M5 Assignment 1: LASA 2: Final Argument Paper
SS_Student
WatkinsM_M3_A2.pptxShould People Under 18 Be Subjected to Legal Curfews or Restricted Driving Privileges?
Marquita Watkins
Argosy University - Online
In the U.S, youth curfew are used to keep adolescence indoor typical beyond 11:00 p.m.
It is against the law for the adolescent to be found outside when is an authorized sate of curfew.
The curfew policies differ in details but they majorly focus to minimize crime committed by the youth in the road.
Youth curfew are controversial because it is against the federal but embraced by most municipality.
Introduction
In the US, parents have the right to restrict a minor from 11:00 pm to 6:00 a.m. The jurisdiction allows exemption of weekends, summer months, and the youth going for studies, religious or civic sponsored events (Grossman & Miller, 2015).
2
Opposing
Curfews for people below the age of 18 are unconstitutional and violets the rights of the youths.
Youth curfews are majorly disproportional and target racial minorities when enforcing the local curfew laws (White, 1996).
Common Conclusions
Supporting
Crime rates on teenagers or by teenagers decreased when the curfews were introduced.
Such restriction impact the values of accountability and responsibility among the youth.
Common Conclusions
4
Facts; they are things proved to be true. The evidence utilized would include scientific findings and research on the effectiveness of youth curfew
Statistics will include collecting numerical evidence on the subject from credible research sources
Onions used by professional and expertise in law provide a logical approach on taking a position.
Kinds of Evidence That Are Utilized and/or Are Most Effective
Facts and statistics offer a credible source of information for any research. Use of facts and statistics from reliable resources can lead to true and accurate research outcomes. Also, there are various research form online research database that are effective source of information for any research (White, 1996).
5
Unconstitutional
Teen Curfew impinge the youth’s constitutional right in the first amendment. Lawyers believe that it is an overreaction by the authority on perceived juvenile crimes
Curfews laws were meant for emergencies rather than restricting the youth
The federal government prohibits states and municipalities from developing laws that privilege a specific group while undermining others.
Evidence for Common Conclusions and Arguments
Minors as well as adults are protected by the constitution and they have constitutional rights. Therefore subjecting the youth to curfew laws in against the federal law since it is the right of all American citizens to be treated equally, regardless of their age. The minors have the fundamental rights as adults and subjecting the to unconstitutional law can be a form of discrimination on age (White, 1996).
The main purpose for a curfew is for emergency purpose especially during military invasion rather than a daily routine within a residence. Curfews are a way of the military avoiding distraction from their operations. Furthermore, the federal government prohibit a state or locality from enforcing laws that abridge the privileges of the citizens. it is evidenced that there are no legal documentation that support youth curfews (White, 1996).
6
Youth curfew is a new way of encouraging discrimination especially on teenagers from minor racial groups
The police target specific racial groups that are vulnerable to criminal activities.
Older teens need to have the right to have a part-time job and they shouldn’t be discriminated by local curfew laws.
Encourage Discrimination
According to the recent research, most curfew in cities are racially biased. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) found that 56% of the curfew charges come against the African American youths compared to 17% from the white counterparts. The irony is that city majority are whites (Grossman & Miller, 2015).
In other words, curfew laws bring more harm than good, especially to the minor race. The police end up assaulting the predominant non-white community. One can easily conclude that the curfew laws specifically target the non-white community in stead of all youths. Therefore, curfews should be made by the parents on their kids and not the state or locality (Grossman, Jernigan & Miller, 2016).
7
Curfews protect teenagers from exploitive adults and other criminals.
Studies show that teenager crime reduced by 10% after the introduction of curfew laws in Texas.
Most criminal activities like rape and robbery with violence happen after midnight.
Reduction of Crime Rate
According to the National Crime Victimization, statistics prove that violent crime typically happens in the late hours of the night. Also, 66% of sexually assaults happen after dark. In other words, when there is dark and less people in the street, individual commit crimes without fear of being caught. The minors may not have the enough strength to defend themselves from such criminal activities and are always on target. Hence, most cities with claim that they are can minimize the chances of youth being in danger by staying at their homes.
8
Youth can perform all their duties during the day and avoid being caught up at night
Teen will avoid drink and driving late nights which is the major cause of teenage accidents
Teens obeying the city’s curfew laws is a sign of bringing up responsible adult ready to abide by the rule and regulations.
Curfews Make Youth More Responsible
Most critics argue that youth curfews impact the sense of responsibility to the teens. Responsible youth are capable of take ownership of their actions and accountable for the outcomes. Therefore, teenage curfew offer an opportunity for the youth to begin being responsible at a tender age by obeying the city laws. Responsible youth wont have to move through the street late night when they know that they are risking their lives (Grossman & Miller, 2015).
9
It is evidenced that providing curfews and restricting the driving privileges may not the most effective solution in minimizing criminal activities and teenage accidents. Most people supporting the argument use emotional appeal rather than facts, statistic and the federal law. The modification of these laws can bring the value of responsibility and accountability among the youth.
Conclusion
White, R. (1996). Ten arguments against youth curfews. Youth Studies Australia, 15(4), 28.
Grossman, E. R., & Miller, N. A. (2015). A systematic review of the impact of juvenile curfew laws on public health and justice outcomes. American journal of preventive medicine, 49(6), 945-951.
Grossman, E. R., Jernigan, D. H., & Miller, N. A. (2016). Do juvenile curfew laws reduce underage drinking?. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 77(4), 589-595.
References
