- Joined
- May 6, 2016
- Messages
- 1,908
- Reaction score
- 489
- Location
- Colorado
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Many cities in america place curfews on teenagers (usually from 10PM or midnight to 5AM). For example, most cities in the greater Phoenix area requires anyone under 16 to be home from 10 pm to 5 am and 16-18 from midnight to 5:00 am. These regulations have led to the arrests of many innocent teens who weren't doing anything conspicuous.
This article was written 10 years ago but the situation hasn't changed:
Teens test limits of curfew - East Valley Tribune: News
While the curfew has decreased the amount of crimes committed by teenagers by 10%, that time period takes up 7 hours which is 29% of the day. The police could probably cut down crime even farther by cutting out any other 7 hour period. This anti teenage prejudice won't be changed by silence. That's why discrimination against blacks wasn't ended until the civil rights movement came along in the 60s.
Many cities in america place curfews on teenagers (usually from 10PM or midnight to 5AM). For example, most cities in the greater Phoenix area requires anyone under 16 to be home from 10 pm to 5 am and 16-18 from midnight to 5:00 am. These regulations have led to the arrests of many innocent teens who weren't doing anything conspicuous.
This article was written 10 years ago but the situation hasn't changed:
Teens test limits of curfew - East Valley Tribune: News
While the curfew has decreased the amount of crimes committed by teenagers by 10%, that time period takes up 7 hours which is 29% of the day. The police could probably cut down crime even farther by cutting out any other 7 hour period. This anti teenage prejudice won't be changed by silence. That's why discrimination against blacks wasn't ended until the civil rights movement came along in the 60s.
Many cities in america place curfews on teenagers (usually from 10PM or midnight to 5AM). For example, most cities in the greater Phoenix area requires anyone under 16 to be home from 10 pm to 5 am and 16-18 from midnight to 5:00 am. These regulations have led to the arrests of many innocent teens who weren't doing anything conspicuous.
This article was written 10 years ago but the situation hasn't changed:
Teens test limits of curfew - East Valley Tribune: News
While the curfew has decreased the amount of crimes committed by teenagers by 10%, that time period takes up 7 hours which is 29% of the day. The police could probably cut down crime even farther by cutting out any other 7 hour period. This anti teenage prejudice won't be changed by silence. That's why discrimination against blacks wasn't ended until the civil rights movement came along in the 60s.
Many cities in america place curfews on teenagers (usually from 10PM or midnight to 5AM). For example, most cities in the greater Phoenix area requires anyone under 16 to be home from 10 pm to 5 am and 16-18 from midnight to 5:00 am. These regulations have led to the arrests of many innocent teens who weren't doing anything conspicuous.
This article was written 10 years ago but the situation hasn't changed:
Teens test limits of curfew - East Valley Tribune: News
While the curfew has decreased the amount of crimes committed by teenagers by 10%, that time period takes up 7 hours which is 29% of the day. The police could probably cut down crime even farther by cutting out any other 7 hour period. This anti teenage prejudice won't be changed by silence. That's why discrimination against blacks wasn't ended until the civil rights movement came along in the 60s.
Many cities in america place curfews on teenagers (usually from 10PM or midnight to 5AM). For example, most cities in the greater Phoenix area requires anyone under 16 to be home from 10 pm to 5 am and 16-18 from midnight to 5:00 am. These regulations have led to the arrests of many innocent teens who weren't doing anything conspicuous.
This article was written 10 years ago but the situation hasn't changed:
Teens test limits of curfew - East Valley Tribune: News
While the curfew has decreased the amount of crimes committed by teenagers by 10%, that time period takes up 7 hours which is 29% of the day. The police could probably cut down crime even farther by cutting out any other 7 hour period. This anti teenage prejudice won't be changed by silence. That's why discrimination against blacks wasn't ended until the civil rights movement came along in the 60s.
Are you a teenager? Those under 18 are juveniles, not adults. Adults have the right to do what they want, when they want, with the only limitation being that it also be legal, and that they accept the consequence or costs associated with their actions. Juveniles cannot legally accept such as responsibility, or be held completely responsible for most crimes they may commit - juvenile records and jail sentences being expunged once they turn 18. Very few crimes that are committed by juveniles end up with them being treated, prosecuted, and imprisoned as an adult.
Now, if you want juveniles to be treated, prosecuted, and imprisoned like an adult, then I would have no problem with allowing them to have complete freedom of movement. If they do the time? Then they can do the crime, or at least be given the freedom to make the choice. But, that's not going to happen.
Juveniles are just that, not adults. If we as adults restrict juveniles from being allowed to put themselves into situations where they may make bad choices that can negatively impact the rest of their lives, or end their lives, then we should do that. Curfews are just one tool to accomplish that.
Juveniles are not permitted many rights and privileges granted to adults and they are not held to the same standards for criminal acts which they commit. A majority see this as completely valid. You cannot have it both ways - if juveniles are granted the same rights and privileges as adults then they should be held equally legally responsible for their actions. If you want a 14 year old kid that gets mad and punches another 14 year old kid to have a lifelong assault and battery record then maybe we can consider letting them drink, smoke, drive, marry, vote, sign contracts and do their jail (or prison) time in a bunk next to Big Bubba.
I tend to agree that their should be one universal age (18) for defining rights and privileges as an adult but that too lacks majority appeal.
But it only reduces it by 10% while cutting out 29%. Assuming that making a youth curfew last all day would reduce it 100%, a good deal would be if it reduced a third or more The curfew basically encourages cops to harass people and check their IDs when they could be preventing someone from breaking into a store
Are you a teenager? Those under 18 are juveniles, not adults. Adults have the right to do what they want, when they want, with the only limitation being that it also be legal, and that they accept the consequence or costs associated with their actions. Juveniles cannot legally accept such as responsibility, or be held completely responsible for most crimes they may commit - juvenile records and jail sentences being expunged once they turn 18. Very few crimes that are committed by juveniles end up with them being treated, prosecuted, and imprisoned as an adult.
Now, if you want juveniles to be treated, prosecuted, and imprisoned like an adult, then I would have no problem with allowing them to have complete freedom of movement. If they do the time? Then they can do the crime, or at least be given the freedom to make the choice. But, that's not going to happen.
Juveniles are just that, not adults. If we as adults restrict juveniles from being allowed to put themselves into situations where they may make bad choices that can negatively impact the rest of their lives, or end their lives, then we should do that. Curfews are just one tool to accomplish that.
Did you know that by "harassing" people during simple traffic stops, it is where many (and some cops claim most) crimes are stopped and/or past ones solved.
The maturity level sensed in these posts suggest that a curfew will serve you well.
Way to read WAY to much into it. I'm saying his use of harass was poor and wrong.So what you're saying is the government needs ways to harass people to do their job. So with that in mind they need to be able to stop people for actions that don't involve harming anyone else because without such measures they wouldn't be as effective at their job. I'm not exactly sure you understand the depth of your argument and how it necessarily calls for the state to pass stupid laws.
Way to read WAY to much into it. I'm saying his use of harass was poor and wrong.
Wrong, it was argued already in post 4I see no way anyone can argue that curfews don't violate the rights of those they are imposed on. If the individual has harmed no one and isn't expected to harm anyone then there is no valid reason to stop them from going where they please. Yes, I understand they are put in place to stop crimes, but that changes very little about the nature of the action. Stopping people from doing as they please when they are not even expected of doing anything is a violation of human rights. Period.
Wrong, it was argued already in post 4
What the OP was talking about and what I was talking about both happened during probable cause. There is no law to harass but people are free to their opinion to see it as harassment.I'm hardly doing that. The US does in fact have many laws that largely exist to give police a way to harass people.
That's not even a good argument. All he did was move the bar lower for children to get out of the argument.
What the OP was talking about and what I was talking about both happened during probable cause. There is no law to harass but people are free to their opinion to see it as harassment.
Now your moving the goal posts to a "good argument" ?
Now your moving the goal posts to a "good argument" ?
Traffic stops act largely as an outlet for the police to harass people. Hell, you even admitted it yourself. :shrug: Cop: "I see you have a black plastic bag in your car, sir." Is that bag any of the cops business? No. Would he have known about it without a traffic law that punishes people before any harm was done? No.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?