In Penetanguishene, the law now says that anyone under 16 out after 12am will be taken home.
This was on VR News tonight, the reasons they listed--a skate park had been graffitied and a park bench was slightly burned in a fire. These all seem a little light to me, I guess to a town of less than 9000 people, it's very severe, but is that an excuse to defy the Constitutional rights of Canadians?
I have so many problems with this, I don't know where to begin. I think I'll start with the Charter, section 15. (1) "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." I'd like to stress on equal protection and equal benefit without discrimination based on age. What is this? It's discriminating based on age. Penetanguishene has introduced a law targeted at a group of people, without taking in any individual merit (more on this later), and using age as the target point. We all have to remember that just because someone is a minor, it does not give the right for the government to abuse them. Unless it can be proven that all people in Penetanguishene under 16 out after 12am are committing a crime or are planning to commit a crime, this law is unconstitutional.
This law infringes on section 2. c) by depriving the right to peaceful assembly as the police will not take into account what the people are doing and will take home anyone and everyone fitting the [already deemed unconstitutional] preset criteria. It infringes on section 7., it deprives liberty of these people to not give them the choice, and the reasons do not affect the principles of fundamental justice at all.
So, what does the local Ontario Provincial Police have to say about enforcing an unconstitutional curfew? "It's not a curfew". According to the OPP, they are not introducing any new law, simply enforcing an already passed law (regrettably I can neither remember which jurisdiction it was under or what it was called, something about Youth and Family Services).
A good question is what's the point of fighting this, Burlington has curfew bylaws and I don't say anything about them. Well it's simple, Burlington's curfew is there in case it has to be used, like a police officer's sidearm, they don't go around shooting everyone for anything, but should the rare occurrence that they need it, it's there.
Separate Opinions: in the dissenting opinion, the minority argued that the ruling of the majority opens up a Pandora’s Box. Arguing that the ruling would encourage offenders to flee and, consequently, put more innocent bystanders at risk. In addition to this separate opinion by the dissent, several other key arguments by the dissent are bulleted
One of the Legal Rights the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects is: The right to be free of imprisonment, search, and seizure without reasons backed by the law. “In a undisclosed school in Canada, there was a sudden police checking, in which police dogs roamed around the hallway of the school to see if there was any suspicious substance or object. During the checking, the police fo...
In this case I leaned towards a strict interpretation of the laws because I believe that freedom of assembly is an important right. As said before, every American should have equal rights but the person in charge, like the guardian of a minor, should be the one to restrict these
The federal and provincial government’s bona fide ability to implement bounds on the rights and freedoms enjoyed by the Citizens of this great nation is an absolute necessity. The confines permitted by the ‘reasonable limits clause,’ ‘notwithstanding clause’ and the need for increased powers in extreme circumstances demonstrate society’s inherent need for confines to prevent disorder and mayhem. If the governments were unable to invoke restraints, chaos and anarchy would prevail. However, the need to ensure that the limitations do not unreasonably infringe of rights and freedoms of Canadians is equally important. If governments began to continuously and unreasonably infringe the rights and freedoms, individual Canadians would become a communist state such as North Korea.
The reason why the system is like this is because they want to prevent who commit crimes whether the age difference from youth to an adult matter. Just like they stated on the video a crime is a crime no matter what way you put once a crime is committed it’s done. I believe that this situation exist because there’s so many young people who commit crimes. This is also an issue today because like they say in the video age is just a number and a crime should just be charged as a crime and like Ed Jagels Points out there putting these kid away because they will just prevent them from committing another crime and or simply just protecting the community by putting them away. I work with people with disability and I feel like this gives me a good example to share one of my clients that I work with he grew up and was manipulated by mid mother because his mother told him that it was okay to steal just likes Alonza got manipulated by someone. my client grow up and constantly Speaking to steal and this is why there should be some type of a valuation to see if the youth should even be put into prison or being charged as an adult. I think that other people that suffer from trop 21 should have the family’s match and petition the court system. I think what we need to do is have a better law system that Separates adults from teens because clearly it’s not safe and I
On Friday morning, October 2, 2015, Two teens invaded a home in Des Moines around 4:30 am. People living in the home say someone busted down the front door and ransacked the home. One person received minor injuries. The Des Moines police officers took two males into custody, one of them is 17 years old. They’re still looking for one more person in connection with the incident (WHO-HD). This invasion was able to happen due to the lack of curfew law in the city of Des Moines. Although, curfews are applied in several Iowa cities including Bettendorf, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Iowa City, Sioux City, Waterloo, and Indianola. Likewise, the city of Des Moines should apply the curfew law from 10 pm to 5 am for teenagers who are 17 years old and under.
A curfew not only limits a teen’s ability to gain real-world experience, but also erodes a family relationship. Obviously enough a curfew directed towards many teens in one state seems too broad and the state needs to rethink their choice. These laws are just like saying the state government has complete authority to control the teens living in that state. Another fact is that a curfew only solves the problem to a certain extent - it will fail eventually. The crimes and bad actions that happen at night will decrease, but they will increase in the day. Granted that a curfew can protect teens at night who is to say it will in the day? Understanding how teens operate is one way of understanding how to better keep them from getting in trouble. Rather than just putting the tape on the cracks, put cement and see how long it will last.
Supreme Court made it significantly easier for police to conduct a warrantless search of a home when one of the two occupant’s objects to a police search but the other does not (Richey N.P.). If one of them objects it means they just don’t want them searching or they have something to hide from them. The question in the case, Fernandez V California (12-7822), was whether the girlfriend’s agreement to allow the police to search the apartment overcame Fernandez's fourth amendment right to be free from such police intrusions without a warrant (Richey N.P.). There were 2 occupants and one of them agreed to the search while the other didn’t and they were deciding if the girl’s decision was more important than a man’s fourth amendment right. In the case Fernandez was refusing to let the law enforcers in his door while his girlfriend said it was ok. Fernandez is a suspect already and his girlfriend doesn’t know so she agrees to let them search. The Supreme Court told the law enforcers that they had to honor the decision of Fernandez when he was physically present at the location to be searched. Since Fernandez was physically present, the police had to respect his wishes. The decision significantly narrows a 2006 high court decision in which the justices ruled that police could not search a residence when one of the two occupants objects to such a search (Richey
When the juvenile violates the curfew law then there could be severe consequence. So of which are fines, which increase for every time they are caught violating the curfew. They could also be subject to being forced to do community service or ...
According to Maya Cepeda (2016), congresmans wants to revert the age limit of imprisonment from 15 years old to 9 years old. Without lowering the age limit, youth offenders will continuously commit crimes knowing they can get away from it. And since minors cannot be imprisoned at an early age, the become the primary instruments of syndicates and gangs to commit and execute illegal transactions easily. Furthermore, crimes by the youths are not only seen through face to face actions but also through online.
There has been talk about how they are going to make kids under the age of 17 have a curfew at 9:00 PM. Although I understand that kids in high school should have a curfew, but I disagree with some of the conditions of this. First, teenage years is the time they develop responsibility, therefore they need some freedom to develop this on their own . Second, I also believe that parents should be able to decide on what time their kid needs to be home since they know if their child is responsible or not. Third, I find it funny that at the age of sixteen you are deemed responsible enough to drive and have a job, but why is it that at that age you are not responsible enough to stay out past 9:00 PM.
A couple of reasons that the curfews started to be enforced was to decrease crime rates and to try to keep them out of harms way and keep teens safe. The fact is that all curfews do is put teens in harms way.
Teenagers should not have curfews set by the cities. People have been talking about this topic since 1976 in Detroit. Some cities have put a curfew in place and they have kept it or they have taken it away. The majority of cities with curfews have taken away the curfew because they did not work. Somebody can really decide if curfews for teenagers are good or not, there are pros and cons. People have found that there are more cons than pros, which drives teenagers to challenge their parents.
The purpose of this paper is to examine juvenile curfew. Curfews have been in place for many years. In the 1700s, curfew was put in place for slaves and workers. Now, since the 1990s, juvenile curfew has become a popular policy across the nation in hopes that it will reduce crime while also protecting the welfare of a minor. Though that may be the sole purpose, there have been critiques about the implementation of juvenile curfew. Some may say that it creates a safer community while others may conclude that it is biased and does not work. First, this paper will provide some of the reasons in which curfew is being used. Second, some of the consequences that come along with juvenile curfew will be stated. Then, the various forms of the curfew
Students need to be supervised after a specific time of night. This isn’t because they will do something disruptive, but they might run into trouble and not know how to react. Stated in an article by Ebscohost, “Hundreds of U.S. cities have laws of curfew that apply to kids 17 and younger, and with that crimes and deaths have went down significantly over the last couple of years”. This valid fact supports the opposition that curfew is over all a good idea for students and parents. If more cities could recognize this now the world can be a safer place. In another example while being in darkness you are more vulnerable to get hurt. You cannot see as easily as you would if you were in light thus making it easier to hurt you. While being inside in a well-lit room or sleeping, you are guaranteed to be much more safer than being outside. Students shouldn’t even be out that late; there is no need to be. All stores are closed, no one is outside, and you are just waiting for trouble to strike.