Anonymous - posted on 06/04/2013 ( 1 mom has responded )
Instead of a curfew, police can respond to kids in threatening situations. "threatening" will be defined and police will be given training on how to respond to "threatening" situations involving minors. Curfews criminalize otherwise lawful behavior such as standing on a street when standing on a street corner doesn't harm anyone or violate anyone's rights. As a result many law-abiding youth suffer the inconvenience of unwarranted stops, detentions and harassment. Mike Males, a sociologist at the University of California, found that in Vernon, Connecticut, of 410 youth cited for violating curfew from 1995 to 1998, only 7 were committing crimes, served with warrants or identified as runaways. We don't want to limit legitimate opportunities for young people to interact and have fun and we don't want to unnecessarily distress young people who aren't causing trouble, so the curfew ordinance should say that police can only stop young people in situations that appear threatening or who are causing trouble, providing police with an extra tool of enforcement. As a result, the what we will call "limited curfews" don't need exceptions. The laws are crafted to assist at-risk teens and their parents while at the same time have no impact on youth who are not causing any trouble. It's a good compromise to those who say curfews reduce juvenile crime and those who say curfews violate rights of teens and parents.