Curfew Laws & Driving Privileges Restriction on Juveniles (Essay Sample)

Curfew Laws & Driving Privileges Restriction on Juveniles
Student’s Name:
Institution:
In many countries, the youth are kept at home and from roving in the streets during late hours by curfews. Although the laws vary in details, the key intention is to diminish the crimes the youths commit in the street. Policymakers have establish that these curfews are the better option to prevent the youth from being tempted to join gangs and cults.
Placing young people under so much inspection or restricting them will without doubt, result to rebellion. Instead, young persons should be taught by their parents how to have control of themselves and be trusted with the accountability which is given to them by the adults. They will definitely behave like accountable young grownups and be in the houses even without the imposition of curfew. The young people will become responsible adults and mature when given freedom of responsibility for the safety of themselves.
According to ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), curfew metrics to both youth constitutional rights and parents are violation. Additionally, it is a transgression of the youth equal protection section which is found on the fourteenth amendment.
Moreover, teenagers must be permitted to drive because of having to attend activities of extracurricular, school and/or jobs that are part time. Furthermore, age does not cause negligence, anyone despite their age, can be careless. Therefore, it is not fair to blame the youth on almost all the accidents that occur on the roads. Before issuance of driving license to the youth, the government has put some metrics to make sure that they are competent enough, thus it is very unrealistic when restricting young people on age basis.
Evidence.
In many places where there is imposition of curfews laws on the young people, crimes have been occurring hours prior to the curfew hours. This reveals to us that those who commit crimes are just criminal offenders, irrespective of the age. Committing violence if definitely a free choice, so it doesn’t matter whether there are curfews or not. Also, public health suggest that, criminal element in a young person can be taken away by making investments of resources on the matter. Committing violence and crimes, as most individuals would accept as truth, isn’t unavoidable. However, imposition of curfew laws is without doubt not a choice (Karen, 2007).
Police consider imposing of curfews the appropriate way of preventing violence activities carried out by the youth. According to many research results, per year, above 60,000 young people are arrested. Therefore, this leads to an overcrowding in both in youth court and the youth in imprisonment. As a result, more money, probably the taxpayer’s money, will be spend by the government in funding of these institutions. Regrettably, according to a research done in the past, between crime reduction and curfew, there is a very diminutive relation. In fact, the researchers have discovered that victimization, crime and violence, at different periods of times, still happen. Additionally, according to civil libertarians, curfew has failed awfully to preclude crime and also infringe on the youth rights. It is also claimed that so much superfluous power has been mandated by the police in exploiting and punishing juvenile who are only culpable because of their age (Siegel, 2007).
Because of the increased road accidents, most parents have attempted to influence the passing of a law that would prevent from driving, any young person below eighteen years. These parents suggest that, for many accidents happening on the highways, young people driving in the team of other young people are responsible. Nevertheless, according to the many researches done, none of them has ever confirmed this claim to be true. It would be unfair and unrealistic to the young people when not allowing them their right to drive just because of their age. Incase this kind of law is passed, then every person aged above seventy years must too be prohibited from driving because of poor eye vision. Evidence collected from numerous researches reveals that anybody who has consumed over forty hours of training of drivers is a qualified driver and is not supposed to be denied a chance to drive due to their age.
Counter argument
There are two classifications of claims that support the imposing of curfew on young people; that it protects the juveniles from harassment and prevents violence committed by the youth. The supporters of this curfews claim that the curfew protects form crime, non-delinquent teens. In addition, the negligent teenagers are not given the chance to indulge in activities of crimes. In 1994, the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) indicated that curfew lead to reduction in crime occurrences. This is due to the use of other teenagers by the juvenile perpetrators to their crimes, therefore with imposed curfew, it will diminish the youth victims number (Kinnear, 2009).
According to the people support curfews on restricted driving privileges, most teenagers have gradually revealed that they don’t have responsibility and therefore are not mature. They claim that the must be saved from the assignment of cleaning up after teenagers who have for, example, crashed. The age that one is supposed to get a driving license should be raised by the government. Additionally, supporters of the argument claim that extre...