at friend's house who had curfew in his area for under 18's after one boy got murdered and another was in critical condition. Anybody under 18 without adult supervision would be escorted back home by police who were making rounds in the area. Without going into detail about my adventures and misdeeds I can say that the curfew does work. Although we could've easily run away and jumped a fence - the point is that police presence does have an affect on crime or potential crime. In other parts of the world when something happens a curfew is placed on the whole populace and nobody is allowed out after certain hours. It does have an effect. It's a great deterrent. However the problem is upholding it fulltime. I'd say having curfew's in areas where there's high crime rates. If it turns out to have a positive effect, we should continue with it, if however the crime gets pushed to areas without curfew, then we know that it will not be kept in place, because rich people are worth more than poor people and that's where the curfew is more likely to be kept. 1056 days ago | Side: Yes, they need to be home
They need to be home Teenage under 18 like boy make lots of damage to our society:- 1. They may damage any things like street lights and fire up the sign board in the road 2.They may murder or kill any one with a gang of Teenagers 3. They will take drugs that their parents wont know it 4.some could suicide them selves in a public bus and that may also cause injuries to many people in the public bus SO I CONCLUDE BY SAYING THAT 18 YEARS MUST HAVE CURFEW AS WELL TO REDUCE CRIME 1056 days ago | Side: Yes, they need to be home
yeh..i really think they need to curfewed because children under 18 need guidance. they dont need to go out until late night. what they need is solid rest so they become healthy. this proves how important curfews are because they prevent childran from doing crimes or witnessing it because if they go out at night they are bound to get involved in gang crimes or even worse see some gruesome crime.... 944 days ago | Side: Yes, they need to be home
Yes there should. Many crimes are committed at night. A curfew helps protect the children. Besides, what would a child be doing out late at night? Some places in the US really do need a curfew because of the rates of crimes being committed. Kids might complain "they are taking away our rights" when they should think about the other children in other countries where they don't have rights to basic things. And what is the problem with staying at home by around 11:30. 426 days ago | Side: Yes, they need to be home
|
Firstly, it would be important to note that "The dominant position in criminology is that crime peaks in the late teens and early 20s, and declines thereafter"[1], so the effect of such a rule would be applicable, but no more so than another age group altogether. Secondly, crime rates for juveniles based on the FBI National Incident-Based Reporting System state that rates peak at 3 pm, standard school closure time, and decline steadily thereafter.[2] Finally, as we have witnessed in the past with the alcohol prohibition, and more currently marijuana prohibition, the more control a government has on it's populace, the less likely such a populace is to obey the government regulation. The more effort the government puts into control, the less likely they are to be successful. This is excessively self-evident in the teenage population, stereotypically being rebellious in nature. To expect that a government could enforce such a blight on personal freedom is ridiculous. [1]http://www.allacademic.com/meta/ [2]http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/ 1246 days ago | Side: No, the kids arent the problem
Finally, as we have witnessed in the past with the alcohol prohibition, and more currently marijuana prohibition, the more control a government has on it's populace, the less likely such a populace is to obey the government regulation. This point is irrelevant to the question because of the completely different nature of the alcohol prohibition. There's money to be made out of that, a black market is created. This cannot be done by curfews on under 18's. "The dominant position in criminology is that crime peaks in the late teens and early 20s, and declines thereafter"[1], so the effect of such a rule would be applicable, but no more so than another age group altogether. You don't think that events in earlier parts of their lives is what leads to criminal lifestyles? You're not a law abiding citizen one day and a criminal once you're 18-19. It's over time with certain peers that leads to this, and hanging out late at night is the best time to get upto no good. 1056 days ago | Side: Yes, they need to be home
Ok. If you establish this hypothetical curfew, then it's just giving kids a chance to break one more rule. If they're out there and they get spotted, then chances are they could run into some mugger or whatever and that causes another crime. 1244 days ago | Side: No, the kids arent the problem
|
