Chicago Mayor, Daley, Wants Earlier Curfew for Teens

For many, enforcing the newest curfew laws will be hard, but the benefits far outweigh the grumbles that might be heard.

Featured in an article by Chicago Sun-Times on January 8^th, 2008, Chicago's Mayor, Richard M. Daley has decided to pull back mandatory curfew by 30 minutes. Of course this all has to be approved by the Aldermen, but I don't doubt that it will be passed.

For those who don't know what the curfew entails it is simply that children under the age of 17 have to be off the Chicago streets by 10pm on weekdays and 11pm on weekends. This new rollback is proposed by the Mayor to quote "stop the epidemic of youth violence." The Mayor hopes to "prevent any more occurrences of what happened in 2007, when 24 Chicago Public School students were gunned down. And, unfortunately, although the homicide rate in Chicago is at a 40-year low, too many of the 442 murder victims last year were young people."

At one point in the article, the Mayor is quoted as saying that by 8 or 9pm, kids have been out more than half of the evening and should be thinking about getting home. I wholeheartedly agree. And I also agree with the Mayor when he said that cutting back the curfew could save many lives. Kids shouldn't be out on the streets after dark. It's more dangerous for them, just as much as for adults. Especially in some of the more violent prone or gang ridden areas of the City.

Personally, if I was a parent who had to work 2^nd shift, I would breathe easier knowing that my children were safely inside well before curfew. Not all parents are home to enforce the curfew with their own children, and that's what makes it hard for some to control the things that their older children do. Especially since, the laws, when enforced, penalize the parents if the child is out past curfew and commits a crime. And as my husband pointed out, kids that cause trouble, won't care that it's going to cost their parents money. They'll just do it again.

But, hopefully, these kids are in the minority. Most of the young people surveyed indicated that they agreed with the curfew and tend to be inside well before the specified times. They feel that if this will keep them safe from gangs and fights, then so be it. All too many have been victims of violence or know someone that was killed by street violence.

Of course, there are exemptions to the curfew. The following exemptions were listed in the article:

Accompanied by parent or guardian.

On an errand at the direction of a parent or guardian "without detour or stop."

In a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel.

Engaged in an "employment activity" or going to or from work "without detour or stop."

Involved in an emergency.

On the sidewalk "abutting the minor's residence or abutting the residence of a next-door neighbor if the neighbor did not complain" to police about the minor's presence.

Attending or going to and from an "official school, religious or other recreational activity supervised by adults and sponsored by the city, a civic organization or similar entity" that assumes responsibility for the minor.

Exercising First Amendment rights.

Married or had been married or are considered an emancipated minor under the Emancipation of Mature Minors Act.

My final opinion is this, even though I don't live in the City of Chicago, I have friends that do, and I think changing the rules is a good thing. If it will keep the kids safe and help cut down on the violence, so be it. I think that penalizing the parents might go too far, but I have to wonder if the kids couldn't be forced to make compensation for breaking curfew. Community Service, Jail Time if a crime is committed, etc. Just my thoughts.

Source: http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/730805,curfew010808.article