The Impact of Curfew on Minors as it Relates to Premarital Sex and Juvenile Delinquency

The Impact of Curfew on Minors as it Relates to Premarital Sex and Juvenile Delinquency

Literature review

Curfews are meant to restrict youth from visiting public places at odd hours. Most states regulate youth of seventeen to eighteen years and below from visiting public sites from 10 pm to 5.a.m during the weekdays and as from midnight to dawn on weekends.  For instance, in Prince George County in Maryland, the curfew is applied to the youth of seventeen years and below. They are restricted from public places during night times (Wilson et al., 2016).  Failure to adhere to the curfew laws attracts a fine, which is applied according to the offense, community service, and youth driver’s license restrictions. This has helped keep then in their homes to avoid being engaged in crime or be victims of crime. Besides, the huge fines, together with sanctions, prevent the youth from visiting public places at night.

Curfew laws have helped, to a vast extent, to reduce crimes and victimization among the youth. According to Wilson et al., 2016, as per the quantitate evaluations carried out on the effect of an official state of restricting the youth from being found at public places at certain hours brought about the positive impact of reducing crime among the youth and also victimization cases. However, the effects were minimal in that the crime committed at restricted hours was slightly above that committed during all hours, same to victimization. Therefore curfew laws do not impact juvenile delinquency to a large extent as perceived by other most people.

However, the study had some limitations that make it not so much reliable in concluding the outcomes. There is a need for much more research on the effectiveness of curfew laws in reducing crime and victimization among the youth. The study is not reliable as most of the studies used in research suffered some limitations, making it almost impossible to conclude (Wilson et al., 2016). Most of the studies which suggest that juvenile curfews can cause significant benefit from preventing the youth from committing crimes and victims of crime are not evidence based. There more meaningful research should be carried out on the same to make it clear if there are positive impacts on crime and victimization. Nonetheless, Wilson et al., 2016 conclude that juvenile curfew does not impact or may have minimal effect on crime.

Gun violence in the United States is rampant.  In 2012, more than 11,000 people suffered a firearm the same to 2011, where 693,000 persons got treatment in emergency rooms due to weapons and similar mechanisms (Carr & Doleac, 2018). Gun fires are among the youth as per the CDC statistics; young males aged 15-24 suffer gunfire’s the most, whereby black males share the leading in causing deaths through shooting. Governmental policies have failed to determine the impact of gun fires because of the limited and low-quality data. Policymakers need to come up with ways of reducing gun fires among the youth. Some cases are underreported on gunfires. Carr & Doleac, 2018, uses new and reliable data on gunfires.

Washington DC adopted juvenile curfews as a way of moderating gunshots among the youth. Juvenile curfew is the most common technique used by states in the US. They aim at reducing crime by restricting young potential criminals indoors. However, keeping young adults with their parents or guardians at home reduces crime. Still, at the same time limits the number of witnesses to possible criminal actions that might happen, and so, juvenile curfews can be advantageous and disadvantageous at the same time (Carr & Doleac, 2018). Washington Dc changed curfew times, or any individual aged below seventeen years should be in the house as per 11 pm on weeknights and midnight for weekend nights from September to June while the curfew time for July and August is midnight for all nights. The time follows the school year.

Carr & Doleac argue that if curfew reduces crime, then switching time to 11 pm will reduce cases of deaths in Washington, DC. They used a triple difference strategy to determine the impact of Juvenile curfew juvenile crime by comparing the 11 pm hour and two sets of control hours. They opted to use ShotSpotter to assess juvenile Curfew in Washington, DC because it is an accurate way for it does not capture deaths at regular hours. They also used reported crime and 911 calls to determine the extent of killing that happens during the restricted hours (Carr & Doleac, 2018). They believe that there are two ways to prevent violence, which are stopping the violence or by keeping the possible criminal indoors. Juvenile curfews are best to have some limitations because not all young people in public ad odd hours are criminals, they contradict with some parents rules of allowing kids to stay late at night away from home, kids from abusive homes suffer too for being forced back home to the unsafe environment, and police resources, which could be used on much more important matters are used on juvenile curfew. That is why; Curfew is not fully supported by all as it has the above limitations.

Lives of young ones being taken away at a tender age by the fellow youths are much more important than the above limitations. Murdering young people possess a threat to the nation. From the study, it was revealed that during switch hours, there was an increase in gunfire incidents. Curfews reduce gunfire’s crimes by 107% and 911 calls by 22 % (Carr & Doleac, 2018). Juvenile curfews improve public safety by lowering crimes other than gunfire’s, which increases during switching hours. However, they are fewer cases reported of violence during curfew times; although gunshots do not reduce remarkably, the number of victims reduces systematically. Juvenile curfew can impact both positively and negatively to juvenile crime.

Curfew laws were set up since 190, but little has been done to check if they are useful.  Curfew system was popular with local governments to stop the youth from engaging Juvenile delinquency. Some research tries to estimate the impact of the curfew laws on the youth, but there is no reliable evidence of whether the curfew laws prevent juvenile delinquency. Another thing that researchers fail to look at is whether the child transfers the behavior to other existing age groups. However (Kline, 2010) tried to reduce the gap on the assumption by evaluating the impact of curfew laws on youth based on the arrest behavior of the youth in the city before and after curfew enactment.

There are two types of law enforcement when the curfew is concerned, namely, statutory treatment and statistical treatment. The statutory procedure applies to the youth within the curfew age who receive total punishment like being detained for some time, fine or any other form of punishment. Statistical discrimination refers to the youth whose age is perceived to be within the curfew ages. Such an individual receive less punishment (Kline, 2010). The police, in most cases, cannot be able to differentiate between individuals above the curfew age hence end up estimating the age of some youths who seem to be under curfew laws. A seventeen-year-old has nothing to show that they are above curfew laws, therefore, facing the consequences. Those who are punished mistakenly can end up not being in public places at the prohibited hours to avoid such a scenario in the future.

Therefore, there is a need to identify the impact of the two law enforcements embarks on youths. Apart from that, it gives an essential boundary to which the curfew laws should apply in that the focus should not only be on the youth under the given age but also the older ones who are above curfew (Kline, 2010). The older ones can also engage in crime or be victims of the crime; hence need to be monitored and punished if need be. Above all, much focus should be on the effectiveness of curfew laws. Do those who are arrested change after that or go back to doing the prohibited. More so, does punishing the youth curfew reduce crime in the city?

According to the research carried out by Kline, 2010, curfew laws are adequate. They are valid based on youth behavior before and after curfew enforcement. Kline researched the youth to determine their behavior toward the implementation of curfew laws and found out that before the curfew was put in place, there were many arrests of the youth. After the enactment of curfews, the pattern changed abruptly by 8% in a year and later by 30% within six years. Property crime also reduces remarkably. Violence crime also decreased after some time. Therefore, curfew laws are effective in reducing juvenile delinquency. However, the efficiency of the las can be seen after a long time.

Premarital sex began way before in the 19^th century, and the most affected individuals are the blacks compared to the whites. Most youths engage in sex at an early age of fifteen years to nineteen years. The family adds up to premarital sex. As per the research, children raised in single mothers’ families are likely to engage in premarital sex, unlike those raised with both parents or father headed families. This is because divorced or separated mother do have sex outside marriage when observed by their daughter, who emulate the behavior leading to premarital sex (Hayes, 1987). Work also adds up to why girls raised by single mothers engage in sex. When the mother leaves for a job, they leave their children under no one’s care and supervision, especially when they need to work on night shifts. The children find the freedom to go wherever they want hence engage in premarital sex. That is why curfew is essential as it will restrict such children from leaving the house at night. But for the boys, those who engage in premarital sex are raised by a biological or adoptive father than those raised by a single mother.

Peer groups are known for increasing premarital sex. Friends influence behavior. When peers gather at one place at a time, there are high chances of changing behaviors. For instance, in public places like clubs. In most cases, boys do initiate sexual actions. Several boys engaging sex for the first time do it with casuals as compare to girls. This indicates that boys are the ones who engage in premarital sex more than girls (Hayes, 1987). They, later on, they introduce the act to their female friends. Since an adolescent, the youth are sexually active, and they cannot resist persons of the opposite sex hence engaging in premarital sex. Curfew laws help in restricting children in engaging in sexual behavior as they won’t be influenced by their peers that much.

Sexual behaviors among adolescents and the youth need to be strictly reviewed, as it is a significant concern for society. Premarital sex leads to HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted infections, early pregnancies, and sometimes death. Premarital sex is common among adolescents in the United States. Some parents are supportive of the behavior as they encourage the girls to use contraceptives as they think that preventing the young ones from doing engaging in sexual intercourse is impossible it is upon the parents to stop premarital sex, but some are encouraging it. As per the research Mollborn, 2011, on their girls, they revealed that high school students, who are their colleagues, engage in premarital sex, and they do not see it as a concerning matter but a regular thing. They go to the extent of aborting in case one got pregnant with the help of the parents.

Another girl said that she came from a conservative and religious family where they educated about sex and sexual matter, instilling fear of engaging in premarital sex, and getting pregnant (Mollborn, 2011). Upon reaching high school, the girl found out that all her peers were engaging in sex, which led her to do it under the cover. Most parents did not know that their children are sexually active and that they engage in premarital sex.

Another study was a boy who was taught by the brother at the risk of becoming a father at a tender age. The brother insisted he should use protection and should not allow emotions to overpower him. However, the boy kept on having sex with random girls.  At 17, the boy impregnated a girl unwillingly. The brother was so upset with him, and the peers started avoiding him. Many people are not comfortable with the messages the youth hear about sexuality and sex. That is why the rating systems in the United States restrict the youth from accessing sexual content on the media, but still, the youth are sexually active. Norms around teen sexuality are two, namely practical rational and moral rational. The youth, as mentioned above, engaged in sexual intercourse because the fellow it was shared around them, hence practical rationale. The practice rationale contradicts moral rationale, which states the sex before marriage is not right.

Curfew laws make little impact on the youth as most of them engage in sex way earlier before puberty under the care of their parents. Yet, they do not know that the kids are sexually active, restricting the youth would needless as they engage in sex while at school, which is the normal time. Social media is another source from which the youth adopt sexual behaviors. However, in the US, the youths re restricted from assessing sexual matters on social media, which is needless s they youth still engage in sexual intercourse. Therefore curfew laws have no positive impact on hindering premarital sex.

Technology makes it easier to monitor curfew cases. However, evaluating the impact of technology is not easy as there exist so many forms of programs. Apart from electronic monitoring, other forms used in monitoring Curfew are GPS monitoring, token verifiers, continuous signaling equipment; however, this type of technology will no longer be reliable due to evolving forms of technology (Hucklesby, 2013). In the past, there were two forms of technology which were applied to curfew. One was a machine used to place calls on the offender’s residence where the offender was to insert his/her wrist on a magnet watch was shaped like a keystone to verify his/her identity. Voice prints were used, too, of which an officer could listen to them later on.

There was the use of continuous signaling which acted like a radio transmitter which offender used to communicate with their families. In case a minor had been arrested for violating the curfew law, they can reach out to their parents. The Random calling, together with a continuous signal, is still used today. CS technology has advanced; they could follow up the offender’s movements if they move away from their homes to restricted places like a pub (Hucklesby, 2013). CS is convenient in examining the actions of the youths and monitoring if they get home before the curfew set time. They also consider alcohol in that they ensure that the minor does not use drugs. CS technology is applicable in violent cases where the offender is restricted from contacting the victim. This helps in ensuring that the victim is safe.

GPS cab also trach an offender. The GPS equipment is reliable and affordable, taking the place of the CS. The Gps can be used to restrict an offender from going to certain places lie drug corners. They also limit them from moving away from permitted areas. The GPS continues to evolve in that it can track an offender and send a signal to a modem (Hucklesby, 20130. The GPS is not applicable to all places hence needs a backup. GPS is the best way of monitoring minor movements during prohibited hours. Geotracking is also efficient in following minors.

There exist new monitoring tools in the market. These devices monitor any movement during sleep through the use of wrist-worn devices. They also monitor alcohol usage. The data is sent to a remote computer (Hucklesby, 2013). There are some other tools which measure eye muscle movements, popular responsiveness as well as writing tremors. They also measure substance abuse through sweat-patch testing. To determine levels of substance abused, microelectronic capsules are used. The above devices are vital in assessing the implementation of curfew laws.

References

Carr, J. B., & Doleac, J. L. (2018). Keep the kids inside? Juvenile curfews and urban gun violence. Review of Economics and Statistics, 100(4), 609-618.

Hayes, C. D. (1987). Risking the future: Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbearing (Vol. 1, No. 2).

Hucklesby, A. (2013). Electronically monitored curfews. Electronically monitored punishment: International and critical perspectives, 228.

Kline, P. (2010). The impact of juvenile curfew laws. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley. National Academies.

Mollborn, S. (2017). Mixed messages: Norms and social control around teen sex and pregnancy. Oxford University Press.

Wilson, D. B., Gill, C., Olaghere, A., & McClure, D. (2016). Juvenile curfew effects on criminal behavior and victimization: a systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 12(1), 1-97.