Scribd
Upload
258 views2 pages

Videoke Curfew Regulations in the Philippines

The document reviews related literature on curfew laws and their effectiveness. Several studies found curfews may displace juvenile crime to other times and places. Others note a lack of rigorous analysis proving curfews reduce crime. Exceptions to curfews and enforcement measures vary between jurisdictions.

Uploaded by

Christopher Peraz
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
258 views2 pages

Videoke Curfew Regulations in the Philippines

The document reviews related literature on curfew laws and their effectiveness. Several studies found curfews may displace juvenile crime to other times and places. Others note a lack of rigorous analysis proving curfews reduce crime. Exceptions to curfews and enforcement measures vary between jurisdictions.

Uploaded by

Christopher Peraz
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERTURE AND STUDIES

RELATED STUDY
*According to Xianne Arcangel, CCN Philippines on March 13,2018 The House bill
seeks to limit videoke hours. The House of Representatives on Tuesday started tackling
the bill that seeks to limit the operating hours of videoke machines and other sound
amplifying equipment between 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.

House Bill No. 1035, filed by Quezon Rep. Angelina Tan, proposes a P1,000 fine or six
months imprisonment for those who use videoke machines past 10 p.m.

"It shall be unlawful for any person or business establishment to cause unnecessary
disturbance to the public," the bill stated.

The proposed measure included the use of radio, CD player, television set, amplified
musical instruments, drums, loudspeakers, videokes, karaoke systems, and other sound
amplifying equipment.

Businesses that violate the law may lose their license to operate. If the violation is
committed by a corporation, partnership, association, or similar entity, the president,
General Manager, or most senior officers will be held liable.

[Link]

*According to Elyse R. Grossman and Kathleen S. Hoke(2015) on study of the guidelines


for avoiding pitfalls when drafting juvenile curfew laws: A legal analysis. The Curfew laws
seek to provide general protection to youth and adults by restricting the times that children
of certain ages are allowed to occupy public places or streets. These laws often contain
exemptions for youth accompanied by an adult, responding to an emergency, or traveling
to or from school, work, or a religious service, among others. However, the actual language
used and exemptions included vary by locality.

[Link]

RELATED STUDY

1. According to (Tolliver, 1994).The curfew law applies to all youth 17 years of age and younger, from 11
p.m. to 5 a.m. week nights, and from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. on weekend nights. The law contains several
exceptions to violations including youths who are: accompanied by a parent or other authorized adult;
exercising first amendment rights (religion, speech, assembly); cases of reasonable necessity; standing
on the sidewalk in front of their residence; returning home within an hour of a school, religious, or
voluntary activity; engaged in employment activity; in a motor vehicle with an authorized driver;
operators or passengers of a motor vehicle in direct route to a destination within or out of the city
limits; married; or homeless and using a public place as an abode. The law also contains a provision to
cite the parents of youth violators if they permit the youth to violate the curfew or fail to prevent the
youth from violating the curfew. Cited parents face a fine of up to $499. Enforcement of this provision is
left to the discretion of the police officer.

[Link] to Galabin (2018), studies of curfews conducted by municipalities may have severe
methodological flaws of which does or may not necessarily prove that these ordinances do not work.
Analyzing such impacts are important because curfew policies can be thought of as constituting
treatments. Indeed, if, as basic economic models, crime is a purposive activity, then curfew should only
reduce delinquency if the technology used to produce this behavior is imperfectly substitutable between
curfew and non-curfew hours (Becker, 1968).

3. According to Hemmes and Bennet (1999). Juvenile curfew is proscribing minors, generally within a
specified age, range, from occupying public areas and streets during particular times. These policies are
not new. The first youth curfew was enacted in Omaha, Nebraska in 1880nin 1884. President Harrison
gave a speech endorsing curfews as the most important municipal regulation for the protection of the
children of American homes, from vices of the streets (Norte, 1958).

RELATED LITERATURE

1. according to (DeLucia, 1995; Johnson, 1995; Marketos, 1995; Seibert, 1995; Lester, 1996). Indeed, the
research literature is nearly bereft of studies examining the effects of curfews on crime, the community,
or youth offenders (Ruefle and Reynolds, 1995). The claims in several high profile cities such as Denver,
San Antonio, and New Orleans that serious juvenile crime decreased 30 to 60 percent in their areas
following the adoption of curfew laws have been based on anecdotal evidence, rather than systematic
data collection and analysis (Siebert, 1995).

2. According to (Becker, 1968), crime is a purposive activity, and then curfews should only reduce
delinquency if the technology used to produce this behavior is imperfectly substitutable between curfew
and non-curfew hours.

3. According to Ruffle and Reynolds (1995) reviewed more than 160 newspaper stories about curfews
which appeared during 1993 and part of 1994. They found that the rationale for adoption of curfews in
most cities was to reduce juvenile crime and crime victimization. Several cities were reported to have
adopted curfews both as a hedge against the geographical displacement of juvenile crime to their cities
from other areas and as part of a domino effect when surrounding cities and municipalities passed
them. At the time of the survey, three major American cities (Denver, Phoenix, Orlando) had adopted
city-wide curfews that had specific application to hot spot high crime areas.

NOTES:

[Link]

[Link]

Common questions

Powered by AI

Juvenile curfew laws generally restrict the times youths can be in public, with exceptions for specific circumstances like being accompanied by an adult or returning from authorized activities. In contrast, House Bill No. 1035 regulates the use of sound amplifying equipment at certain hours regardless of age, imposing fines or imprisonment for violations. It is more focused on noise disturbance rather than time-in-public restrictions .

According to Becker (1968), crime is a purposive activity, implying that individuals engage in crime based on cost-benefit analyses. Curfews may only effectively reduce crime if individuals can't easily substitute their criminal activities between curfew and non-curfew hours. This perspective suggests that merely limiting hours without addressing why juveniles commit crimes may not deter delinquent behavior effectively, highlighting the need for comprehensive crime prevention strategies .

Municipalities must carefully consider the specific language and scope of exemptions when drafting juvenile curfew laws to avoid constitutional challenges and ensure fairness. Pitfalls to avoid include overly broad restrictions that could infringe on minors' rights, failure to include reasonable exemptions, and neglecting variations in local contexts that might affect enforcement and public reception of the laws .

Methodological flaws, as pointed out by Galabin (2018), make it difficult to unequivocally prove the effectiveness of curfew laws. These flaws may include lack of controls for confounding variables and reliance on anecdotal reports rather than systematic data. Such deficiencies mean curfew laws may not address the underlying causes of juvenile delinquency effectively, questioning the actual impact of these laws on crime reduction .

President Harrison endorsed curfew laws as crucial municipal regulations for safeguarding children from the vices of the streets. The early implementation of juvenile curfews, tracing back to Omaha in the late 19th century, aimed to protect minors during nighttime hours and maintain public order, reflecting a longstanding concern over juvenile safety and societal morals .

Juvenile curfew laws typically include exemptions for situations such as being accompanied by an adult, responding to emergencies, or traveling to or from work, school, or religious services. These exemptions reflect the laws' flexibility to accommodate necessary night activities and recognize the importance of allowing youth to engage in legitimate after-hours activities without penalty .

House Bill No. 1035 holds the highest-ranking officers of a corporation, such as the president or General Manager, responsible if the entity violates the regulations on sound equipment use. This liability extends to potential license revocation and personal penalty for senior officers, emphasizing the importance of corporate accountability in maintaining public peace .

House Bill No. 1035 proposes a P1,000 fine or six months imprisonment for those who use videoke machines past 10 p.m. It also provides that businesses violating these rules may lose their license to operate. Furthermore, if the violation is committed by a corporation or association, the highest-ranking officers will be held liable .

The proposal under House Bill No. 1035 introduces stricter regulatory measures by imposing fines and imprisonment for night-time noise violations specifically relating to videoke machines. This approach is more punitive and formalized compared to traditional policies that might focus on community enforcement or warnings. Such stringent measures signal a rigorous stance on maintaining public order and noise control at night .

Cities usually adopt curfew laws to reduce juvenile crime and victimization. These regulations are often implemented as preventive measures against the geographical spread of juvenile crime and are sometimes enacted in a domino effect following neighboring cities. Such laws are perceived as strategies to curb potential crime hotspots and ensure general public safety .

You might also like