Does your town have a teen curfew? Do you think it is a good idea? or even fair? Read this excerpt from Issues and Controversies, August 31, 2000, then formulate your own position on the topic.
Teen Curfews
Over the past several years, concern about juvenile crime and teenagers' safety has led many U.S. cities to enact teen-curfew laws. Such laws make it illegal for youths under a certain age -- usually 16 or 17 -- to be in public places during specified hours, usually between 11 p.m. or midnight and dawn.
Between 1984 and 1994, the homicide-arrest rate for juveniles nearly tripled. Just under 2,800 juveniles were arrested for homicide in 1994, compared with 958 such arrests in 1984. The number of gun homicides by juveniles quadrupled between 1984 and 1994.
In response to high levels of juvenile crime, 146 of the nation's 200 largest cities now enforce teen curfews. Ninety of these municipalities have passed new curfew laws or have begun enforcing old ones since 1990. Including smaller cities and towns, about 1,000 communities impose teen curfews.
Advocates of curfews, including [former] President Clinton (D), some members of Congress and many law-enforcement officials, say that they are an effective crime-fighting tool. They point to declining crime rates in cities with curfews as proof that curfews work.
Curfews are needed to keep juveniles from committing crimes, advocates say, but also to protect youths, who are increasingly the victims of violent crimes.
Curfew backers argue that if fewer teens are on the streets, fewer crimes will be committed by and against juveniles. Curfews help overburdened parents who are not always able to supervise their children or keep them at home, advocates say, and also protect neglected teens whose parents play little or no role in their lives.
Based on information above, how do curfews help curtail crime?
But teen-curfew laws have not been universally accepted. Some teens resent curfews, and civil-liberties groups have challenged the legality of curfew ordinances, claiming that they are unconstitutional.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), many teenagers and some parents argue that the laws violate minors' freedom of assembly as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. They say that that right applies to people of all ages at all times.
Curfews have also been criticized for encroaching on the rights of parents to determine rules for their own children. Critics say that parents should be able to set restrictions within their families without government interference.
Others claim that curfews are ineffective, pointing to statistics showing that most juvenile crimes occur between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m., usually right after school days end, and many teenagers have little to do then but loiter. The money spent on enforcing curfews could be better spent on after-school recreational or educational programs for teens, they say.
Based on information above, summarize the arguments against teen curfews.
No nationwide study has been conducted on curfews' effectiveness in reducing juvenile crime. But in several cities where curfews have been enforced, police departments have reported declines in juvenile crime rates. In Dallas, Texas, where a curfew for youths under age 17 took effect in May 1994, violent crime by juveniles has decreased by 30.3%, according to Dallas police, while overall juvenile crime has decreased by 20.7%.
Regardless of such lower-crime developments in some cities, juvenile crime rates nationwide remain largely higher than in the past. Many law-enforcement officials are particularly disturbed by what today's trends will mean for the future.
Curfew advocates say that curfews provide an opportunity for teens who are at risk for becoming delinquents to get needed help. Gregory Bodenhamer, a community crime consultant in Portland, Ore., says that curfew laws are "one of the most dependable, least intrusive methods to identify and help children from the neglectful and chaotic families that produce most of the nation's young criminals."
Law-enforcement officials who favor curfew laws say that they are a straightforward, proactive and enforceable way to fight juvenile crime. They say that any infringements on juveniles' liberty will be outweighed by the safety benefits curfews will bring.
"I'm sure that a lot of teenagers think this is too strict," [Former President] Clinton said in May 1996. "But they must also know that it's a dangerous world out there, and these rules are being set by people who love them."
Yet critics of teen-curfew laws say that they are simplistic solutions that sound appealing, especially to politicians who want to sound pro-family and tough on crime, but achieve very little.
Many say that curfews cannot possibly reduce juvenile crime over the long run because most juvenile crimes occur in the afternoon hours when most juveniles are unsupervised.
James Alan Fox, the dean of the College of Criminal Justice at Northeastern University in Boston, Mass., says, "The problem with curfew laws is that most kids, the good, the bad and the tired, are asleep at midnight."
Others say that curfews will not stop youths who are already engaged in criminal lifestyles. Arthur Spitzer, the legal director of the ACLU in Washington, D.C., notes that children already engaged in illegal activity will also be willing to break a curfew law.
Yet defenders argue that curfews work by forcing youths to consider the consequences of violating curfews. The laws are also effective, supporters say, in influencing youths before they become potentially involved in criminal activity. In many cities with curfews, they point out, curfew centers are staffed with trained counselors who try to identify the problems at the root of a youth's delinquency, whether by aiding communication in families or by referring them to other social services.
Some experts maintain that curfews alone cannot reduce juvenile crime. Alfred Blumstein, a leading criminologist at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pa., says that curfews must be augmented by community centers where young people can go to meet other teens in a safe atmosphere, play sports and receive tutoring or counseling. "This would be a logical extension of curfews that makes them positive and not just another rule for kids to break," he advises.
Think About It...
Refer back to the article to answer these questions.
1. The author develops the text primarily by providing
A. descriptions of curfew programs
B. arguments of advocates and critics
C. interviews with mayors and judges
D. anecdotes by teen participants
2. The first paragraph implies that the primary purpose of a teen curfew law is to ensure that teenagers --
A. get adequate nutrition
B. attend school
C. receive legal advice
D. stay home at night
3. As used throughout the passage, the word advocates most closely means --
A. lawyers
B. adults
C. people in favor of a cause or position
D. people against a cause or position
4. According to the text, civil-liberties groups claim that curfews are illegal because teenagers have the right to
A. vote on curfew ordinances
B. gather in public
C. own property
D. hold jobs
5. According to Gregory Bodenhamer, one benefit of curfew laws is that they
A. permit early intervention in lives of at-risk youths
B. impose punishment on parents of delinquents
C. provide communities with crime statistics
D. encourage teenagers to identify career interests
Your Turn...
What is your position on Teen Curfew ordinances? Take a stand and defend it in a persuasive essay. Use references and quotations from the article to support your position.
Answer Key
1. B
2. D
3. C
4. B
5. A