Are mandatory curfews really needed?
963749
What perspective are you speaking from? A government curfew or a parental curfew? \n\nGovernment curfew -- completely unnecessary. It is not hte govts job to raise children OR tell us, law-abiding citizens when we can and cannot leave the house (except in VERY VERY rare circumstances such as war or natural disaster). \n\nParental curfew -- completely necessary. Teaches boundaries and limits as well as consequences for breaking both. Teens need to be inside, in bed at a reasonable hour in order to get homework done and be fully prepared for school and activities the next day. Any parent that does not impose a curfew should not be a parent.
724665
No.  That's not necessary.  All we really need to do is be kind & treat each other with respect.  That's not dependent on anything else.
697560
Bad, kids need to be home and not out getting in trouble or getting pregnant resulting in aboritons.
414605
Yes. There's no discipline in schools or at home, or to authorities (compared to other countries), there's almost too /much/ free speech (people suing everyone over the tiniest things), and too much blaming. Especially parents. Parents that always blame the government, school, media, etc. even though it's they're own fault they can't take care of their own kids.
388937
Yep.  Since when do you live in a totally safe neighborhood without sickos, drugged out thieves, etc....?  And do you _REALLY_ think there's going to be police outside your door 24 hours a day when you need them?\n\nIf you're so rich you can afford 24-hour-a-day personal bodyguards and private security, the above does not apply to you.  Otherwise carry your own protection.
127441
There is no state law that I know of, at least not one that is enforced. Municipalities may have a curfew law; you would need to check each town individually.
901506
this is a very good question seeing as our criminals are getting younger and younger. i think that parents should be held responsible as a lot of them dont even know where they are half the time! but fines would be no good they would have to do some public service of some kind. it would improve parenting skills i think as they would do their damn best to make sure their kids behaved. discipline and morals are not present today as they used to be because like the police, parents rights have all been taken away and the kids know they have the upper hand, and can abuse the system and get away with it
706612
I think first you should get it right and say Laws since they are Laws not just Policies. The fact that they are laws yes they should be enforced. Laws are made to be enforced whether good or bad and to allow people to break them makes a mockery out of the entire legal system. If we don't enforce laws designed to make us a soveriegn nation and keep us safe in general then why should we enforce any laws?
955115
I would say, yes, as it gets darker earlier so more cover for ilegal activity whether it be burglary or mugging or any other crime. And for the same reason that some have posted about people being up later in summer I would sugest this being a reason for criminal activity to fall. too many people around to make crime undetected. In winter people will be more likely to be off the streets cosy indoors huddled around the tv. Less witnesses on the street and burgalers can nip into houses that are unlit as it's fairly certain nobody is in.\n\nCan't do that at 8pm in the summer as no-one has their lights on anyway. How would they tell if someone was in or not.
308745
Legal and mandatory in most.
1034935
Ideally yes, \nIdeally there should be lots of mandatory things...\n\nbut realistically there are many factors to consider, age of person, disability, actual time within the country.\n\nFor example would you require a mute to speak. Or teach english to a 89 year old. Should immgrants speak english at the 8th grade level. most american speak at this level.\n\nWill they speak the KINGS ENGLish, because you know in america, we speak a form of english. Will we from a new buracracy to purify the English/American Language.\n\n\nRealistically if i am a company or service, i would rather be effective and efficient by providing other languages than be xenophobic.\nFor example if sell medicine in other countries besides the US i would use the other languages on my labels...makes good business sense.\n\nWe provide benefits to many people that do not speak English because we are not monsters, if a child was dying you would save that life without asking if they spoke English....you wouldn't let a human life die because of it even you are not a monster.\n\nBesides, your question is full of anger and bias. What you fail to point out is that most of the quality universities int the Untied States require a foreign language.\n\nIn fact many school districts require foreign language to graduate. There is a definite value in multiculturalism.\n\nAs a college educated person you must see that...\n\n\n\n\nBy the way the US is planning to build a superhighway four football fields long from Canada to Mexico.\nThey plan to implement one currency to easy trade, \nand plan to make English, Spanish and French the official languages.....maybe not today or tomorrow  but soon....i am not making this up.
1152053
I didn't see any specific curfew law. However, Alameda does have the following muni code:\n\n4-28.4 Roaming or Loitering on Streets, Sidewalks, and Other Public Places.\n\nNo person shall roam or loiter about the streets of the City between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 4:00 a.m. without having lawful business upon the streets at that time; nor shall any person, at any time, loiter on the public streets, public places or any place open to the public, stand, sit or lie upon any street, sidewalk or crosswalk in the City in such manner as to interfere with the free and unmolested passage of persons or vehicles passing over, along or across same. (Ord. No. 535 N.S. § 18-615; Ord. No. 1315 N.S.)\n\n\nThis seems to be in direct violation of I believe 647G (loitering) which was struck down by the California Supreme Court in the 1970's.
611661
A judicial system is mandatory for a society to function well.\n\nIn the past, in times where there wasnt a justice system, people solved their problems with the Eye for an Eye method.This created chaos.\n\nJustice came as a way to establish harmony and peace in peoples lives.\n\nImagine a world without a judicial system, there will be no rules, People could just take your stuff and you wouldnt be able to complain, we would have no rights.\nThere will be fear and chaos.
385330
Here's one idea. You could argue about the crime rate in your community (assuming that you have crime in your community).I just know that crime is a big issue. For instance, you could argue about needing a larger police force or something. If you don't have a large crime rate in your community, then argue about better schools, or better garbage collection, or more sanitary restaurants. The possibilities are endless.
817623
It depends on the rules. Rules like one person is only willing to go so far should be enforced and respected. But rules like you can't talk to girlsw or she can't talk to boys, or setting a curfew are ridiculous and should not exist.
505644
i don't think they're really necessary, but if they're left off during the day, and only used at, say lunch and after class, i don't see any problem. But i know that people will abuse that privellege (sp?) no matter what.
510076
dude, you're looking at it the wrong way. it has more to do with your age, and what time the curfew is. the fact that you're asking a question like this might just prove that you're not ready to have a later curfew. \n\nnow, if she's telling you that you need to be asleep by 8:00 and you're 17, thats not cool. if you're 13 and she wants you to be home by 8:00 and in bed by 11:00, seems to me that she's not out of line.