...because they targeted minors who committed no other crime than being night owls...Night owls my Hillary! These are hoods that need to be kept off the streets at night to keep the crime rate down!
To: JesseHousman
...justices said the laws in Tampa and neighboring Pinellas Park were too broad because they targeted minors who committed no other crime than being night owls... WTF? Someone needs to take these robed jackasses and put them in a crowd of these "night owls" for a couple of nights. That'll change their tune right pronto.
2 posted on
11/19/2004 8:23:42 AM PST by
Prime Choice
(STFU ACLU.)
To: JesseHousman
"Nothing good occurs past midnight outside the home"
Words from my grandmother which are absolute.
3 posted on
11/19/2004 8:24:10 AM PST by
blackdog
(Can we possibly have just one more "Kidz-Bop"?)
To: JesseHousman
I think that this is a local issue that state judges need not to involve themselves in. If your town wants kids under 16 in a midnight, then thats the way it should be.
To: JesseHousman
Good. Parents need to make that decision, not the state. I remember this crap from when I was a teenager. It teaches you to look at any authority as a threat. It teaches you to not trust or support law enforcement.
7 posted on
11/19/2004 8:32:39 AM PST by
mysterio
To: JesseHousman
These are hoods that need to be kept off the streets at night to keep the crime rate down! So why not curfews for adults too?
I don't know what version of the Bill of Rights you have, but mine doesn't come with a disclaimer that says "does not apply to those under 18 years of age".
8 posted on
11/19/2004 8:35:29 AM PST by
gdani
To: JesseHousman
9 posted on
11/19/2004 8:35:56 AM PST by
NonValueAdded
("We are in the process of allowing them to self-actualise" LtC. Rainey, Fallujah, 11/04)
To: JesseHousman
Ban curfews, but enforce loitering laws.
10 posted on
11/19/2004 8:36:22 AM PST by
zook
To: JesseHousman
....were too broad because they targeted minors who committed no other crime than being night owls.....In other words, they committed no crime other than VIOLATING THIS LAW. Shall we apply this principal to other laws? Murder? Rape? If you are only violating that one law, then it's not really a crime.
To: JesseHousman
it takes a village -without a curfew...
24 posted on
11/19/2004 9:16:37 AM PST by
DBeers
To: JesseHousman
How would these judges feel if it was their neighborhood? Maybe they should send some of these juveniles to the streets these judges reside - liberal snobbism - they probably live in gated communities!
31 posted on
11/19/2004 9:42:38 AM PST by
Alissa
To: JesseHousman
OK, so all the BAD KIDS stay home! ;)
47 posted on
11/19/2004 10:14:43 AM PST by
Libertina
(We praise You Lord, You have granted America a Christian leader!)
To: JesseHousman
"because they criminally punished parents and even shop owners who condoned or couldn't control kids' curfew-breaking."Parents who can't do something about their kids breaking curfew? Those kind of parents NEED to be punished, along with the errant children.
54 posted on
11/19/2004 10:29:23 AM PST by
MEGoody
(Way to go, America! 4 more years!)
To: JesseHousman
is there overall opinion here that the government should set curfews for kids?
i think thats interesting. i think the government should mind their own business.
To: JesseHousman
When I was a teenager, I had no parental curfew at all. I could stay out til 3 AM if I wanted, as long I as I let them know where I was and what I was doing. Admittedly, I only exercised this privilege 2 or 3 times, through my entire high school years. However, the freedom was there when I wanted it, which wasn't often.
BUT.... I was a good kid and my parents knew it. They knew that I would never touch drugs, fornicate, commit street crimes, let my grades slip, turn homosexual or Democrat, or drive drunk -- even if I stayed out til sunrise.
Not all kids are like that.
130 posted on
11/19/2004 3:11:20 PM PST by
Rytwyng
(we're here, we're Huguenots, get used to us)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson