LASA 2 Final Arguement Paper
Bigieg
lasa_1_human_resources.pptxLegal Curfews: The Minor Debate
Legal Curfews on Juveniles
A curfew is “an order establishing a specific time in the evening after which certain regulations apply, especially that no civilians or other specified group of unauthorized person may be outdoors or that places of public assembly must be closed” (Dictionary, 2015).
Juvenile Curfew laws are becoming more common and are being enacted at the state and local level, and they can prohibit people under the age of 18 from being in public or driving at specific times
Juvenile curfew laws have become a persuasive and popular strategy for controlling juvenile crime (Sagepub, 2003).
In many different areas there are concerns for those minors that are out after the certain hours of night. At night situations are likely to occur which can put the minors in a dangerous time. It is said that having the curfews are going to reduce the amount of crime that is happening at night because it is taking some of the minors off the street in order to make sure this does not happen. The juvenile laws are enacted at many different levels of government from the state level to the local levels of cities and townships. It is up to the vote of the citizens on whether these laws are going to be enacted.
2
Controversies of Juvenile Curfews
Juvenile curfews are considered by some as unconstitutional as they are considered to violate the fourth amendment of the United States.
Most Juvenile curfews laws come with “exceptions”, which helps the law enforcement to identify situations under which the person deemed as a minor would not have to be subject to the law.
The laws in place do not allow for the parents to have the right to provide for a parental exception. In this regard, there is an issue of unwanted government interference with the right of the parents when deciding to control their children and their bringing up (Brank &Scott, 2014).
Citizens are concerned with discrimination due to race, gender color which could lead to further discrimination and tension.
The fourth amendment “protects the people from unreasonable government intrusions into their legitimate expectations of privacy” (Hanley, 2004). The argument is for that the amendment states that minors have the right to be legally protected. If the juvenile laws are in place then it forces the government to interfere were they do not have a legal right. Minors have the right to privacy and the illegal search and seizure could be considered as a infringement on this right. In most times, there is a challenge in distinguishing whether an act is permissible or even prohibited, and thus most legal experts claim that juvenile curfew statutes are vague.
3
Conclusion One
Every citizen of the United States has the same rights according to the constitution whether they are above the legal age of 18 or a minor.
In the constitution the fifth amendment and the fourteenth amendment protect the citizens from the federal government depriving them of individual rights.
Juvenile curfews infringe upon the individual rights and liberties, and the children are citizens who have the right to free movement and the curfews would undermine the rights and liberties of the young people (Brank, 2014).
Juvenile have the right to be treated as anyone else in the United States. When looking at the amendments of the constitution it states clearly that every citizen of the United States has the right to be protected from having their rights taken away. According to the fifth amendment it states “The federal Government not deprive individuals of life, liberty or the pursuit or property without the due process of the law” (USLaw, 2015). The fourteenth amendment of the United States prohibits states from violating an individual rights of due process and equal protection. Juvenile and their parents have the right to freely move without the federal or state government constrict them. Enacting these laws take away from the parental rights. The parents have the right to set the boundaries for the children when it comes to the times they have to be in by.
4
Conclusion Two
Curfews are not a complete and effective solution to the problem of youth crime.
A study done by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice concluded that crimes fell faster in California Cities without curfews than in California cities with curfews (CTPost, 2012).
This study shows that among 410 citations issued for curfew violations in Vernon, Conn only seven cases were the youths involved in any other offense other then violating curfew (Ctpost, 2012).
Evidence suggest that more racial tensions are raised due to the amount of minorities that are arrested which leads to a greater tension amount amongst them and law enforcement.
Apart from the fact that these laws are considered to be unconstitutional the curfews for the minors is not a effective solution to the crime that is happening. Many times we see these curfews being put into place in order to make the people feel better when in reality they are not doing anything to deter the amount of crime that is happening. The study that was done by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice concluded that cities without the curfews seen a decrease in the amount of crime. The importance of role models on these children and the parents helping them has a better influence then mandating when they have to be in by. Most of the citations given are for none related criminal activity. They are being cited for being out later then the curfew which ties up the police from staying focused on the real criminals in the cities.
5
Conclusion Three
) Curfews are considered by some to single out a certain group and many activist believe that the minority groups feel that they unfairly bear the blunt of curfew enforcement efforts and tend to view curfews as a instrument of political oppression (Adams, 2003.
Minors are becoming victimized by the police in these curfew hours and at the end they are viewing the police as enemies rather then someone that can help them.
Most of the minors that are convicted of violating the curfew are first time offenders. This means that the laws are singling out the minors and making them more vulnerable.
Curfews do not create a safer environment from the younger criminal they increase the number of younger criminals due to them violating the law (Brank, 2014).
These laws create a sense of fear amongst minors. They may be heading home from somewhere after a night out with friends and because they are running late then the police are going to arrest them for walking down at the wrong time of night. This would be considered as victimizing the children and making them feel like they are going to be doing the wrong thing. This will create a sense of hate towards police which means if they younger people see a crime they are less likely to report it to police due to the anger and resentment against them. With many of the crimes being committed are because of the violation of the curfews it just increases the amount of criminals in the system. This takes away from the time the police could be looking for actual crimes.
The minority groups feel they are already being untreated fairly by the law enforcement and having these laws set in place will increase the tension amongst them rather then bring them together to reduce the amount of crime that is happening. This leads to larger tensions in law enforcement and the minority groups.
6
Conclusion Reasons
The first conclusion states that the juvenile laws are considered to be unconstitutional. The government (State and Federal) should base the decisions of these laws of the constitution.
In the second conclusion we show that the Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice is used to counter the arguments for curfews. The research does show that very little is being achieved in many cities by having the curfews in place.
The third conclusion is based on the views of activists against the curfew. They show that many of these laws are creating more resentment and tensions amongst different groups rather then working together.
In the above three conclusions we see many different types of evidence on why the juvenile curfew is not working. In the first conclusions we see that the juvenile curfews are unconstitutional due to the clauses in the constitution that which guarantee every citizen, whether a child or and adult has the freedom of movement and liberties without being violated. The reason why many of the people are using this is because the evidence is used to counter those that are in support of these laws. They show that the freedom of parents to look over and take care of the children in the way they see fit are being violated. Having the induvial rights of the constitution are being abused by enacting these laws. The constitution protects our rights and these laws are a direct infringement of them. The government needs to base the decision on the constitution in order to make sure no laws are being violated. The second conclusion is the research that is done on these laws. The opposition is using this research in order to show a better understating of states that have these laws in place. The reason why the research is so important in the argument is that it portrays the impacts on the children and the towns in a positive or negative way. The research will give a clear picture. The third conclusion is that based on the views of the activists against the laws. Curfews are considered by some to single out a certain group and many activist believe that the minority groups feel that they unfairly bear the blunt of curfew enforcement efforts and tend to view curfews as a instrument of political oppression (Adams, 2003). They use this arguments because of the racial tensions that these groups have with the police. The studies done and the amount of media attention between the law enforcement and the minorities has increased. They argue that the laws will create even more tensions and cause them more problems then good.
7
Analysis of the Opposing Group Issues
The group that are opposed to this are claiming they are unconstitutional and are using this to argue by clearly stating it undermines the rights of the youth and the parents.
The second conclusion argued that the curfew is ineffective. Citing the research that was done by Center on Juvenile and Criminal justice it states that most people between the age of 12 and 17 are more likely to commit crimes between 2pm and 8pm when they are least likely to be supervised by parents (Ctpost, 2012).
The third conclusion is on the basis of activists. These laws create more tensions amongst minorities when it comes to law enforcement. They feel as if people are going to be singled out more then normally after the hours of the law. “Disproportional confinement of minorities has been recognized as a problem by the federal government”(NAP, 2001).
Analysis: Opposing Groups
The opposing groups of this law argue that they are being treated unfairly by breaking the laws on the constitution. The fifth and fourteenth amendment protect the rights of the people from illegal searches and seizure without the due process of the law. While it states this many of the people that oppose the laws state that having the police ask for identification and other items is illegal. This puts that person in a state of fear and anxiety when there should not be. The argument of the curfew being ineffective is due to the fact that many minors are without supervisions due to parents being at work and other jobs. They have more freedom to roam and get into trouble. The times the curfews are enacted are not effective because most minors are under supervision at the time. Racial tensions has been going on for years. The opposing groups argues that because of the times at night the laws are in place it will only generate more tensions amongst groups instead of helping. This will lead to a bigger rate of violence and crime. While this is the opposing arguments there are many that claim it to be false.
8
Supporting Groups Analysis
The first conclusions for those supporting the laws is that the minors do not have the same rights therefore they are under the laws that are made. This means that argument of being unconstitutional is not legit.
The second conclusion is that curfews are ineffective, but the supporting group argues otherwise. This group argues that curfews will help keep the minors from negative influence of street gangs, and breaks congregating of gangs in hours of darkness.
The supporting group argues that the purpose of curfew laws may not be to stop youth from committing crimes, but they protect the youth from being victims of crime (Squires, 2014).
Many people believe that the curfews are there to protect the minors. By regulation what time they have to be in at night they feel safer knowing that these minors are off the street and not getting into illegal activities. The group has good points to argue because they truly care about the minors and the way they are being pulled into the illegal activities. Protection is there number one reason for installing the laws.
9
Reference
Dictionary (2016) Curfew, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/curfew?s=t
Hanley, K (2011) Fourth Amendment Protection for Juvenile Offenders: State, Parent, and the Best Interests of the Minor, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2496&context=flr
Brank, E. M., & Scott, L. (2014). Parental Responsibility for Juveniles' Acts. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118517383.wbeccj262/full
Find US Law (2015) US Constituion-5th and 14th Amendments, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://finduslaw.com/us-constitution-5th-14th-amendments
CTPost (2012) Curfew ineffective distraction from real solutions, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://www.ctpost.com/opinion/article/Curfew-an-ineffective-distraction-from-real-3735234.php
Adams, K (2003) The Effectiveness of Juvenile Curfews at Crime Prevention, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://ann.sagepub.com/content/587/1/136.full.pdf+html
NAP EDU (2001) Race, Crime, and Juvenile Justice: The issue of Racial Disparity, retrieved March 16, 2016 from http://www.nap.edu/read/9747/chapter/8
Squires, P. (2014). Debating the Ups and Downs of Youth Justice. Social Policy, 323.
