Teen curfews

[minionofmidas]

Obviously not. Thank God that idea hasn't swept over here. (Under 18s need by law to be out of nightclubs by midnight though - not that that's enforced either, though they might not let you in after a quarter to midnight.)

[minionofmidas]

there's pretty much one constant goal:  finding a warm, wet hole which permits entry.

"You know what I really want in a girl? Me."
(c) Bloodhound Gang

[minionofmidas]

It depends, What color are said teens?     To allude to Alcon's white boy rant post, Yeah cops usually will just drive by a young man like Alcon.  The sad and true thing is that some black kid dressed in Fubu; or whatever the heck the fashion is these days, will not be accorded the same courtesy.  I know a lot of cops and policing is not color blind.   

For me it would be profoundly hypocritical to support a curfew.  I used to party on the beach all night long and unlike most of the teens on this board I was up to no good.  "Relatively" minor lawbreaking really: drink, weed, fights and noise violations.  I threw a multiple keg party on the beach one time that attracted near 500 hundred people.  The Nassau PD dispatched their helicopter and 30 police cruisers- I guess I wasted some tax payer dollars there...

.....typical Long Island white trash....

I seem to recall Pat grow up in Rockaway?

Chewing out a rhythm on my bubble gum
The sun is out and I want some.
Its not hard, not far to reach
We can hitch a ride
To rockaway beach.
Up on the roof, out on the street
Down in the playground the hot concrete
Bus ride is too slow
They blast out the disco on the radio
Rock rock rockaway beach
Rock rock rockaway beach
We can hitch a ride
To rockaway beach
Its not hard, not far to reach
We can hitch a ride
To rockaway beach.

[minionofmidas]

I think most of us has a sense that young people (in particular young men) are pretty aggressive. With most people this decreases with age. I mean, visit any schoolyard where a bunch of young boys aren't being supervised. Most games they come up with will basically be about fighting or testing each other physically. I think there are good reasons to assume that aggressivity is to an extent connected with youth.

I'm in high school and, uh, no.  There is some fighting, but for the most part I see people playing bloody knuckles with quarters (dumb, but not violent).  I do not at all agree that anywhere near the majority of male teenagers are criminally aggressive.

Also, once you exclude "serious" criminals I believe young people tend to dominate crime statistics by a mile. So the link is not in any way weak and that it is causal is under-pinned by biology, I think (has to do with developing the ability to fight for the tribe, for food and whatnot. Kind of like how lion cubs will roll around fighting each other).

And so do minorities and males in general.  No one is arguing against the points you are making - that most criminals are young males, and minorities - commit an unusual number of crimes.

The issue is whether the criminalisation of their being out at night is justifiable, considering that there has been no study that has scientifically proved that it really doesn't that much in reducing crime rates.  Do you not think it is fair that the law-abiding among us demand at least that before the right to be outside for a third to a quarter of the day is taken away from us?

You've got points but consider that Gustaf is a euro nanny state transnational progressive so attempts to get him to consider solutions NOT involving the nanny state probably won't work too well

Especially given that we're discussing a nanny state proposal that has never been seriously proposed in any European nanny state (although Sweden, like the US, has laws against drinking in public) but that does exist in parts of the oh-so-libertarian US.

Give me a break.

[minionofmidas]

I guess I'll try again...many people I know have been involved in crimes, one way or another. A friend of mine was, for instance, arrested for using a fake ID, trying to get into a bar. Another of my friends know several girls who have been raped. I've met someone who would send around pictures of his penis via bluetooth in order to annoy people on buses. A guy in my class was in bandage for some time after having had a fight with a Nazi. Now, these people, who have been arrested, are likely to grow up and become lawyers, doctors or whatever. They're not specifically criminal, they're just young and commit crimes because of that reason. However, I don't know many 40-year olds who are involved in gang fights on the street, rapes, etc. And the reason is that a 40-year old who engages in criminal behaviour is not a normal person, but probably a criminal. I don't see how you can ignore this? If you take to lawyers, married with two children living in a high-income suburb, neither is going to party around town and smash a car. Skin colour doesn't really enter into it. But if you take a 19-year old kid, none of these statistics would matter. I would never be surprised to hear about a teen male being involved in some kind of criminal activity, regardless of other factors, because that is what you expect of young people.

Alright. I'm being lazy and don't want to read the whole discussion.

I agree with every word you say up there (except for the part "is not a normal person, but probably a criminal". Too black-and-white to be of much worth in a real life situation, not to mention that "criminals" are more or less normal people.) but how does it relate to teen curfews?

[minionofmidas]

I guess I'll try again...many people I know have been involved in crimes, one way or another. A friend of mine was, for instance, arrested for using a fake ID, trying to get into a bar. Another of my friends know several girls who have been raped. I've met someone who would send around pictures of his penis via bluetooth in order to annoy people on buses. A guy in my class was in bandage for some time after having had a fight with a Nazi. Now, these people, who have been arrested, are likely to grow up and become lawyers, doctors or whatever. They're not specifically criminal, they're just young and commit crimes because of that reason. However, I don't know many 40-year olds who are involved in gang fights on the street, rapes, etc. And the reason is that a 40-year old who engages in criminal behaviour is not a normal person, but probably a criminal. I don't see how you can ignore this? If you take to lawyers, married with two children living in a high-income suburb, neither is going to party around town and smash a car. Skin colour doesn't really enter into it. But if you take a 19-year old kid, none of these statistics would matter. I would never be surprised to hear about a teen male being involved in some kind of criminal activity, regardless of other factors, because that is what you expect of young people.

Alright. I'm being lazy and don't want to read the whole discussion.

I agree with every word you say up there (except for the part "is not a normal person, but probably a criminal". Too black-and-white to be of much worth in a real life situation, not to mention that "criminals" are more or less normal people.) but how does it relate to teen curfews?

Well, that was obviously an exaggeration which I will not stand up for.

As for you question, it doesn't really. My point is that it is reasonable to support a teen curfew but not a black curfew, or whatever, because the groups are fundamentally different in this aspect.

Change that to "not quite as immediately obviously unreasonable", and I'm ready to agree with you. It's not reasonable because it's not solving anything, and is unenforceable - something which the fact that your point is true simply doesn't affect.

[minionofmidas]

I guess I'll try again...many people I know have been involved in crimes, one way or another. A friend of mine was, for instance, arrested for using a fake ID, trying to get into a bar. Another of my friends know several girls who have been raped. I've met someone who would send around pictures of his penis via bluetooth in order to annoy people on buses. A guy in my class was in bandage for some time after having had a fight with a Nazi. Now, these people, who have been arrested, are likely to grow up and become lawyers, doctors or whatever. They're not specifically criminal, they're just young and commit crimes because of that reason. However, I don't know many 40-year olds who are involved in gang fights on the street, rapes, etc. And the reason is that a 40-year old who engages in criminal behaviour is not a normal person, but probably a criminal. I don't see how you can ignore this? If you take to lawyers, married with two children living in a high-income suburb, neither is going to party around town and smash a car. Skin colour doesn't really enter into it. But if you take a 19-year old kid, none of these statistics would matter. I would never be surprised to hear about a teen male being involved in some kind of criminal activity, regardless of other factors, because that is what you expect of young people.

Alright. I'm being lazy and don't want to read the whole discussion.

I agree with every word you say up there (except for the part "is not a normal person, but probably a criminal". Too black-and-white to be of much worth in a real life situation, not to mention that "criminals" are more or less normal people.) but how does it relate to teen curfews?

Well, that was obviously an exaggeration which I will not stand up for.

As for you question, it doesn't really. My point is that it is reasonable to support a teen curfew but not a black curfew, or whatever, because the groups are fundamentally different in this aspect.

Change that to "not quite as immediately obviously unreasonable", and I'm ready to agree with you. It's not reasonable because it's not solving anything, and is unenforceable - something which the fact that your point is true simply doesn't affect.

How do you define reasonable? You're bringing in more practical reasoning here, and I'm not really an expert on criminology. I do think a teen curfew would lead to a signficant drop in the number of teens about in the street and that would in turn lead to a drop in crime level.

I don't. The first part yes, probably, but there's not much reason to assume the second.

Just for one thing, there's lots of places to 'hang around' that aren't as it were on the streets. And the main victims of that kind of 'crime' are much the same people as the perpetrators anyways.
You *might* see a slight decrease in shoplifting, that's about it.

[minionofmidas]

Just for one thing, there's lots of places to 'hang around' that aren't as it were on the streets. And the main victims of that kind of 'crime' are much the same people as the perpetrators anyways.

Ah, that is a good point. But I'm thinking of the whole "going home late at night and running into a teen gang"-sort of thing. Of course, that isn't as common as people think, but it does happen. There was a case in Sweden quite recently with a man who told some guy to not urinate against the wall. The guy and his friends knocked him down and jumped on his head till he died. Also, it isn't just about perpetrators it's also about paternalistically protecting those people. Drunk teens are very common victims of all sorts of crimes.

I've never had a crime happen to me as a drunk teen. I've had a leatherjacket stolen as a drunk young twen though, and had to walk home without it on a cold night. Thank God I was drunk.