Teen Repelent

[AzurePhoenix]

AzurePhenoix, you and several others have blown this thing way out of proportion and are trying to compare the annoying sounds to something much more insidious to which there is no comparison. Maybe if you studied your history lessons a little better you would realize just how shameful your comparing this annoying noise to racism and discrimination is. It is obvious that some of the younger folks here don't really know what racism and discrimination are.

I am simply looking ahead to the potential this kind of action carries with it. Don't tell me what i do or don't understand, I full well know the atrocities committed against undeserving peoples, including some my own ancestors whose people the american government payed bounties for as rewards for their murder.

 

It may not be a big deal now, but people have a long history of taking things steps further bit by bit until eventually a line is crossed without anyone ever realizing it. That is why this disturbs me.

[ydoaPs]

Adults don't loiter as much.

Whites don't steal as much

 

*note:this is to make a point. i am not racist*

[Sisyphus]

Look, I'm not saying it's fair or admirable, but I don't think it's discriminatory in a way that should be illegal. They're not keeping anyone out. They're not putting up signs that say "nobody under 25." They ARE actively creating an environment to discourage a certain group (of which I am a member, if that matters) from doing something that they shouldn't be doing anyway. Making it slightly more annoying for young people to break the law than older people. It's not illegal to be racist, and this is not nearly as bad as racism.

 

"Agism" is a real problem, but it's not quite as simple as something like racism. Children are clearly different from adults, for example, and are justly treated differently. The law (in the U.S.) doesn't see you as a fully rational person until you are at least 18, when you no longer have a legal guardian, are allowed to vote, etc., and some legal restrictions are even higher than that. 21 for purchasing alcohol, 25 for renting a car, 35 for becoming President, etc. To be consistent in the position that agism is equivalent to racism, you would have to challenge all these laws.

 

Anyway, that's why I don't think this is a particularly big deal.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Whites don't steal as much

 

*note:this is to make a point. i am not racist*

Nobody suggested a device to keep all other races out of a certain area.

[AzurePhoenix]

The law (in the U.S.) doesn't see you as a fully rational person until you are at least 18, when you no longer have a legal guardian, are allowed to vote, etc., and some legal restrictions are even higher than that. 21 for purchasing alcohol, 25 for renting a car, 35 for becoming President, etc. To be consistent in the position that agism is equivalent to racism, you would have to challenge all these laws.

if it puts my perspective into... perspective... at all, I've never been particularly fond of those varied age-based privelages either, especially considering how many people plenty old enough to be allowed them probably couldn't be trusted with caring for a houseplant for a weekend

[KLB]

I am simply looking ahead to the potential[/i'] this kind of action carries with it. Don't tell me what i do or don't understand, I full well know the atrocities committed against undeserving peoples, including some my own ancestors whose people the american government payed bounties for as rewards for their murder.

 

Don't go and think that you are the only one who has had ancestors who had atrocities committed against them. Again even trying to say that this annoyance has the potential to lead to something more insidious is disgraceful. You should be ashamed of your self for even trying to make a comparison.

 

IF, and it is a very big if, a large mall pumped such sounds throughout their entire complex such that you couldn't go through the mall then maybe there could be concerns raised about that mall. There is, however, no cause for concern if the corner convenience store pumps some annoying sound through the speakers in their parking lot to simply discourage loitering. Face facts, the only time the use of these sounds become annoying is if one is breaking the law by loitering, as such there is nothing wrong with these sounds even if only kids can hear them.

 

If we are going to ban annoying sounds, I think they should ban the speakers on the ice cream trucks that drive by my window three or four times a day and often times stop outside my window for five or ten minutes while kids buy ice cream. I can't even hear my own bloody music without shutting my window when they are stopped outside. Some annoying sounds are designed to attract kids some are designed to drive kids away. They both have their place in our society.

[ydoaPs]

Nobody suggested a device to keep all other races out of a certain area.

what's the difference between keeping one arbitrary group away or another?

[AzurePhoenix]

Don't go and think that you are the only one who has had ancestors who had atrocities committed against them. Again even trying to say that this annoyance has the potential[/i'] to lead to something more insidious is disgraceful. You should be ashamed of your self for even trying to make a comparison.

And I think you should be ashamed for criticizing others for voicing concern for a possible problem simply because it hasn't gotten bad YET. It is not a wise thing to ignore small problems simply because worse things happened once. An intelligent person doesn't try to shrug off an issue as not worthy of concern just because he or she is concerned that it is an insult to people who suffered bigger problems. It doesn't change the fact that it is NOW posing an issue, no matter how minor.

 

I never ONCE said anything about the sufferign of other peoples or said those I'm close to are any worse than any other. YOU attacked me arrogantly claiming that I was ignorant of the subject and I responded in kind

[Phi for All]

what's the difference between keeping one arbitrary group away or another?

They're not arbitrary. They're loitering young people, driving business away as opposed to being business drivers.

[KLB]

And I think you should be ashamed for criticizing others for voicing concern for a possible problem simply because it hasn't gotten bad YET.

No you should be ashamed for trying to claim an injustice that does not exist. There are many, many, things in life that are a much bigger risk of eventually infringing upon one's civil rights that we all ignore on a daily basis. In fact I would argue that by trying to ban these annoying sounds you are infringing upon the civil rights of others, in particularly their rights under the First Amendment of our constitution. In our society you do not have the right to be free from annoyances nor should you have that right otherwise everything would become illegal because almost everything annoys someone in our society.

 

Some people are extremely annoyed by the choice of "music" that young people listen to. Should this be banned on public beaches or public places? Again remember a store is on private property and as long as one doesn't violate civil rights laws one is given much greater latitude on private property. If you are annoyed by the sounds a store uses then exercise your rights to boycott that store and if it hurts their profitability maybe they will stop using the noise.

[ydoaPs]

They're not arbitrary. They're loitering young people, driving business away as opposed to being business drivers.

Yet if I were to say "They're not arbitrary. They're shoplifting Mexicans, raising prices.", I would get a warning.

[Phi for All]

Yet if I were to say "They're not arbitrary. They're shoplifting Mexicans, raising prices.", I would get a warning.

Well, yes, you would, because ALL young people hanging out doing nothing in front of these places of business are loitering, while NOT all Mexicans inside the store are shoplifting.

 

I actually don't care much for what these stores are doing. I think there are much more proactive ways of dealing with the problem but they obviously see it only as a detriment and are determined to remove it as cheaply as possible. If it were me I would do a cross-promotion with another store and give discount coupons to the loiterers so they would go hang out where they could spend some $$$.

[ydoaPs]

Well, yes, you would, because ALL young people hanging out doing nothing in front of these places of business are loitering, while NOT all Mexicans inside[/i'] the store are shoplifting.

what about pedestrians? what about kids whose cars broke down? what about someone watching a bicycle for someone who is inside? what about people reporting to the police about a purse snatching that occurred in the vacinity? etc.

 

what about non-youth loiterers?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The device becomes progressively more irritating. It's not as if you'll want to run to the other side of the street when you walk in front of the store.

 

Non-youth loiterers are obviously in the minority where the devices are being used, or nobody would use them.

[GutZ]

You guys are assuming they are going to leave that device on 24/7. It's gone to a point that they can't reason with these .... kids. I am sure they don't want to call the cops everytime either. I've been to places where you literally have to push these *refrains from getting angry*....people to get anywhere. Maybe it's not the best solution, I am sure there will be reasonable people who are just waiting for someone or having a quick chat so to them it will be annoying but not hoards of ..... kids that just stand there doing ...things and I think they won't mind that much. Good trade off.

 

Ultimately if they ask the kids to leave and they don't, fine. They just power up that sucker and a few minutes later they leave instead of hours.

 

Personally I think tear gas would work better but maybe a little extreme ...maybe.

[AzurePhoenix]

Personally I think tear gas would work better but maybe a little extreme ...maybe.

I'll vote for tear-gas deployment, it's effective against all loiterers indescriminately, hearing-capable as well as the old, deaf, and IPod-protected

[ydoaPs]

The device becomes progressively[/b'] more irritating. It's not as if you'll want to run to the other side of the street when you walk in front of the store.

the sound doesn't magically go away when you leave the store property. what about people that live next door, etc?

 

i'm surprised the stores in using said devices aren't getting in trouble for disturbing the peace.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

the sound doesn't magically go away when you leave the store property. what about people that live next door' date=' etc?

 

i'm surprised the stores in using said devices aren't getting in trouble for disturbing the peace.[/quote']

You didn't read the article. It's being used by the city in one particular area, not by store owners in specific. The owners all like it.

[ydoaPs]

You didn't read the article. It's being used by the city in one particular area, not by store owners in specific. The owners all like it.

actually i did, but it was yesterday and i forgot the specifics.

 

being used in an area instead of store by store is even worse. it makes your dismissal of pedestrians lack basis.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I suppose pedestrians can just keep walking, then. I'm assuming (because it is logical, as a store owner can call the police during regular hours to prevent crime) that the device is used after hours (to prevent people gathering and vandalizing, etc), so pedestrian traffic would be minimal anyways.

[ydoaPs]

even if you could eliminate the disturbance to pedestrians completely, you still have problems. what about teens that live in the area trying to sleep?

[AzurePhoenix]

even if you could eliminate the disturbance to pedestrians completely, you still have problems. what about teens that live in the area trying to sleep?

It quite simply may not be in close proximity to residential areas, or even if it is maybe the range is too low. We don't know any of those details well enough to make an issue out of them.

[Phi for All]

what about pedestrians?

They don't loiter, they... ped.

what about kids whose cars broke down?

They are standing outside a store they didn't shop at because...?

what about someone watching a bicycle for someone who is inside?

How did I ever forget such a huge segment of the loitering community?

what about people reporting to the police about a purse snatching that occurred in the vacinity? etc.

If I were them, I would complain to the police when they got there about how obnoxious it was to wait in front of a store that was so undriendly to youthful civic-minded people. Or I would ask the store owner if I could come inside to wait.

what about non-youth loiterers?

Older people can usually read the NO LOITERING signs.

[ydoaPs]

They don't loiter, they... ped. They are standing outside a store they didn't shop at because...? How did I ever forget such a huge segment of the loitering community? If I were them, I would complain to the police when they got there about how obnoxious it was to wait in front of a store that was so undriendly to youthful civic-minded people. Or I would ask the store owner if I could come inside to wait.

that was my point. they aren't loitering. therefore you are wrong. it is prejudice no matter how you slice it.

 

 

Older people can usually read the NO LOITERING signs.

*cough*STEREOTYPE*cough*

 

for instance, around here, at least half of the people that loiter are over the age of 25....it's probably more. i haven't done a formal survey, though.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

that was my point. they aren't loitering. therefore you are wrong. it is prejudice no matter how you slice it.

Read Phi's post again.

 

 

*cough*STEREOTYPE*cough*

 

for instance' date=' around here, at least half of the people that loiter are over the age of 25....it's probably more. i haven't done a formal survey, though.[/quote']

Well, nobody will use the device in your area, then.