Teen Repelent

[ydoaPs]

WRONG! Anyone hanging around the theatre after hours long enough to be affected is loitering.

i wasn't talking about loiterers! NOT EVERYONE IN THE VACINITY IS LOITERINGnow, that i added emphasis, you might read it.

 

WRONG! It's targeting loiterers, who are criminals, who happen to be young in this particular instance.

you are wrong. does nothing to target loiterers. it targets young people. remember this:

You've obviously never heard one of these things. And the writer of the article probably hasn't either' date=' considering that they are most likely in their 30s or 40s, and even if they have heard one of these things... that was 20 years ago.

 

There is one of these things around where I live, and I can't walk by the area without going into a rage, because the sound is more than annoying; it is painfully loud, AND AT 16KHZ! The telletubbies got progressively irritating...Hitler got progrssively irritating... Mosquito buzzers are like lemon juice to the eyes... for the ears; repeated punches to the spine while some fat kid in the corner scrapes his nails down the chalkboard. It's the kind of thing that makes you see red, and hear leprechauns.

 

And, yes, I cross the street when I need to venture past the buzzer in question.

 

It's less like sound, and more like having your eardrums pierced. Imagine someone screaming in your ear at 80dB. Just because it's at 16Khz, doesn't mean it's any less irritating... it makes it moreso. It's a dog whistle for people with good hearing.[/quote']?

 

Do you think the owners said, "Man! I really hate the fact that our clients are so young, let's do something to drive them away!" No, they said, "We can't get those kids to stop loitering out there in the square in front of the theatre. They are causing disturbances, vandalizing the place and driving business away. They ignore the signs we put up and so they are breaking the law. What can we do besides call the police?"

they aren't targeting the loiterers, they are targeting all young people in the area

 

My scenario is NOT a strawman because loiterers and shoplifters are both breaking the law. How can you not see that the loitering caused the Wyvern to purchase this equipment? Why would they spend their money because someone is young?

it IS a strawman because not all the young people in the area are loitering.

[Phi for All]

i wasn't talking about loiterers! *snip*

In case you hadn't noticed, I was talking about the Wyvern Theatre, the story the OP was referring to? I made no mention of any anecdotal observations regarding any other devices. There wasn't enough information to form an opinion on. "There is one of these things around where I live" is not exactly telling me much about who placed it and why.

 

I made it quite clear what I was talking about. I mentioned the Wyvern Theatre several times. I mentioned their particular problems with loiterers. You are trolling and being obtuse and unnecessarily argumentative. You are fast becoming the new revprez as far as I'm concerned. It's such a shame.

[ydoaPs]

In case you hadn't noticed' date=' I was talking about the Wyvern Theatre, the story the OP was referring to? I made no mention of any anecdotal observations regarding any other devices. There wasn't enough information to form an opinion on. "There is one of these things around where I live" is not exactly telling me much about who placed it and why.

 

I made it quite clear what I was talking about. I mentioned the Wyvern Theatre several times. I mentioned their particular problems with loiterers.[/quote']

does the location matter? it doesn't change the fact that not everyone in the area is loitering.

 

You are trolling and being obtuse and unnecessarily argumentative.

i think it is you who are being obtuse. it does not target loiterers; it targets young people. it isn't a sound that only loiterers can hear.

 

You are fast becoming the new revprez as far as I'm concerned. It's such a shame.

you not giving a damn about discriminiation does not make me "the new revprez."

[Dak]

your argumentative tactics are becoming a tad trollish lately.

 

nether-the-less, i have to say that i agree with pogo. this isn't targetting loiterers, and it isnt targetting teens who loiter. it's targeting teens who happen to be in the vacinity.

 

It is, in effect, enforsing a ban on teens in the local vacinitiy. the justification for this enforsed ban is that a lot of teens are troublesome, so all must be banned.

 

That's why i drew a parralell with banning all blacks, and enforsing this ban with some kind of only-blacks-can-hear-it noise. Either scenario would be banning people based upon the group to which they belong, and in both scenarios is has been descided that the group is more trouble than they're worth, so bugger them all -- guilty and innocent alike -- they're not coming in our store.

 

And, like teens, you can often bandy about statistics that support claims that blacks are responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime/agro/whatever.

 

a tad unfair on the members of the group that aren't troublesome, be we talking about blacks or teens.

 

My question, again: why is it ok to do this to teens but not blacks?

[Phi for All]

your argumentative tactics are[/i'] becoming a tad trollish lately.

Yes. We may be forced to use our own Mosquito tactics very soon.

nether-the-less, i have to say that i agree with pogo. this isn't targetting loiterers, and it isnt targetting teens who loiter. it's targeting teens who happen to be in the vacinity.

Using only the story provided by the OP, I haven't seen any indication that the sound carries over any extreme distance. I would imagine local noise ordinances would cover anyone with this kind of gripe.

It is, in effect, enforsing a ban on teens in the local vacinitiy. the justification for this enforsed ban is that a lot of teens are troublesome, so all must be banned.

"Local vicinity" is too vague for the purposes of this argument. It implies a much wider area of effect than I'm willing to believe is being imposed. And, again, the Wyvern sees most of its loiterers as being young, but they see them first as loiterers. There would have been no reason to use the device if they kids weren't loitering.

That's why i drew a parralell with banning all blacks, and enforsing this ban with some kind of only-blacks-can-hear-it noise. Either scenario would be banning people based upon the group to which they belong, and in both scenarios is has been descided that the group is more trouble than they're worth, so bugger them all -- guilty and innocent alike -- they're not coming in our store.

It has nothing to do with who is or isn't coming into the store. It's primarily about keeping people from loitering. I would definitely be on your side in this if the sound was being used to keep certain shoppers out.

My question, again: why is it ok to do this to teens but not blacks?

I guess we really don't know enough about the rest of what is done by the Wyvern about this problem. Would it make you feel better about this to know that they use the Mosquito to clear out the young loiterers and then call the police on the older loiterers? Would that show you that they are simply targeting loiterers in every way possible?

[ydoaPs]

the Wyvern sees most of its loiterers as being young, but they see them first as loiterers.

i have a store in and i have a problem with black people stealing. can i shoot every black person around with an airsoft gun?

 

 

There would have been no reason to use the device if they kids weren't loitering.

not all loiterers are kids and not all kids loiter.

[Phi for All]

i have a store in and i have a problem with black people stealing. can i shoot every black person around with an airsoft gun?

Your strawmen are becoming persistent.

not all loiterers are kids and not all kids loiter.

I'll ask you what I asked Dak. Would it make you feel better about this to know that they use the Mosquito to clear out the young loiterers and then call the police on the older loiterers? Would that show you that they are simply targeting loiterers in every way possible?

[ydoaPs]

Your strawmen are becoming persistent.

how is it a strawman?

 

 

I'll ask you what I asked Dak. Would it make you feel better about this to know that they use the Mosquito to clear out the young loiterers and then call the police on the older loiterers? Would that show you that they are simply targeting loiterers in every way possible?

why not just call the police in both? using the mosquito doesn't target the loiterers; it targets young people. just calling police for both would be far better as that actually targets loiterers. there are ways of specifically targeting loiterers instead of targeting young people.

[YT2095]

it`s a "Strawman" by default, it has Nothing to do with the topic (although you try and make it be).

then you take That Black person arg appart and therefore you win!???

 

sorry, it does NOT work that way strawman

[ydoaPs]

in the inner city, the majority of your shoplifters will be african american. why is it wrong to do something annoying(airsoft) to them, but it is okay to do something to annoying(the mosquito) to teens?

[Dak]

it's a strawman because no-one is suggesting shooting teens. I savvy that you're trying to make your argument more apparent, but in doing so you are strawmanning. I'd reccomend sticking to noise that only blacks could hear, or simply 'annoying black people'. shooting group x, even with an airsoft, is certainly not comparable to irritating group y with noise.

 

"Local vicinity" is too vague for the purposes of this argument. It implies a much wider area of effect than I'm willing to believe is being imposed.

 

local vacinity = theaeter and outside square, then.

 

And, again, the Wyvern sees most of its loiterers as being young, but they see them first as loiterers. There would have been no reason to use the device if they kids weren't loitering.

 

and the problem is that now all kids are effectively banned. reguardless of any correlation between youth and loitering, and reguardless of the fact that it is loitering that the proprietors are trying to prevent, this is still discriminatory. a non-loitering kid can now not go into the building without having to tolerate the 'increasingly irritating' noise.

 

I would definitely be on your side in this if the sound was being used to keep certain shoppers out.

 

hmm... have i missed something? as i see it, the mosquito repels kids, reguardless of wether or not they are loitering. what if they want to go to the theater?

 

Would it make you feel better about this to know that they use the Mosquito to clear out the young loiterers and then call the police on the older loiterers? Would that show you that they are simply targeting loiterers in every way possible?

 

no. if they called police on any loiterers, that'd be fine. and i dont particularly care when a youth-loiterer is repelled by the mosquito. what concerns me is that non-loiterer teens are being targetted (albeit unintentionally) by the mosquito.

 

And... you still haven't told me why it's ok to target teens just because most loiterers in this particular area are teenage, but it presumably would not be ok to target blacks if most of the loiterers in the local area were black.

[YT2095]

it`s off topic for a start, and NOT what we`re talking about, you TRY to present it as valid and then you hope it will lead all of us down a slippery slope. sorry but You`re BUSTED!

get over it and present a VALID / ON TOPIC arg, and leave the potential strawman "openings" out of it.

 

can you Do that?

[GutZ]

You guys are also forgetting the device can't send loit homing frequencies. A business like a theatre isn't trying to drive away kids, they bring good income. Shooting a person of colour (have to be PC) with a gun is discrimination because of choice. If the shop owners could create or buy a device like I mentioned earlier and decide...nah i'll stick with the youth violator instead, then I can see a point.

 

What do you want them to do? Have a guy running around like an idiot chasing people with a modified version that targets the guilty just so it doesn't seem like its discrimination.

 

These days discrimination/security takes on to many impractical forms. Like the burglar sueing the owner of the house who he/she broke into because the house doesn't have a beware of dog sign, and getting bitten.

[Dak]

you could allways just have police break up loitering gangs, and arrest repeat loiterers. I believe that there are laws against loitering.

 

a practice that would be unlikely to adversly affect any innocent non-loitering teens who just wanted to go to the theaeter. or however the stupid word is spelt.

[ydoaPs]

it's a strawman because no-one is suggesting shooting teens. I savvy that you're trying to make your argument more apparent, but in doing so you are strawmanning. I'd reccomend sticking to noise that only blacks could hear, or simply 'annoying black people'. shooting group x, even with an airsoft, is certainly not comparable to irritating group y with noise.

airsoft is just annoying, it doesn't harm the people.

 

why not have an irritating noise that all people can hear? it would get rid of the loitering problem without the discrimination.

[YT2095]

don`t tell lies airsoft Can and Does cause damage!

 

this device cannot.

 

you`re hoping to play on a Strawman AGAIN!

[Phi for All]

it's a strawman because no-one is suggesting shooting teens. I savvy that you're trying to make your argument more apparent, but in doing so you are strawmanning. I'd reccomend sticking to noise that only blacks could hear, or simply 'annoying black people'. shooting group x, even with an airsoft, is certainly not comparable to irritating group y with noise.

Exactly. Plus you'd be shooting real black customers. The mosquito is targeting everyone who can hear it who is loitering in the square outside the theatre.

local vacinity = theaeter and outside square, then.

Gotcha.

and the problem is that now all kids are effectively banned. reguardless of any correlation between youth and loitering, and reguardless of the fact that it is loitering that the proprietors are trying to prevent, this is still discriminatory. a non-loitering kid can now not go into the building without having to tolerate the 'increasingly irritating' noise.

Perhaps this is where things are unclear. I had assumed that the device is only turned on after hours or when loiterers are present. I can't see any benefit to making young paying customers walk through an annoying noise to get into the theater.

And... you still haven't told me why it's ok to target teens just because most loiterers in this particular area are teenage, but it presumably would not be ok to target blacks if most of the loiterers in the local area were black.

There are no analogies for a noise that targets a particular race. This is definitely a unique case. Again, I don't like the device but I don't think using it is particularly an act of discrimination. A sign that says "NO SKATEBOARDING" would, by default, target people under 25 as well but no one thinks it's discriminatory.

[Dak]

airsoft is just annoying, it doesn't harm the people.

 

unless you catch it in the eye. whatever, even if it is a valid analogy, it's validity certainly isn't clear. it'd be productive to abandon it and chose a new analogy.

 

There are no analogies for a noise that targets a particular race. This is definitely a unique case. Again, I don't like the device but I don't think using it is particularly an act of discrimination. A sign that says "NO SKATEBOARDING" would, by default, target people under 25 as well but no one thinks it's discriminatory.

 

I think this is the main area in which we disagree. banning skateboarding (or loitering) may, coincidentally, have more of an inpact on teens, but it is targetted directly at loiterers or skateboarders, and teens who partake of neither of these activities are unnafected. as far as the analagy goes, then banning basketball might, i suppose, effect local black people more than whites, but is still primaraly targetted at basketball players, and not blacks.

 

this mosquito, tho, is targetted at teens. not at loiterers, most of whom happen to be teens, but at teens, some of whom happen to be loiterers. teens who dont partake of loiterage are still effected. whilst the intent might be to fight loiterers, the actual effect is targeted by design at teens as a whole, hence why i think it's descriminatory.

[Dak]

Perhaps this is where things are unclear. I had assumed that the device is only turned on after hours or when loiterers are present. I can't see any benefit to making young paying customers walk through an annoying noise to get into the theater.

 

Actually, id assumed it was left on all day.

 

I suppose if it's only put on after hours, and the square isn't somewhere that people have to pass through to get from A to B, then that makes the whole thing alot better.

[YT2095]

they`re turned on a while AFTER closing time, I thought everyone already Knew that!?

 

if was an ALL DAY thing, I`de object too (and it doesn`t even affect me).

[H2SO4]

this reminds me of the circle k convenient store gas station down the street that plays classical music outside to discourage teens from loitering. I actualy like the music. I find it relaxing. I wonder if it actualy works though.

[ydoaPs]

wouldn't a better solution be to play a loud, high-pitched noise that everyone can hear? that would target all loiterers, right? and it isn't descriminatory.

[Genecks]

Makes me think there's a spaceship in the shop!

Me wanna go in!

 

I think I've heard this noise before. I like it.

[KLB]

wouldn't a better solution be to play a loud, high-pitched noise that everyone can hear? that would target all loiterers, right? and it isn't descriminatory.

Descrimintation in the business sense refers to refusing to do business with a specific group of people or refusing to hire a specific group of people.

 

In this case by definition loiterers are neither customers nor employees so even if only a specific group can hear the sounds it is not descrimination. By loitering one is already breaking the law if the store has posted a sign that states no loitering.

 

Also as has been pointed out several times in this thread, the method of using high pitched sounds that only teans can hear are designed for businesses who are having problems with TEEN loiterers. If only teens are loitering why should a business use a sound that everyone can hear.

[ydoaPs]

In this case by definition loiterers are neither customers nor employees so even if only a specific group can hear the sounds it is not descrimination. By loitering one is already breaking the law if the store has posted a sign that states no loitering.

Not all teens in the area are loitering.

 

Also as has been pointed out several times in this thread, the method of using high pitched sounds that only teans can hear are designed for businesses who are having problems with TEEN loiterers. If only teens are loitering why should a business use a sound that everyone can hear.

Not all loiterers are teens and not all teens are loiterers. Why not have the noise so all can hear? It requires no more equipment than the mosquito and it gets all loiterers.