There is no need to go into detail about the staggering increase in legislation and the difficulty of police field work in every western country since the professionalization of politics, so let us merely apply it to this case.
Germany, in particular, has extensive curfews for teenagers.
If children stay locked away at home, the chance they will be stolen from, hit, stabbed, or kidnapped is zero percent — much in the way an indoor cat lives longer.
There is a serious point to be made here: we can reach ultimate security if we give up all of our liberties.
Besides, what would a child be doing out late at night?
And what is the problem with staying at home by around .Children and teenagers already have to follow an enormous set of rules that are not laws at all, generated by their guardians.Being under tutelage couldn’t be more arbitrary, since the rules change depending on the mood of their adult overseer — and they are often more restrictive than the law.Or to put it differently: the law, in this case, is simply unenforceable.Interestingly enough, we would not even want it to be, since we prefer that the police work to stop actual violent crime (murders, rapes, and the like) rather than chase little Timmy because he stayed out until a.m.What applies to the debate about mass surveillance also holds true when it comes to curfews. We should strive to teach our children the values of freedom — that doing whatever we want while not hurting anyone else is liberating, that taking responsibility for our actions is a virtue, and that dealing with these responsibilities is part of growing up.What we shouldn’t do is give teenagers another set of tutors — in this case, politicians.The policy of having trained police officers catch teenagers at night to establish their age (since few teenagers make a habit of carrying identification around) and then press charges ultimately makes as much sense as taking the time to establish who threw over whose sandcastle first.The first records we have of state curfews are those imposed by the royal authorities in Europe during the 9th century.But more importantly, there is a larger point between the history of the curfew as protection from a fire hazard and authoritarian restrictions for political goals: power prevails.Proponents of curfews argue they protect teenagers from potential dangers, and that argument is ultimately true.