One of my favorite childhood memories from elementary school (I was probably 9 or 10) was me sleeping in a tent in the backgarden of a classmate. We'd go out exploring the town late at night. This was in a ~2000 people town mind you. Do I think having laws prohibiting something like this is overreaching? Damn right I do.
It just says "children age 12 and younger may not be outside after 20:00 unless accompanied by an adult. Children ages 13 to 16 may not be outside after 22:00 unless they're returning home after an approved school-, athletic-, or youth-program function. Between may first and september first children may stay out an additional two hours"
Even though it's not stated the "accompanied by an adult" applies to ages 13 through 16 as well.
No I'm not asking for the law to be subtle. I'm asking for the law to not put its nose into things it has no business doing so.
Elementary school education (which is mandated by law) ends after 15 years of age so I think that would be a more natural cutoff for this law and I think that any curfew after that age should be up to the parents.
I think most of the disagreement in this thread comes from when is someone no longer considered a child.
According to the applicable laws, anyone under 18 is still a child, and needs to be treated as such.
Most people in the thread are arguing that 18 is to high of an age for this, while others are arguing that it is the proper age.
I personally believe that setting this age at 18 detrimentally affect those youth, who will become adults who are less individualistic and less capable. I may or may not be wrong about this. Read reificators comment for a better phrasing of this.
Those who believe that this is the proper age believe that this is protecting those youth and allowing them to grow into the adults they have potential to become. They may or may not be wrong about this.