Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Communications Cellphones Crime United States

Philly Answers Youth Flash Mobs With Curfew Enforcement 377

Not that it's the first city to enforce a youth curfew, and not that kids on a crime-spree is the only variety of moral panic offered as a rationale, but Philadelphia is cracking down through increased enforcement of a youth curfew law after children and teenagers attacked two people in the Center City district — attacks which, according to police, were coordinated via text messaging.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Philly Answers Youth Flash Mobs With Curfew Enforcement

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 06, 2011 @12:34PM (#37008080)

    And in this case, it wasn't really a flash mob at all, it was just a gang of hoodlums.

    This story doesn't seem relevant to this site at all to me.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yes, a gang of *black* hoodlums, attacking innocent whites in race-hatred motivated motivated attacks.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by hairyfeet ( 841228 )

        Which I'm having to wonder if the PC bullshit isn't getting too damned thick. anybody seen any real media coverage of the state fair at WI? How black gangs pretty much took over the fair in a looting spree, that ended up going down the neighboring streets? no? Why am I not surprised.

        This is what happens when an entire culture abandons any sense of morality. I'm not talking Xtian morality, I'm talking about teaching the most basic right from wrong. Where is Jackson and Sharpton when it is blacks doing the mo

        • by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @04:40PM (#37009976) Homepage

          But its time to call it like it is folks, and admit there is a reason why even though blacks have only 10% of the population they are more than 30% of the jail pop and it AIN'T racism. it is because you have this huge "thug life baby, thug life 4ever!" culture coupled with ZERO shame for having a half a dozen kids and not even knowing who the father is or having a male even involved in the child's life.

          I'm not going to "call it" like any of this.

          For one thing, who are the biggest consumers of rap music? White kids. That is a fact: Whites buy more rap music than anybody else, including the "thug life 4ever" music you describe. It only makes sense, because whites are the majority.

          But white appetite for gangsta rap music is significant, because various black leaders over the years, including (just for example) Chuck D of the rap group Public Enemy, have criticized gangsta rap as a fabrication created by the (white-owned) record labels to pander to white prejudices and bigotry. Gangsta rap music perpetuates the same kind of stereotypes first put forth by the "blacksploitation" movies of the 1970s: Black man as thug, black man as criminal, black man as sexual predator. Those movies were made by whites and white audiences ate them up.

          And those stereotypes didn't come out of nowhere. They are essentially the same stereotypes that were created as a way to reinforce the institution of slavery: Don't trust the Negro. He has no intelligence, only criminality. His only interest is to steal whatever he can (which is hilarious, considering black slaves were systematically deprived every possible material possession, up to and including their own bodies). He covets white women, don't let your women near him. If you see a Negro walking unaccompanied, call the police. And so on.

          To your second point, about black families not having father figures, guess what? This is America. I grew up in the white suburbs in California, and from the 1970s onward, divorce was positively endemic in that community. I barely knew anybody who grew up in a two-parent household. Judges tended to award custody to mothers, and many fathers (mine, for example) were more than happy with that situation. Most white kids tended to see their fathers on weekends, or at least a couple times a month. But that might be true of "fatherless" black kids, too -- that doesn't make their fathers into "father figures." And as for abandoning their kids? My dad was a doctor, making a six-figure salary, and my mom eventually gave up trying to collect child support for her two kids.

          So what's the difference? The difference is that when compared to blacks, whites are disproportionately born into the middle class or higher. They live in communities with better schools and better access to opportunities. They live in communities that don't foster an atmosphere of criminality, hostility, and disrespect -- but that's largely because even the most disadvantaged of their peers is probably doing pretty OK, while kids who grow up in poor neighborhoods are likely to have friends who are literally living on the streets by the time they are teenagers.

          The difference is that, however much you might want to wave your hand and vanish it all into the cornfield, blacks still must contend with the legacy institutionalized racism. They are still born into communities that inherit the poverty that came from discrimination, segregation, intimidation, marginalization, disenfranchisement, and all the inequalities to which blacks were subjected just 50 years ago.

          Seriously, you do realize that there are probably people reading /. who were born in an era where it was actually legal to deny someone a job because they were black, right? Or for that matter, to deny them the use of a public toilet for the same reason? That doesn't just disappear overnight.

          A lot of the change has to come from within the black community, true. But what

        • I am forced to agree (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I live in a neighborhood that's going through that kind of thing & I am also in process evicting some blacks from properties I own for being late on payments and destroying my property piece by piece, as well as trespassing & attempted robberies of my neighbors' homes too in this particular property.

          They called me a "cracker m'f'er" when I told them to move their things from that home's basement (not in rental agreement, was just a nicety I offered), & EVEN threatened me while I was on the phone

    • by iONiUM ( 530420 ) *

      I think this is more about "your rights." Lest we forget, we were all young once too, and not all of us were idiots. They're taking rights away. I mean, just look at this quote:

      “No good things can happen to young people at that hour.”

      Seems like a slippery slope to "No good things can happen to people at that hour.", no? Rights are rights, /. fights so hard for children's rights in schools, and there have been many postings about how so and so's son was expelled for "hacking." Why not out-cry ove

      • I actually agree with that quote. There is no good reason whatsoever for any teenager to be out after midnight, unless they are coming home from work.
        • There is absolutely no good reason for a teenager to be working up until or after midnight; homework and being well-rested for school are incompatible with a job that late in the evening.
          • I remember back when I was 17. I would think to myself, "If only there was a time of year where there was no school and I could get a job to earn some extra cash."

            I hope one day future generations could have some kind of vacation in the summer where they could work to earn extra money, even if it involves the occasional late shift.

          • There is absolutely no good reason to pass a law forcing good people, even young ones, to stay home after a certain hour in a free country. AND this law only applies to kid under 13! Does Philly actually have troubles with kids that young committing violent crimes?

            Curfews are an infringement of citizens rights. Young people are citizens. I'm a father of three grown kids, and had my share of trouble with my boys in their teenage years, but it is up to me, not the government to set my kids curfew.

            I think

          • Amateur astronomy?

        • I used to get up at two or three in the morning and go fishing before school.

          Seems like a perfectly valid reason to be out of the house after midnight to me.

          Just because YOUR teen-hood was so dull you didn't have a reason to be out late doesn't mean there aren't reasons. Hell, I had a couple of friends who would take late-night walks in the cemetery and write angsty bad poetry. Weird? Maybe. Worth arresting them over? No.

        • In free societies, you don't need a good reason to do something. Instead, you need a good reason to not be able to do something, and there is not a good reason to categorically stop minors from being out late at night.
        • by Calydor ( 739835 )

          Midnight premiere of Latest Over-Hyped Movie?

        • There is no good reason

          According to you. However, "good" is subjective. Some people might find "good" reasons to be out at that time period.

      • by insertwackynamehere ( 891357 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @01:07PM (#37008338) Journal

        I was a teenager in Philly and there was a curfew. These curfews make sense, I really don't think you are from there if you don't understand why. Currently, these "flash mobs" are sporadic riots involving violence. Imagine living there. Does some kid being out at 12 at night seem more important than not getting mugged and assaulted out of the blue in what you would think is a nice area because there are literally people around everywhere?

        The curfew is not enforced racially, for the record. Under 18, you go in. My friend was telling me about how a while back (7 years maybe) he was out at 4am in Philly when he was like 15 and the police cited him and called his parents and he got in a lot of trouble. He's white. These curfews are because a lot of kids do cause problems that late. Right now, yes, there is the disenfranchised black youth, but let's not act like we can't be against violence in the streets if it means we have to acknowledge instances of violence that generally center around a specific population. All it means is we should probably figure out what is making Philadelphia's black youth so mad (there are a lot of obvious things that come to mind) and at the same time don't let them act out in the interim as we try and fix it because no matter what the reasoning, innocent people shouldn't be hospitalized and stores and delis shouldn't be destroyed. No one has the right to do these things to people.

        • And precisely when are teens supposed to learn how to make their own decisions? I don't think that there's any good reason for 14 year olds to be out that late by themselves, but at some point, kids do need the chance to start growing up before they turn 18.

          Sort of reminds me a bit about a kid I knew in high school. His parents were extremely protective and while typically a very responsible person, he'd more or less go nuts on the weekends that they weren't around. I'd be surprised if he'd do that if he ha

        • Does some kid being out at 12 at night seem more important than not getting mugged and assaulted out of the blue in what you would think is a nice area because there are literally people around everywhere?

          Yes. I'd rather not put a ban on something just because some people may or may not abuse it.

        • by sjames ( 1099 )

          So why the hell are you out at an hour where you could get mugged? Why do the kids get a curfew and the adults run around stupidly begging to get mugged?

          Perhaps you believe some citizens are lesser beings than others? Perhaps that's one of the things making them so mad?

          I fully agree that innocent people shouldn't be hospitalized and stores and delis shouldn't be destroyed and fully support the police finding and stopping the people doing that.

          • Perhaps you believe some citizens are lesser beings than others? Perhaps that's one of the things making them so mad?

            Yes. They're called minors for a reason. They've been pissy whiny hormonally emotional about it since, well, forever.

        • The curfew is a symptom of the problem of a incompetent government. It is NOT a good way to curb violence in a free democracy.

        • These curfews are because a lot of kids do cause problems that late.

          No matter what you do like this you're going to see more and more of these problems. The only way to fix it is to eliminate basic inequalities in our society. Since our society is generally designed to create inequality, that's not going to happen until it falls. Our culture is therefore designed to fall.

          The curfew is not enforced racially, for the record.

          As long as the police have the right of selective enforcement, and they very much do, I cannot believe in equality. There WILL always be bias.

          no matter what the reasoning, innocent people shouldn't be hospitalized and stores and delis shouldn't be destroyed.

          ...and innocent people should not be incarcerated, even in their

      • I used to go out hiking 'till 5am when I was that age just for fun, me an a group of 4/5 others around the same age all go out hiking in the country in the dark. It was fun. Was good team and character building and it was happening at 4am in the morning when it was pretty dark. Don't even have streetlights in the country.
      • Personally, I spent many happy weekends at a certain movie that started at midnight on Saturdays. I met friends who I am, decades later, friends with, and we've been in each other's wedding parties, lost in wars, and otherwise followed the lives of.

    • "First, they came for the Niemollers..."

  • by DavidTC ( 10147 ) <slas45dxsvadiv.v ... minus city> on Saturday August 06, 2011 @12:51PM (#37008206) Homepage

    ...everyone is aware that's not what a 'flash mob' is, right?

    There are law enforcement issues issues with 'flash mobs', specifically, they work very well as a pre-scheduled distraction for the police, and can even be used for help with escape.

    At some point, I suspect that will happen, that some bank robber wearing a clown outfit will actually escape into a flash mob of clowns, and everyone participating in the flash mob will be charged as an 'attractive nuisance', which is legal speak for 'behaving so stupidly that you make the job of criminals easier', and this whole 'flash mob' thing will die out, or at least the anonymous ones.

    However, thugs that know each other, coordinating an attack via text messages, is not a 'flash mob'.

  • by shoehornjob ( 1632387 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @01:01PM (#37008300)
    Because the second link was a bit light on information and the NY Times still seems to think that dumbass John Street is still the mayor of Philadelphia I give you the local source. [] it really was a shame what they did to one of those guys but this is hardly a flash mob. What somone had a cell phone and all of a sudden it's "News for Nerds"? Please. I don't even live in Philadelphia (anymore) and I know it's not safe to walk around downtown at 10:00PM. Brotherly Love my ass.
  • by The O Rly Factor ( 1977536 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @01:15PM (#37008410)
    As a Philadelphian, I can vouch that a flash mob in Philly is not the same thing as a flash mob that you see on AT&T advertising campaigns. While a flash mob may make you think of a bunch of people dancing in unison to some obscure pop culture reference in a large public area, a Philadelphia flash mob is a band of nearly feral minority teenagers whose parent wants to get their drink on and expels them for the night from their section 8 houses in North Philadelphia. They then flood down in droves to the Center City business district and Old City/South Street area, where they attack people at random.

    I am sorry if that comes off as bitter and slightly racist. I was involved in one of these on South Street a few months ago...the fear you feel is absolutely indescribable when you realize that kids as young as 10 were raised in a way where they feel assaulting and robbing people at random is an acceptable Saturday night activity.
    • by insertwackynamehere ( 891357 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @01:25PM (#37008468) Journal

      I don't think it comes off as racist. Only on the internet, where racism has taken a meaning of pointing out problems within a certain community, would it be considered racism. Back in the real world, you pretty much described what a Philly flash mob is and likely what a good part of the reason is that they occur, specifically with poor black youth. It's not racist, it's a depressing reality: the majority of a flash mob (if not the entirety) is poor and black for a reason and not by chance. It's because of these issues that the black community in Philadelphia is dealing with: being raised by no one except some sociopath who was also raised by no one, to bash heads and snatch wallets.

      The school system is falling apart meanwhile, we've got a string of terrible superintendents, teachers laid off, when I was in high school 5-9 years ago, there were schools known to be absolute hell holes (I went magnet, my neighborhood school would have probably led to my death) and even now some of these kids apparently were on their way to college but they decide to just participate in this violence? There is clearly something at work here, but that being said there is also no excuse for violence, none of the "white people deserve to get bashed" internet rage is appropriate, especially when most people posting it are white but super far removed from anything close to this because they live in some rich suburb in their parent's house and then act like white people in an urban environment are spoiled children for complaining about these sorts of things.

      • Only on the internet, where racism has taken a meaning of pointing out problems within a certain community, would it be considered racism.

        Well, no.

        Actually, in many parts of the country this would be considered racist. It's not just an internet thing.

        Though the tendency to see this sort of comment as intrinsically racist has gone down since Jesse Jackson made the comment about seeing a young mand approaching him at night, and being relieved when he realized the young man was white....

      • by LoRdTAW ( 99712 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @02:34PM (#37009056)

        ...and even now some of these kids apparently were on their way to college but they decide to just participate in this violence?

        Its part of growing up in the hood. You either fit in with the wolf pack or become prey. Many of those kids do want to get the fuck out of their situation but they have choice but to live with the rest of the dreck. So when a kid trying to be good is asked by his thug friend to go out, he goes and does whatever he can to fit in. Otherwise he will be called a pussy and get his ass beaten (or even killed) on a daily basis.

          I remember a mini spurt of wilding one day after school while walking to the bus station. I was walking down when one kid comes running across the street with a big chunk of concrete. I thought I was a goner but it turns out he hurled it through the back window of a parked mini van right in front of me. The group of youths he was with proceeded to cheer and smash a few other car windows on the block. Then they all took off running. This was in broad daylight in front of dozens of other school kids.

        I always find that the first whites to call someone a racist are (as you said) far removed from inner city life. They never went to a high school (that was in a bad neighborhood) where they were the only white person in class. They never walked through a bad neighborhood to a friends house and get mugged at gun point by four black youths. They never witnessed a gang of eight youths beating one helpless kid to the point that he had to go to the hospital. Fuck those people.

        I am white and I went through this kind of crap. I was mugged a few times on my way to school during my freshman year (all of the muggers were black teens). After that year, the muggings stopped only because I think the police presence was jacked up in that area. I reported every incident to the school, they work with the police on the report.

        Growing up with no money and considered a boat anchor sized nuisance by your own parents (usually a single mother with 3+ kids) who turns you loose to get their fuck/crack/drink/whatever on does not produce well behaved members of society. They are literally wild animals. Never loved or taught right from wrong and never learned about consequences. They fear nothing. Some make it through that mess but they are few and far between.

        If you want an idea of how bad it gets for poor minority youths, watch the TV show called "The First 48" (Its on A&E). Its a reality cop show based on a few homicide units in various cities. Most of the cases involve black youths and adults senselessly murdering one another over NOTHING. You see the shit conditions they live in and how their parents or lack thereof shaped their short and hellish lives. Its terrible.

    • It wasn't racist until you apologized for being racist - you never actually mentioned race. However the assumption that "nearly feral minority teenagers" and "section 8 housing" refers to a specific race might be racist. (I live in the deep south, where white people are just as poor as minorities, so I imagined these flash mobs as white kids until you said otherwise.)
    • the same things happen in other parts to the world, and it's not black kids doing it, it's poor kids doing it

      the POVERTY is the issue, not the race

      it's just revealing to me to see the right constantly falling into race based thinking, rather than class based thinking

      it reveals the right doesn't understand the problems you create when you push social policies that create a large poor under class, rather than policies that support the growth of the middle class

      the right pushes policies that makes people poor, and then they see poor people doing things because of their lame policies

      and yet, they don't think "poor kids did this and that", they think "black kids did this and that"

      very revealing

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This is not a Philly problem, this is a global problem. The UK has had feral humans like this for many years, we called them Chavs.

      Society is failing to teach parents to be responsible, which is letting feral kids into the systems which disrupts educating everyone else. Until society steps up and starts taking care of the poor and helping them out of their situations, we're going to see increasing numbers of these type of people. There will always be terrible parents who let their kids run wild, but those k

    • by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @02:18PM (#37008914)

      There is a reason that doesn't happen much in States where it is a reasonable presumption that many potential targets are armed.

      The LA riots happened in LA because there was no serious armed opposition except for a very few armed citizens. The reason they didn't spread to the South (excepting a few minor incidents) is that citizens are ready and eager to waste anyone threatening their safety.

      "when you realize that kids as young as 10 were raised in a way where they feel assaulting and robbing people at random is an acceptable Saturday night activity."

      I wasn't raised to think that gunning them down is an inappropriate response. A child soldier in Africa can kill you as dead as an adult militiaman/woman.

      None of this is new. This guy fought back and survived: []

    • It doesn't help that many of the nicer parts of center city (and south philly) are only a few blocks away from some housing projects etc. The have's and the have not's don't usually play nice with each other.
  • They should be banning private ownership of cellphones, which are obviously highly effective as terrorist weapons.

    • They should be banning private ownership of cellphones, which are obviously highly effective as terrorist weapons.

      How are cellphones effective as terrorist weapons? Terrorists kill 10's 100's or 1000's of people but as far as I can tell here only one guy got critically injured and a few people were assulted. Hardly a terrorist action.

  • Problems... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MaWeiTao ( 908546 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @01:35PM (#37008542)

    We can talk about rights all we want, but the fact here is that what we're experiencing here is the criminal element stripping our rights away. Being unable to safely walk somewhere late at night constitutes a loss of freedom. The problem is that Americans are so used to this sort of garbage that they don't even see the problem. But I lived overseas where I could walk the streets at 3am without a care in the world. It wasn't that crime was non-existent but it didn't factor into normal routine. Sketchy neighborhoods were rare.

    But the problem here is that American law enforcement is reactive, not proactive. The approach taken to crime is similar to how oppressive regimes keep sectarian conflict in check: oppression. I don't mean that Americans practice anything nearly that severe. What I mean is that they address problems with aggressive tactics; increased police presence, more arrests, etc. That only addresses the symptoms and once they're gone the problems return. And making matters worse is that this approach dehumanizes police offices, it turns them into this faceless force. They don't interact nearly enough with communities. They should patrol on foot, not in police cars.

    However, the real problem are parents. Too many parents have abrogated their responsibilities. They don't care what their kids are doing, because if they did that kid wouldn't be out on the streets in the middle of the night. So, the responsibility ends up being foisted on the government. And what the government decides isn't always in the best interests of the citizens, especially when they're looking for quick results. Those quick results are effective over the current election cycle, but they never address the long term problems.

    But the fact is the United States is suffering from serious cultural issues that perpetuates things like crime. Those need to be addressed properly, but honestly, I don't know see who could disagree with the benefits of enjoying safer streets, less vandalism, etc. But I suppose it's the tendency for Americans to want to stick it to the man, to the point of being irrational about it.

    • it's a problem with poverty

      the overseas places you are talking about are rich places. there are also rich places you can walk around at 3 am in the usa

      go to the favelas in rio, the slums outside mumbai or manila or cairo or nairobi, and you tell me again criminals running roughshod over your rights is some sort of american phenomenon


    • but the fact here is that what we're experiencing here is the criminal element stripping our rights away.

      Too true. If we'd stop electing people who ignored our civil liberties, we'd have fewer criminals in office stripping our rights away.

    • Could you please back these statements up with some facts? The truth is that our cities are not in general more dangerous than they were before, nor was there some kind of golden age when everyone was safer than we were now. Certainly I can point to times when things were much much worse.

      While there are always hotspots of crime and danger, and you can always point at anecdotes of problems, I don't think you can support your assertions, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

    • We can talk about rights all we want, but the fact here is that what we're experiencing here is the criminal element stripping our rights away.

      Sorry, but I disagree. Both scenarios technically take your rights away. And I'd rather the criminals do it to me than have the rights taken away from innocent people who never did anything "wrong" to begin with.

      to the point of being irrational about it.

      "irrational"? No, it is a preference. There's nothing inherently illogical about emotions or preferences.

    • Re:Problems... (Score:5, Informative)

      by brit74 ( 831798 ) on Saturday August 06, 2011 @03:36PM (#37009564)
      > But I lived overseas where I could walk the streets at 3am without a care in the world... But the fact is the United States is suffering from serious cultural issues that perpetuates things like crime.
      I think it depends on where you are. As a tourist, you're probably travelling in safe places - in part because dangerous places aren't the places that get a lot of tourist traffic. (I know, for example, that the tourist areas of Mexico are generally safe, but Mexico has a lot more problems with crime, drug cartels, and 3-4x the homicide rate than the US.) Also, you might be perceiving the US as very dangerous thanks to news reports, while you're judging other countries based on personal experience.

      Assaults (per capita) []
      # 1 South Africa: 12.0752 per 1,000 people
      # 6 United States: 7.56923 per 1,000 people
      # 7 New Zealand: 7.47881 per 1,000 people
      # 8 United Kingdom: 7.45959 per 1,000 people
      # 9 Canada: 7.11834 per 1,000 people
      # 10 Australia: 7.02459 per 1,000 people
      So, you're only 1%-8% more likely to be assaulted in the US than you are in New Zealand, the UK, Canada, and Australia.

      Burglaries (per capita) []
      # 1 Australia: 21.7454 per 1,000 people
      # 3 Denmark: 18.3299 per 1,000 people
      # 4 Estonia: 17.4576 per 1,000 people
      # 5 Finland: 16.7697 per 1,000 people
      # 6 New Zealand: 16.2763 per 1,000 people
      # 7 United Kingdom: 13.8321 per 1,000 people
      # 8 Poland: 9.46071 per 1,000 people
      # 9 Canada: 8.94425 per 1,000 people
      # 17 United States: 7.09996 per 1,000 people
      You're quite a bit less likely to have a burglary in the US than you are in Australia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, New Zealand, the UK, Poland, or Canada.

      Total crimes (per capita) []
      # 2 New Zealand: 105.881 per 1,000 people
      # 3 Finland: 101.526 per 1,000 people
      # 4 Denmark: 92.8277 per 1,000 people
      # 6 United Kingdom: 85.5517 per 1,000 people
      # 8 United States: 80.0645 per 1,000 people
      # 9 Netherlands: 79.5779 per 1,000 people
      # 11 Germany: 75.9996 per 1,000 people
      # 12 Canada: 75.4921 per 1,000 people
      # 13 Norway: 71.8639 per 1,000 people
      The US ranks in the same ballpark as these other countries when it comes to total crimes per capita.

      Car thefts (per capita) []
      # 1 Australia: 6.92354 per 1,000 people
      # 2 Denmark: 5.92839 per 1,000 people
      # 3 United Kingdom: 5.6054 per 1,000 people
      # 4 New Zealand: 5.45031 per 1,000 people
      # 5 Norway: 5.08143 per 1,000 people
      # 6 France: 4.9713 per 1,000 people
      # 7 Canada: 4.88547 per 1,000 people
      # 8 Italy: 4.19755 per 1,000 people
      # 9 United States: 3.8795 per 1,000 people
      Car theft is quite a bit less common in the US than these other developed countries.

      Rapes (per capita) []
      # 3 Australia: 0.777999 per 1,000 people
      # 5 Canada: 0.733089 per 1,000 people
      # 9 United States: 0.301318 per 1,000 people
      # 10 Iceland: 0.246009 per 1,000 people
      # 12 New
    • I've some problems with details in your post:

      1. The "criminal element" isn't stripping any rights away. (Rights can't be taken away, either, only infringed upon; if they can be taken away, they're called privileges.) If anyone, it's law enforcement that is infringing upon rights. Now, if you were referring to law enforcement agents as criminals, then I stand corrected. :)

      2. The crime problem in America is not due to a flaw in law enforcement, but due to the ignorance and laxness of the population in general

  • Regardless of whether it would be effective at stopping crime, curfews are routinely struck down as unconstitutional. All this will do is cost the city of Philadelphia money in legal fees when it is inevitably challenged in court and struck down.

    Local politicians rarely learn though.

    • Junior, West Virginia, a city so small it gets missed on a lot of maps, has a curfew law for everyone under the age of 21. Though not part of the curfew, usually suspicious vehicles or individuals are checked out quickly at night. Efforts to strike it down (all one of them that I've been told) failed.

      The reason is that Junior has a problem with backwoods drug manufacturing and dealing. Like, massive, to the point that regular night time trafficking and drug use were becoming a safety issue for the entirety
  • The world runs 24/7 these days.

    I work night shift

    • If you're under 18 in the US, that's illegal in pretty much every state, unless you're in some exception, like working for your parents or yourself...

  • by mosb1000 ( 710161 ) <> on Saturday August 06, 2011 @03:57PM (#37009722)

    It bugs me the way older generations seem to expect young people to stay at home all day, and then think it strange when the go out and do these sort of things. This is a time when people are trying to make a name for themselves and decide who whey will become, people who want to be spineless, worthless stackers will sit at home and watch TV, but there are a lot of people who want more than that for themselves, and when this is the only real option they have, it's what they turn to.

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.