Of course there is a solution to the current wave of youth violence and gang crime.

But it is repugnant to liberal thinkers and certain to provoke an uproar from parents, social workers and politicians.

Its only redeeming feature is that it is possibly better than the present situation where gangs of children terrorise our estates and town centres.

Before considering this solution, we need to set some ground rules.

'Teenager' and 'youth' are useful concepts, but neither has any established validity in law.

There are only two states that should concern us - child and adult.

We need to start by establishing one single age of majority at which the child becomes an adult. This could be 16 or 18, or anything else that suits society.

After that age of majority, people solely responsible for their actions. They can smoke, drink, have sex, marry, vote, join the Army or do anything else they want to, within the law.

Before that age, they are children in law and responsibility for their actions is shared between themselves and their parents or guardians.

Every child has a guardian or guardians - they might be his parents, relatives or the state.

If children break the law, they will be punished. But so will the guardians - be they parents, relatives or the state!

Clearly the law must have a wide range of powers within this framework.

A serious crime might send an older child to youth custody, not to prison, which is a punishment for adults.

Guardians might receive a stiff fine or even prison for constant re-offenders.

A younger child committing a minor crime might receive no punishment at all, but his or her parents should be fined since they are responsible in law for that child's actions.

And now the solution - curfew. At a time which suits society, be it 9pm, 10pm or as decided, children are required by law to return to the custody of their guardians and remain there until a set time the following morning.

They can go out with their guardians, of course, but unattended children on the streets will be breaking the law and their guardians will be fined or punished as the courts see fit.

The truth is that too many parents have abandoned their responsibilities, preferring to rely on the schools, the welfare system and the state as surrogate mother and father. Having a child is not just a biological function. It also implies acceptance of moral and ethical responsibilities for that child's upbringing.

I told you it was a repugnant solution. Can you think of something better?

RICHARD TAMMADGE Abingdon