MIM Notes 166        July 15, 1998

Curfew Laws proven bogus in fighting youth crime

by RC35

Contrary to popular justice system opinion, a recent 
study put out by the Justice Policy Institute shows that 
youth curfews do not solve the supposed problems of 
youth violence and crime. The only correlations found 
were that curfews had no effect on crime, or that 
curfews actually accompanied an increase in youth crime. 
Also, the government has never done a study on the 
usefulness of curfews in fighting crime.(1) This exposes 
the hypocrisy in the stated successes of juvenile 
"crime" fighting, and the usual empty rhetoric the U$ 
uses to support any of its anti-masses programs. Like 
the war on drugs, MIM has exposed that any power given 
to the pigs to "reduce crime" is really an excuse to 
crack down on potentially revolutionary forces. MIM 
believes youth in general, and oppressed nation youth in 
particular, are among the most revolutionary because of 
the short-term outlook of capitalism, environmental 
destruction and patriarchal oppression.(2)

Curfew History

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention (OJJDP) says that curfews were applied 
initially to immigrant youth, to meet the "need for more 
stringent efforts at social control." OJJDP also said 
that, "during World War II, curfews were perceived as an 
effective control for parents who were busy helping with 
the war effort. More recent interest in juvenile curfew 
ordinances came as a response to growing juvenile crime 
during the 1970's."(3) It is important to note that 
during the early part of the century, most immigrants 
were proletarian, with many actively organizing left-
wing groups, and that the 1960s and 1970s marked one of 
the highest rates of student and youth anti-imperialist 
activism the U$ has ever seen. Those they reasons they 
need for "social control" programs like juvenile 
curfews.

The JPI study shows that in a minority of today's cases 
are oppressed nation youth singled out for curfew 
violations, but that in four major counties, including 
Los Angeles, oppressed nation youth were arrested 2-8 
times more for curfew violations then whites. The 
injustice system has an overall practice of 
disproportionately attacking oppressed nationals. From 
1985-88, white youth incarceration decreased 2% while 
black youth were placed in detention centers 269% more 
often.(4) In 1992, while only 15% of the youth 
population was Black, Black youth arrests were 27% of 
the overall youth arrest total. Whites were 80% of the 
population but only 70% of all arrests.(5) In 1991, 43% 
of all youth in detention centers were Black, and it was 
estimated in one state that 1-in-13 Black males under 
the age of 18 would be put in a detention center, 
whereas only 1-in-64 white males would be.(6) In all 
probability, white nation youth are most likely given a 
"watch your butt" warning with curfew violations, 
whereas oppressed nation youth get criminal arrests. 
Overall, curfews, and the injustice system in general, 
are a method of social control aimed at deterring youth, 
especially oppressed nation youth, from organizing 
themselves against the system that works against their 
material interests.

Today, the curfew laws' main stated objective is to keep 
youth in school. The average law "restricts minors to 
their homes or property between the hours of 11 p.m. and 
6 a.m., [and at school during school hours, with] 
exemptions for youth who are going to or from a school-, 
religious-, or civic-sponsored event, ... traveling from 
places of employment or responding to emergencies [and] 
allow unrestricted mobility for youth who are married, 
accompanied by an adult, or traveling with a parent's 
permission."(3) In essence, if youth are doing only what 
is acceptable as status quo Amerikan, and/or accompanied 
by someone who agrees with the status quo (parents), and 
agree to house arrest between designated times, then no 
crime is being committed. If youth rightfully think 
bourgeois education is a waste of time,(7) and/or decide 
to organize against imperialist oppression (a non-civic 
event), then they face possible grounds for arrest. 

Juvenile law = paternalism 

In 1996 President Klinton endorsed national curfews as a 
"'means of fighting teen crime' that would 'protect 
youth from the dangerous world out there.'"(8) MIM 
doesn't think that chronological age determines a 
person's competence. If compared internationally, youth 
in Third World countries are taking active roles in 
changing their societies and value is not based on a 
magic number called adulthood. The patronizing idea that 
youth need protection is derived from the same 
ideological practice that made the world dangerous for 
youth in the first place, imperialist patriarchy. 

Because of Amerikan economics and society, youth are not 
valuable tools for the growth of society. Their only 
value is as future heirs (whites) and paper-pushers, and 
future cheap labor (oppressed nationals)(9). In efforts 
to hide this truth, the patriarchal sympathizers uphold 
that "law presumes that juveniles' concepts of right and 
wrong are not fully developed, that juveniles are 
generally more impulsive than adults, and are more 
subject to negative influences."(10) In materialist 
terms, the idea is that youth have not yet bought into 
imperialist ideology. So when youth say, "serving in 
imperialist wars is bad," the pig reaction is that youth 
haven't yet figured out right and wrong. 

Curfews aren't a legal issue

Many youth advocates have claimed that laws like curfews 
violate constitutional rights. Namely youth are assumed 
guilty until proven innocent, 4th Amendment probable 
cause is not required, 9th Amendment rights for 
parenting are violated, equal protection isn't applied, 
local curfews pre-empt state laws, the laws are vague, 
therefore unconstitutional, and any constitutional 
violation needs compelling governmental support.(11) 
However, much like the paternal excuse used for youth 
protection, the legal system replies with a 1975 case 
that says the constitutional violations are only minimal 
infringements and "protect immature minors."(12) The 
standard for immature and minimal is set by the white 
nation legal system, and with the fact that juvenile 
laws (curfews included) are most often passed by citizen 
vote, the voice of youth, and especially oppressed 
nationals, is completely silenced.

The answer to an overly stated rise in youth crime is 
not more pig power. The facts that need to be faced are 
not the alleged rise in youth crime, but an increase in 
the criminalization of youth activity, especially 
radical organizing (starting with standing together on 
street corners). The problems faced by youth are not 
whether or not they are getting enough protection, but 
the fact that the imperialist society they are born into 
is on a fast track to destruction. The failure of curfew 
laws is just one aspect of exposing U$ lies told to 
perpetuate imperialist social control. The real answer 
to ending youth oppression is proletarian leadership, 
organizing, and revolution.

Notes:
1. "The Impact of Juvenile Curfew Laws in California," 
by Dan Macallair and Mike Males, Justice Policy 
Institute, http://www.cjcj.org/curfew.html. Although the 
research was from California statistics, the results can 
be applied to the U$ as a whole because of California's 
representative populace, high curfew law use, and the 
researchers' thoroughness in comparisons.
2. MIM Theory 4, "The Principle Contradiction," p. 52.
3. "Juvenile Just ice reform initiative in the states 
94-95," Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention, 
http://www.ncjrs.org/ojjdp/reform/ch2_c.html.
4. MIM Theory 11, p. 60. "Amerikkkan Lockdown Index." 
http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/ulk/amlock.html.
5. National Criminal Justice Reference Services: 
Juvenile Justice -- 1992 Juvenile Arrests -- FBI Uniform 
Crime Report Data. http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/fs-
9413.txt.
6. "Disproportionate Minority Confinement," OJJDP paper, 
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/fs-9411.txt.
7. See MIM Theory 13, "Culture in Revolution," for more 
on imperialist education.
8. NRA CrimeStrike June 6, 1996,  "REVOLUTION: The End 
of OJJDP's 20-year Reign?"
9. MIM Theory 2/3, "The oppression of children under 
patriarchy."
10. "Young People and the Law," Jan Rayburn, Houston 
Police Department, 
http://www.ci.houston.tx.us/departme/police/juvenile/leg
al.htm
11. National Home School Legal Defense Association, 
National Center Resourse Library, "Daytime Curfews: 
Guilty Until Proven Innocent" 
http://www.hslda.org/nationalcenter/library/resources/00
023.html
12. OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, "Curfew: An Answer 
to Juvenile Delinquency and Victimization?" 
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/curfew.txt.