Keith Hobbs comes out of the gate quickly with the announcement that he will be pushing for a curfew for kids out past midnight. I am more than a little disappointed to hear this.
He argues that youth who are out will either be victims or accused. I would add "except those who aren't". Much like adults who are out at night will either be victims, or accused, or not. The Chronicle quotes him as saying that there is "no viable excuse, reasonable excuse" for youth to be on the streets at night. What viable excuse does an adult have to be out? What excuse more than "I want to be" should be necessary.
Thunder Bay has a crime problem, some of this crime is caused by youth. Restricting the movements of an entire demographic is a blunt tool to tackle this issue, like driving a nail with a bulldozer. It may be effective, but at what cost?
My formative years involved a lot of roaming the streets at all hours with my friends, talking, dreaming, and creating visions of the world we wanted to see happen. When the city sleeps there is an inspirational air, especially for kids.
At best, this will be a tool for police to shoo kids home who they see to be a problem. If someone is performing an illegal act, then let the police respond. If someone may potentially perform an illegal act, then we must as a society give them the benefit of the doubt. Demographic profiling is not an acceptable prevention strategy.
I strongly urge Mr. Hobbs to reconsider this strategy. I also encourage the rest of council to educate themselves on this issue before it comes to debate. Remember that many of those who are affected by this will be of voting age by the next municipal election, and this sort of insult will not be easily forgotten.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
+800x600+.jpg)
I think the issue is that there aren't MORE people out on the streets at night. Going out for walks, watching out for one another, feeling safe with having a community of people who look out for eachother, our city and our youth.
ReplyDeleteWhen I heard this proposal on the news this morning I immediately thought "this is absurd." So now the police will be dealing with potentially harmless children (calling their parents, hauling them down to the station) instead of being present when real crime is occurring. I keep hearing people mention about how "there used to be a curfew." I ask, "why did that ever stop if it was so effective?" There was obviously a reason that it no longer exists today. This needs to be explored significantly before putting in place this absolutely ridiculous proposal.
ReplyDeleteWith all do respect Jay, you have alot of good points but I still have to disagree. I don`t see it as a tool to shoo kids home so they won`t be a bother. I mean, let`s face it. Teenagers are not known for making the best decisions and nor should they be expected to be. I mean, it`s a fact that even the smartest of teenagers do not have a fully pruned brain. You can`t blame them for not making the best decisions at all times because they have not developed the capacity. That said, I would be more concerned about all the terrible things that could happen to them more than any teenage mischief they may get into.
ReplyDeleteOkay.... in a few words.... What is the difference between teens and adults roaming the streets? Brain capacity for making sensible decisions. Simple.
And how do they get better decision making skills? Through experience! Not from being locked away, coddled, or accused of being up to no good when they are merely exploring their world.
ReplyDeleteThe first reason I can think that it would have stopped is section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.