Some people think that a law should exist so that young people under 18 cannot be out after the midnight, others think it should not be. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Young people are indeed a group of people in the society, which should be protected. A vast majority doesn'

t

have enough experience to protect themselves fully, so how to ensure safety of young generations remains a highly controversial issue.

Nevertheless

, I think that

such

a strong law, which prohibit students to go away late, doesn'

t

solve the problem. Personally, I believe that

such

an approach won'

t

decrease crime rate and it would cause other serious problems.

To begin

with, going late at night doesn'

t

necessarily put you in a dangerous position. The statement that darkness means danger can be discussed and argued. According to an article which I recently read, statistically crimes don'

t

occur during the night more during the day.

Furthermore

, some places are utterly free every time, they are highlighted constantly and no risk would emerge there. It's a highly controversial statement that night activity should be controlled so much.

Secondly

, a strong law like

this

definitely makes a young person less free and doubly possible benefits cost

such

a high price. I could imagine myself being in

such

a situation and I would be quite depressed due to

this

illogical and strict approach. Even in my family any prohibition would somehow destroy my relationship with parents. Speaking of the government, the risk to raise generations who would like anarchy emerges. To sum up, a law shouldn'

t

make so strong restrictions on a person's liberty. In conclusion, strong methods of solving problems don'

t

prove themselves as reliable ones, especially in situations when their usage is not justified. Overall, our society should tend to find compromises where possible.