Some countries are considering imposing curfews in which teenagers will not be allowed outdoors at night unless they are accompanied by an adult. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this policy?
Many nations are proposing
to impose a restriction on the unaccompanied outdoor movement of adolescents
after dark. This proposal has divided the opinions – one that agrees with the
idea, and the other that does not, as both sections carry their own convictions
behind their rationale.
A lobby is of the opinion
that countries must execute such curfews because several instances have been
reported and recorded where youngsters are caught red handed while indulging
themselves in unlawful acts: robbery, ruining national and personal properties
and even riots. Late evenings prove to be a leverage for youth to undertake
such activities; thus, it becomes imperative for societies to implement
policies that can restrict the prevalence of any crime and safeguard the future
of their youth. This move has proven to be quite fruitful in cities like
Bristol where such constraints have helped curb antisocial acts involving teens
that usually took place at night.
Nevertheless, the critics
of this ideology do feel that such policies will prove to be an additional
burden for every individual and stakeholders of a society, as such setting
demands for more security personnel and funds to make it operational,
eventually imposing an additional liability on taxpayers. Additionally, such an
arrangement will render a sense of fear and terror among people and have a
detrimental impact on young minds. Also, people will be under pressure to
complete their daily activities before dusk, so that the parents can be at home
to escort youngsters, in case the latter desire to be outdoors.
Overall, I reject the
notion of imposing curfews for teenagers at night, as this will hamper their
liberty and create an environment of fear for both - parents and children
without ensuring any positive outcome.
