The money was originally intended to relieve overcrowded prison conditions, some inmates received multiple spider bites from having to sleep on the floor due to lack of space, according to a Sept. 20 article in the San Francisco Chronicle. While child safety is important, current prison conditions may be considered cruel or unusual punishment under the eighth amendment. It seems ridiculous to be violating the civil rights of prisoners to keep young teens off the streets at night.

“The curfew started to be enforced about a month ago,” according to police officer John Scully.

“The main reasons have to do with serious crimes in some neighborhoods where teens stay out past midnight and become the victims of these crimes.”

Juvenile crime is not the main problem. Out of a total of 116,874 crimes last year, only 533 juvenile crimes were committed, according to an annual police report on the San Francisco Police Department Web site (www.sfgov.com).

The police department should focus on capturing the criminals, not the victimized youth.

The city would be a safer place for everyone if the police focused on perpetrators, not baby-sitting preteens. To prevent all 13-year olds from being out at night would be nearly impossible.

It is a parent’s responsibility to enforce their child’s curfew. If a 13-year old is consistently out late at night, then perhaps his parents should be fined or required to attend child-care classes. If a parent won’t enforce a curfew, a child can’t be expected to follow one.

A child’s curfew should be put in the parent’s hands, not the government’s. City money should be used to provide funding for an appropriate prison environment, not to enforce rules that should already be enforced at home.