The truth of the matter is it does the opposite and needs to be banned. One reason why Curfew should be eliminated is it targets the wrong people. Experts have said that little criminal activity happens overnight which proves that most of the kids that are being kept inside are not looking to break any laws. In Ferguson and Baltimore police blamed teens for most of the problems but their logs showed that most
With this information it suggest that teenagers need to have a few less rules so they do not feel as if they are being suffocated to do the right thing. However, many adults don’t see the same as teenager and will more than likely keep their rules the same, uptight and strict, to make sure teenagers are kept in their place. Limitations on These Studies One major flaw in this project was. I was limited to only two high school art classes. If I were to have four or five different classes of thirteen teenagers each, I could have had a better perspective of what teenagers thought.
A major reason why the driving age should not be raised is that teenagers have to be responsible for themselves. Teenagers have responsibility to deal with matters like going to school or having a job, because their parents will not be free all the time to take them where ever they need to go. Teenagers also need to have some fun like going out with their friends, go to cinema or to coffee shops as
They are aware that these minors are protected by the law and could not be sent to jail. Existing juvenile laws are being taken advantage hence, child offenders keep on committing various crimes. However, they could not be sent to jail but must be turned-over to DSWD or their parents as mandated by law. On the other hand, UNICEF, social workers, psychologists, and human rights advocates to name a few, strongly oppose the lowering of minimum age. They believe that children in conflict with the law should neither be tried as adults nor punished but instead, should be rehabilitated.
Argumentative III - Teen Curfews A lot of talk has been going around about a teen curfew, mainly a teen curfew that restricts them to be out no later than ten P.M. or later depending on the area. Most are saying that it is unconstitutional and should not be supported because it takes away, teens under the age of eighteen, their rights; while others think that it will lower crime rates and create a safer place for growing teens. But are we really so sure of that? People will learn that giving teens a curfew of any time will not only be ignored, but also raise crime rates in the worse way. Whenever someone talks about teen curfews, or curfews in general, most would agree that they would be helpful and bost the community in the best way possible; but ignore all of the
“Starting immediately, your curfew is 9 pm.” Curfews have been implemented by parents in the past, and now the government is thinking of creating a nationwide curfew. Kids often view this as an unnecessary law, and it is. There should not be a legal curfew because it violates minors rights, waste police resources and are actually ineffective. There should not be a curfew because it disregards the basic rights of teenagers. The first and fourth amendment were both created to ensure that the freedom and privacy of American citizens was protected.
Children and teens should be able to access literature “free of restrictions” (70). Censors of young adult literature “fail to see” the similarities between their “desires to suppress information” about sexuality, violence, and religion and the “successful attempts by dictators to control their countries’ population” (70). Countries who have tried to implement censorship are practicing control over their citizens, which is why Canada should not suppress the population from any literature. If children are told they are not able to read books they are interested in or curious about they will be deterred from pursuing leisurely reading which limits their intellectual
Most of us will never have to experience the horrors of war like the author of slaughterhouse five had to. But that does not mean that we should not be informed and know the truth about what it is like. Since most people will never go to war we need to read books like slaughterhouse five to know what it 's truly like. Some people and school boards have tried to ban this book because they believe that it is inappropriate for young teens to read, Teens must be exposed to this kind of literature so that they will not be naive to the cruelty of war. Slaughterhouse Five does not hold back with the gory imagery, and that is partly the reason why it has been disputed.
Even though there are many people claims that banning smoking in the public will bring many benefits to the society, however, this statement is only up to a certain extent. In fact, there are many arguments that disagree with the legalisation of banning smoking in the public area. Banning smoking would infringe a person’s choice and right and affect the business and economy of a country. The government should not implement the smoking ban in the public it is because banning smoking is an act of infringing a person’s choice and right. The government should not regulate a person’s choice and right just because smoking is harmful.
Many politicians, including you, have vetoed the proposal to rid schools of soda and junk food and have decided instead to trust the schools in each state to “control” the sales. However, many parents, including myself, are adamant that no amount of money will be able to justify sacrificing the health of a child (especially if it is my own kid being exposed to harmful products). As a parent who is extremely interested and keen to be involved with problems and controversies about childhood obesity, I firmly argue for the point that a governor should do anything one can to pass laws for the state and for the people. You have