There should be curfew laws for juveniles

1. ""All the studies on curfews show they do not reduce or prevent crime,"victimization,"protect kids or make the kids and the community safer. " That is false. For example, this study shows that "being subject to a curfew reduces the number of violent and property crimes committed by juveniles below the curfew age by approximately 10% in the year after enactment, with the effects intensifying substantially in subsequent years for violent crimes." http://emlab.berkeley.edu... The effectiveness of curfews applies elsewhere in the world as well. For instance, on the first night curfews were imposed for the 2005 French riot, only 617 cars burned in all of France during the night. That is 400 cars less than the night before. 2."People have no business telling kids when they are not allowed to be out in public, unless they are the parent of that kid. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean you have the right to intervene. " If you see domestic violence, should you intervene? If you see parents raising their children in a non-ideal way, you should be intervening. Yes parents should raise their children however they want, but within limits that were set to help better develop the child. 3. "It is often argued that everything can be done during the day. This is true, but is not a sufficient reason to restrict the activity. That is just like banning grocery shopping after 6:00 PM just because it can be done during other times of the day." If the activity is harmless, like grocery shopping, then of course it can be done 24 hours a day. But the point is that at night there are less people for that's when people sleep. Criminal acts are easier done when they are unnoticed. And there is almost nothing open at night anyways. So if there's no curfew then more crimes would go unnoticed and not get caught. It's more important to mitigate a crime-encouraging environment. 4. "It is often argued that teens have no business outside at midnight. What they do is none of your business unless what they are doing affects you or they are committing a crime." Juveniles' brains are not fully developed yet. Their amygdala is still developing so they cannot sense danger the way adults do. This is why it's important to protect them for they cannot make decisions like the adults. They are also more vulnerable for they are juvenile. Especially when it's a night it's dark so it's easier to get into stuff like car accidents. So just because they are not affecting you or committing a crime doesn't mean it's none of your business. You cannot treat them as if they are adults since they are not. Moreover, it is not just protection, but teens are really supposed to be sleeping at midnight because of school. Lack of sleep will affect school performance. It's for their own good. 5 and 6 are kind of similar so I'll write it together. Like giving tickets to cars parked in the wrong spot, some laws are set not to catch criminals and violent crimes, but because in the long term it improves the society reduces chaos in the long run. This is the same thing for curfews (refer to study in point 1). And thus it is not counter-productive. If parents enforce this with the kids, it shouldn't require much police resource anyways. If parents need a police phone-call to know that their children are not at home, then they are obviously not doing a good job keeping an eye on their own children and guiding them. Ultimately, disciplining children should be the parent's job. Only when parents fail does the police have to step in and perhaps give them a wake-up call on how they are not doing their job as a parent.