Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why do teen curfew laws receive so much suppo

luvx
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 9:25:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

This is 100% age discrimination. How would old people feel if we started calling the po po on them because they might be "missing elderly" or something?
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 9:51:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

Would you want your own child out on the streets at 2 am?? There is absolutely nothing you can do after hours, that you couldn't do before curfew time.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 9:57:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 9:51:28 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

Would you want your own child out on the streets at 2 am?? There is absolutely nothing you can do after hours, that you couldn't do before curfew time.

Wanna Bet?
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:05:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

Its really based on the belief that teens are prone to do idiotic things due to their age. While I don't fully agree with that it has some truth in it. Teens have their whole lives ahead of them, and who knows, maybe having a curfew in place could of saved their lives at one point of another.

And since BOP is on you, do you have any sources stating that positing a curfew is totally useless, because I just don't believe that.
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:10:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 9:25:14 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

This is 100% age discrimination. How would old people feel if we started calling the po po on them because they might be "missing elderly" or something?

Really? are you just being sensational. The purpose of a curfew is to potentially ensure the safety of minors. Even if it is founded on some discrimination towards the youth, it isn't malevolent.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:10:33 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/1/2013 9:25:14 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

This is 100% age discrimination. How would old people feel if we started calling the po po on them because they might be "missing elderly" or something?

Really? are you just being sensational. The purpose of a curfew is to potentially ensure the safety of minors. Even if it is founded on some discrimination towards the youth, it isn't malevolent.

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:20:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 9:57:26 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 9:51:28 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

Would you want your own child out on the streets at 2 am?? There is absolutely nothing you can do after hours, that you couldn't do before curfew time.

Wanna Bet?

Ok I'll rephrase that. Nothing that a kid SHOULD be doing, that can't be done before curfew.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:24:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:20:46 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/3/2013 9:57:26 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 9:51:28 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/1/2013 7:26:20 PM, luvx wrote:
Why do teen curfew laws receive so much support?

Honestly, I am baffled by the amount of support in teen curfew laws when studies show that they are ineffective. Yes, studies show curfews do not reduce or prevent crime, nor street shootings. People say "teens have no business outside at 2:00 AM" but you don't get to choose how someone lives their life. Do people realize that teens are traumatized by the arrests, for normal human behavior that harms no one?

Chicago has a curfew for under 17 and still has a problem with shootings. Given these facts, So why do people continue to support curfews?

Would you want your own child out on the streets at 2 am?? There is absolutely nothing you can do after hours, that you couldn't do before curfew time.

Wanna Bet?

Ok I'll rephrase that. Nothing that a kid SHOULD be doing, that can't be done before curfew.

Boys can be drafted into war at 18. I think that it's ok to let the same guys walk around one year before they ship off, don't you?
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:39:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...

Everything the need to do can be done before in the allotted time before the curfew. No right are being denying to anyone.
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:40:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:39:04 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...


Everything the need to do can be done in the allotted time before the curfew. No rights are being denying to anyone.

Edit
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:45:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:40:06 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:39:04 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...


Everything the need to do can be done in the allotted time before the curfew. No rights are being denying to anyone.

Edit

Nope - being outside after 2300 hours can't be done before curfew. The First Amendment gives me the right to peaceably assemble ... right? Why can't I go somewhere and just peacefully stand?
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:53:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:45:18 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:40:06 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:39:04 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...


Everything the need to do can be done in the allotted time before the curfew. No rights are being denying to anyone.

Edit

Nope - being outside after 2300 hours can't be done before curfew. The First Amendment gives me the right to peaceably assemble ... right? Why can't I go somewhere and just peacefully stand?

When you attend organizations/institutions that impose curfew then you are willing subjecting yourself to their legislation. Or parents put children in such places, whether the parents are right/wrong is a different issue.

In the first is amendment says congress shall make no law preventing peaceful assembly. How would curfews violating this.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:55:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:53:17 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:45:18 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:40:06 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:39:04 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:29:15 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:26:09 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:17:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:

It doesn't have to be malevolent in order to be age-discrimination. More 80 year olds would get lost at 0200 hours... why not ticket them for wandering around late at night? Besides, when they shuffle around real late at night, they look like zombies - that could start off a panic.

I'm not saying that curfews are malevolent or age-discriminant but you're implying that they are. Curfews aren't applied to the elderly because imo, young people have their whole lives ahead of them and some like to play Russian roulette. Therefore, curfews can potentially prevent events like this from happening.

So they need fewer rights because they have their whole lives ahead of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to deny liberties like this to people who cant use those freedoms? lol...


Everything the need to do can be done in the allotted time before the curfew. No rights are being denying to anyone.

Edit

Nope - being outside after 2300 hours can't be done before curfew. The First Amendment gives me the right to peaceably assemble ... right? Why can't I go somewhere and just peacefully stand?

When you attend organizations/institutions that impose curfew then you are willing subjecting yourself to their legislation. Or parents put children in such places, whether the parents are right/wrong is a different issue.

In the first is amendment says congress shall make no law preventing peaceful assembly. How would curfews violating this.

That is not what the First Amendment says.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:58:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
To people pro teen curfew laws: Would you feel comfortable going up to some teenager who's outside their house at 2:00am, forcing them into your car, taking them to your house and imprisoning them there until morning? If not, then you're either anti-these laws, or immoral since you're not willing to do what it takes to keep teens safe..
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 10:59:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:55:19 PM, Beverlee wrote:

That is not what the First Amendment says.

According to this link it does

http://www.uscourts.gov...

Which is a credible .gov domain

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances." First Amendment, U.S. Constitution

Look at bolded parts
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:02:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I remember my friends and I used to wander around in the middle of the night all the time. It was good fun, and while our city didnt have a curfew the town adjacent to us all did and when we would stray into them we had to be careful of police ticketing us to be assholess. I remember some friends got ticketed because they went to a restaurant after a football game and the police showed up to take their money for..engaging in commerce I guess. Those laws are pretty dumb, if the minors legal guardian takes no issue in them being out late I don't see who else should have a say in the matter.

It's just the combination of busy bodies and the natural distrust adults feel of teenagers.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:03:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:58:20 PM, sdavio wrote:
To people pro teen curfew laws: Would you feel comfortable going up to some teenager who's outside their house at 2:00am, forcing them into your car, taking them to your house and imprisoning them there until morning? If not, then you're either anti-these laws, or immoral since you're not willing to do what it takes to keep teens safe..

Curfews are set in place in certain contexts like organizations/institutions that youth are continually attending or reside in.

Your story is an extremity and completely out of context
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 10:59:19 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 10:55:19 PM, Beverlee wrote:

That is not what the First Amendment says.

According to this link it does

http://www.uscourts.gov...

Which is a credible .gov domain

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances." First Amendment, U.S. Constitution

Look at bolded parts

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.

Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM
I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:28:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM
I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...

Ok yea, you listed a bunch of frivolous excursions that can be done in the allotted time before a reasonably set curfew. So you concede?
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:30:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:28:15 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM

Surely curfew laws don't apply on private property? Do they?....

I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...

Ok yea, you listed a bunch of frivolous excursions that can be done in the allotted time before a reasonably set curfew. So you concede?

If the minors guardian does not mind them going out on public property or private property where the owners consent, who else can possibly have a say in the matter? Would you support a curfew for adults as well?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 11:37:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:30:42 PM, thett3 wrote:

If the minors guardian does not mind them going out on public property or private property where the owners consent, who else can possibly have a say in the matter? Would you support a curfew for adults as well?

Let me make something clear, I support curfews in certain contexts, particularly places where people go to reside in (meaning they don't own it) or attend frequently like universities.

And in such contexts curfews should apply to all who attend no matter their age.

I initially directed my views at the youth to stay on topic.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2013 12:53:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/3/2013 11:28:15 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM
I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...

Ok yea, you listed a bunch of frivolous excursions that can be done in the allotted time before a reasonably set curfew. So you concede?

You call worshiping the great moon goddess "frivolous??" Atheist! Besides, how I use my human rights is my business - I can waste them on frivolity if I want. What is NOT frivolous is taking them away from me.

Have you no respect for the brave men who proudly gave their lives for those freedoms? Think of their sacrifice. Let freedom ring.
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2013 12:56:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/4/2013 12:53:37 AM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:28:15 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM
I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...

Ok yea, you listed a bunch of frivolous excursions that can be done in the allotted time before a reasonably set curfew. So you concede?

You call worshiping the great moon goddess "frivolous??" Atheist! Besides, how I use my human rights is my business - I can waste them on frivolity if I want. What is NOT frivolous is taking them away from me.

Have you no respect for the brave men who proudly gave their lives for those freedoms? Think of their sacrifice. Let freedom ring.

Wow you jumped from don't call my actions frivolous (which they are) to the founders of the country. LOL

So I guess you concede, I won you
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2013 1:05:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/4/2013 12:56:49 AM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/4/2013 12:53:37 AM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:28:15 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:23:46 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:11:00 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 10/3/2013 11:03:24 PM, Beverlee wrote:

There, that's more like it.

Now, see where it says that part about how Congress will not abridge the right of the people to peacefully to assemble? Notice how it doesn't say "unless they are under 18?" That's because it doesn't say that.

In fact, many teen curfew laws have been struck down as unconstitutional - and they ones that are still there have to be worded in such a way that they make exemptions for Constitutional rights. That's because these rights are not activated or deactivated by age.


Ok, I see your point but it isn't as though they are meant to imprison and punish teens. They are trying to ensure their safety which some care nothing for.

Give me one good reason a teen would need to do something after a reasonably set curfew that they can't do before. ( please don't say family emergency, pregnant, injuries etc.... because those reasons are obviously excusable)

I can just think of thousands:

I wanted to stand in my yard at 3:00 AM
I wanted to do some looking at the stars (Astronomy takes a long time. Meteor showers are notoriously late)
I wanted to walk home from work
I wanted to walk to Taco Bell and see if they have any vegetarian dishes
I was dared to see if I could run to the corner without being ticketed by the police
I wanted to go skinny dipping at the lake (Late, when nobody was there)
I wanted to read the US Constitution by the streetlight
I wanted to worship a moon goddess
I wanted to sing "Proud to be an American" while I cried thinking about the ones who died...

Ok yea, you listed a bunch of frivolous excursions that can be done in the allotted time before a reasonably set curfew. So you concede?

You call worshiping the great moon goddess "frivolous??" Atheist! Besides, how I use my human rights is my business - I can waste them on frivolity if I want. What is NOT frivolous is taking them away from me.

Have you no respect for the brave men who proudly gave their lives for those freedoms? Think of their sacrifice. Let freedom ring.

Wow you jumped from don't call my actions frivolous (which they are) to the founders of the country. LOL

So I guess you concede, I won you

I didn't concede. Besides, what books do you have in your house? lol.... if I think they are frivie is it ok if I send the police in to come and get them? What about your guns? If I decide that you might misuse them should they be taken away from you? Even if I'm snug in my bed with my teddy bear - and not outside, why would I want to have my ability to go outside for a walk taken away from me? F'rill, dude! How is that cool, even if I don't want to use that freedom?

You would let them take the freedom from the children? How could you??
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2013 1:10:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/4/2013 1:05:18 AM, Beverlee wrote:

I didn't concede. Besides, what books do you have in your house? lol.... if I think they are frivie is it ok if I send the police in to come and get them? What about your guns? If I decide that you might misuse them should they be taken away from you? Even if I'm snug in my bed with my teddy bear - and not outside, why would I want to have my ability to go outside for a walk taken away from me? F'rill, dude! How is that cool, even if I don't want to use that freedom?

You would let them take the freedom from the children? How could you??

Um... Regarding my children (when I get some), yes I would tell them to come home at a certain time because I want there safety assured Duh.

Wow do you even know what frivolous means because you taking some weird negative connotations from the word. Therefore lets look at it denotatively

Frivolous - characterized by a lack of seriousness or sense