Cop out
Today's Record brings word that our neighbors in Hackensack are considering adopting a citywide juvenile curfew. The ordinance, proposed by residents, would prohibit youngsters from moving about freely after 10 pm, and might even impose penalties upon parents whose children are stopped by police after curfew. In the words of one community leader who supports the proposal:"I don't think curfew laws seek to make the lives of young people and their parents miserable," said the Rev. Brian Laffler, a minister at St. Anthony of Padua, an Episcopal Church in Hackensack. "At 10 o'clock at night a kid should be home, especially during school time."
Laffler said having a curfew will also keep youngsters safe.
"Our other concern is if there are other influences in the neighborhood, it has to be bad for the kids," he said. "We want to protect homeowners and citizens and also provide protection for young kids."
The intentions of the proposal seem innocent enough. Adults are showing their concern for the safety and wellbeing of children. One could even envision support for a similar proposal in Teaneck, especially in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Ricky Lee Smith Jr. last month.
The consequences of imposing a curfew on our youth, however, are nearly intolerable. The abrogation of individual liberties, even those of minors, is not a small thing. Do we really need restrictive laws that send the message that we do not trust young people to act as responsible members of society? Furthermore, is it really the case that curfews are put in for the benefit of the youth, or are they a license to abdicate parental and communal responsibility, to drop our own problems into the lap of local law enforcement?
There are many ways to address the problems of wayward youth wandering the streets and making mischief (or worse) at night. Expand recreational opportunities, improve lighting, encourage greater parental involvement, or step up neighborhood watch or police patrols to catch actual wrongdoing. But don't implement harsh measures that impact an entire age group to cover up the failures of another.
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 8:13 AM
7 Comments:
Fundamental rights should only be abrogated in the most exigent of circumstances. While rationalizations for a curfew are easy to devise, we must first ask ourselves if we have exhausted the alternatives before taking such a step.
As our blogmeister pointed out, these steps could include efforts to "Expand recreational opportunities, improve lighting, encourage greater parental involvement, or step up neighborhood watch or police patrols to catch actual wrongdoing."
Specific plans to address these issues have been developed, based on extensive community participation and surveys completed by several hundred high school-aged students in Teaneck. These recommendations lay dormant waiting to be implemented to address many of the issues that Teaneck must face in trying to point our teens in a positive direction.
Just a few years ago, hundreds of Teaneck residents worked together as part of the Teaneck Community Project (the "Visioning Process"). After months of analysis, we collectively identified six major issues of focus that needed to be addressed: Taxes, Economic Development, Community Relations, Government, Education and Youth. The name of the task force chosen by its members to address teen issues -- Community-Based Programs for Youth -- speaks directly to the issues identified back then. The solutions that the group proposed, address the four specific problems the group identified at the time and the tragic circumstances we are forced to deal with today.
The problems the Youth task force identified start out straightforwardly enough with 1) The lack of a "centralized township sponsored youth development organization or department to coordinate and develop youth activities...", and 2) the lack of coordination and community awareness of existing programs.
It is most disturbing to read the tragically prophetic warnings of problems 3) "There is not enough parental/adult active participation in youth programs and activities and la [sic] lack of awareness by many of the adults of issues affecting the youth such as drug abuse, youth gangs and violence.", and 4) "Lack of information about available and adequate facilities that are, supervised and safe and that offer or can be use [sic] to do activities for the youth to gather after school and on weekends."
While it is impossible to say that the proposed solutions proffered by the Community-Based Programs for Youth task force would have averted a tragedy, it is clear that the group's recommendations speak directly to the issues that Teaneck faces for our youth.
It's time to take these proposals -- the result of thousands of hours of effort invested by hundreds of volunteers -- and start the hard work of reviewing the final report of the Teaneck Community Project and implementing its recommendations for the benefit of our youth and the entire Teaneck community.
Alan Sohn
I don't Teaneck to take over management of my children. Ascribing the need of any segment of the population is at best paternalistic and at worst discriminatory. Teaneck Blog and Alan Sohn, right on!
Can one of you please expalin to me then sinc you are against a curfew in Teaneck why teenagers are hanging out on local streets between 12am-4am.
Are there ANY activities in the Township going on at these hours that warrent a minor child being out at these hours of the morning??
I for one am all for a Curfew...lets keep the riff-raff off the streets and make the parents accountable to the neighbors, police etc. for WHY their kids are out at these hours!
As a side note is there any reason outside of a religious activity or work that a minor child needs to wander the streets of Teaneck after 11pm??
Is there any reason an adult needs to be out during those hours, save for the exceptions you mentioned? Why not restrict all movement after a certain hour?! Adults commit crimes too. The presumption that anyone below a certain age who is out and about at night is engaged in anti-social or criminal behavior is an offensive one. One of the consequences of living in a free and open society that preserves individual liberties is that people have more latitude to do harm to others if they are so inclined. That is a reasonable price to pay to protect human rights and dignity, and those values should only be sacrificed in extreme circumstances.
Alan Sohn said...
Just a few years ago, hundreds of Teaneck residents worked together as part of the Teaneck Community Project (the "Visioning Process").
...
It's time to take these proposals -- the result of thousands of hours of effort invested by hundreds of volunteers -- and start the hard work of reviewing the final report of the Teaneck Community Project and implementing its recommendations for the benefit of our youth and the entire Teaneck community.
Don't hold your breath.
I agree with Teaneck Blog that a curfew would be intrusive.
Nothing beats parental supervision and oversight although admittedly in some families, supervision and oversight is lax.
People in the community can do their part to take up the slack. If you see a group of teens hanging out late at night with no apparent adult supervision, it couldn't hurt to let the police know. Likewise, of someone is having a party that appears suspicious in any way - too much noise, large crowds, visible inebriation, lack of adult supervision - call the police.
Post a Comment
<< Home