Public Safety
A color-blind Montgomery County is still a myth
Supporters of Montgomery County's proposed teen curfew say we shouldn't worry about racial profiling. But in this newly majority-minority jurisdiction, race is the one thing we should be talking about.
Photo by thecourtyard on Flickr.
In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Montgomery County police officer Robert Carter explained that cops don't see race:
"I understand that some cops of yesteryear judged a "book by its cover." The good news is today's Montgomery County police are part of one of the first generations of Americans to have grown up "color blind," or for that matter, blind to all bias. They'll judge these kids based on something else, something they have learned quickly on this job."Though I'm not convinced that the curfew represents a "war on black teenagers," as Post columnist Courtland Milloy describes it, I cannot believe that Montgomery's police are all "color-blind," even the younger officers who like me grew up around diversity. After all, a curfew in Frederick County was struck down because police were using it to target black kids. As a black male, my experiences with racial profiling tell me I should be skeptical of statements like Officer Carter's that our cops can serve without ever displaying bias.
After all, prejudice is still present even in liberal Montgomery County, even if it shows up in subtle ways: the community meetings where neighbors equate low-income people with drug dealers or use coded language like "undesirables." Or the diner that kicks a black gay couple out for embracing in public.
Some would argue that class, not race is the biggest divider in today's Montgomery, especially with a black County Executive and three minority Councilmembers. But we're still far from being a color-blind society. At Saturday's community roundtable on youth issues, I talked to Joey, who lives in Four Corners and said he'd support a curfew. He won't take his family to Silver Spring at night because of "thug-looking kids" hanging out there. "And I'm not just talking about black and Latino kids," he quickly added. If we don't see race, is that statement necessary?
For years, Montgomery County has been proud of its liberal politics. Now that we're a majority-minority jurisdiction, we actually have to show our progressive values. After all, it's easy to be open-minded when the only minorities you see are the token black family on your cul-de-sac. It's harder when your kids go to a school that's 25% white and the signs in your neighborhood are all in Amharic or Spanish.
Some people are comfortable with that. The rest struggle each day to negotiate a world that doesn't look like it did just twenty years ago, unsure how to respond. Usually, they go with fear. And that can make even the most staunch liberal consider things normally offensive to their principles. Like trusting that police can pick out "bad" kids on a busy downtown street, even before anyone's done anything illegal, and not wrongfully accuse someone based on vaguely-defined characteristics.
The perennial debate over youth behavior and crime in Silver Spring has been going on for years. It's a reflection of how committed people are to ensuring that this community, once lost to disinvestment and urban decay, can remain vibrant and safe. Yet the discussion rarely touches on the elephant in the very diverse room and, as a result, can never be fully resolved.
 | A planner and architect by training, Dan Reed is interested in suburban retrofits. Dan works for the Friends of White Flint, writes his own blog, Just Up the Pike, and serves as the Land Use Chair for the Action Committee for Transit. Dan lives in Silver Spring.    |
Comments
- Cyclists are special and do have their own rules
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money
- Metro policy for refunds after delays falls short, riders say
- ICC losing bus service in classic bait and switch
- WMATA launches "Short Trip" rail pass on SmarTrip
by Fitz on Aug 9, 2011 11:14 am • link • report
Kids want to have fun? Well they can play baseball, basketball, football, soccer or roller hockey like we used to. They can use their imaginations. They can hang out at the houses or apartments of their friends. They are absolutely NOT entitled to loiter and hangout wherever they please because they are teenagers, and gosh darn it, teenagers are people too.
News flash: Life sucks if you're a teen, but you grow out of it. Suck it up, deal with it and wait until you are 18 or at least self-sufficient (and of voting age). Quit demanding (and for you Dan Reed, enabling) to be treated like adults because, frankly, YOU AREN'T ADULTS.
Just face it, Dan. There are parents out there who are unwilling or unable to parent their children appropriately, in DC and Mont Co and PG. That's why Mont Co police should have another card to help protect investment in downtown SS and around Mont Co.
by 20024 on Aug 9, 2011 11:33 am • link • report
by Jerome on Aug 9, 2011 11:37 am • link • report
The problem isn't that black youths are hanging out at Silver Spring or Gallery Place, it's that they're loitering and not patronizing a business. And businesses believe that there is a negative perception to that behavior.
by Fitz on Aug 9, 2011 11:48 am • link • report
by dan reed! on Aug 9, 2011 11:49 am • link • report
I agree with you about the curfew issue. I just question how much responsibility there is on MoCo to provide bored teenagers with something to do at 11 PM on a Friday or Saturday night.
If teenagers don't wish to be hanging out with their friends at home then why do we think that they want to be hanging out somewhere else in a supervised fashion?
by Fitz on Aug 9, 2011 12:00 pm • link • report
Teenagers have terrible decision-making skills. They disproportionately get into trouble regardless of their socioeconomic status. So, in this case, legally compelling teens to go home at night until they're older (and their brains develop further) might very well meet the definition of the "addressing the root cause of crime."
Anyway, it's no more unfair than discriminating against them in renting cars, drinking, or anything else. The state has a "loco parentis" role to play in the lives of children. The children aren't going to like that. Tough.
by oboe on Aug 9, 2011 12:01 pm • link • report
Whose bright idea was this?
by Eric Fidler on Aug 9, 2011 12:09 pm • link • report
On GGW, our rule is that comments must give opinions about the issues rather than making the debate about the author, and that people must be polite to other commenters and to the contributors. Your "Sorry, Dan... Dan Reed, enabling... face it, Dan" rhetoric does not respect that line.
Please feel free to give your opinions on the facts and on what teenagers should do or what laws should apply to them, but please leave individual names out of it. Further comments of this nature will be deleted. Thanks and welcome!
by David Alpert on Aug 9, 2011 12:11 pm • link • report
That said, the government shouldn't be in the business of deciding when some of its citizens can or should be going to bed. We already have enough laws on the books to enforce good behavior in public. If these kids (or even adults) are loitering ... then arrest them for loitering. If they're disturbing the peace, then arrest them for disturbing the peace. Etc. But don't take away the civil liberties of an entire age group for the bad actions of a few bad actors.
by Lance on Aug 9, 2011 12:14 pm • link • report
by Vik on Aug 9, 2011 12:14 pm • link • report
by prognostication on Aug 9, 2011 12:15 pm • link • report
I don't think I've ever heard such a ridiculously informed diatribe against teenagers. If this curfew is meant to stop the actions of those who would break the law, it won't have much of an effect. If you are already considering a crime (violent or otherwise) what is a curfew going to do to stop you. This will just effect those who actually want to be out late. When I was a teenager (admittedly not in MoCo), I was often out late. I wasn't breaking the law or "loitering." I was often at the movies or at a late-night diner enjoying time with my friends. Loitering is already a crime. Any other number of laws exist to punish actions by those supposedly targeted by the curfew. This is overkill and ineffective. Further, living within walking distance of DTSS, I question just how many people this will effect. I don't see a lot of teens just out and about. I see a lot of 18-20 and early 20s about and a whole lot of homeless (especially as you get back toward the metro). Tell me how a curfew impacts these people. I see the teens hanging out at the movies and at some of the restaurants (even if they recently closed). I would suggest a more prudent option: OPEN SOMETHING UP ASIDE FROM THE MOVIE THEATER LATE! Then, we might reduce the number of teens standing around.
by J on Aug 9, 2011 12:28 pm • link • report
Based on the Courtland Milloy article on teen loitering in Gallery Place then I can't imagine that too many folks would be pleased if police started arrested teens for loitering.
by Fitz on Aug 9, 2011 12:34 pm • link • report
That is why we give the police discretion. If they look suspicious, arrest them on curfew violations. If they are harmless, yell at them and drive them home.
Oh wait! That's profiling!
by charlie on Aug 9, 2011 12:35 pm • link • report
Point well taken. Looking into the issue a little further, I see loitering isn't covered for nights (assuming what I am reading is right) in DC. That said, I never was much for a law that criminalized standing around. I just don't see what a curfew is going to do to stop the issues at hand.
by J on Aug 9, 2011 12:38 pm • link • report
How about arrest them when they commit a crime and leave the others alone. That's not profiling. Keep a police presence down there to limit crime and arrest the ones that do engage in criminal activities. And, if a cop sees suspicious behavior, he could always go over and investigate, which usually stops something pretty damn quick. No profiling needed, just good old-fashioned actual police work.
by J on Aug 9, 2011 12:41 pm • link • report
And if a person of any color finds gaggles of loud black, Asian, Hispanic, or white teens loitering around stores or a mall to be a deterrent to their patronizing the area, why must we accuse them of some sort of "-ism"?
If I take my family to the downtown Silver Spring area and am bothered by the behavior of teens acting like idiots, does it make a difference if the teens are minorities?
Should I not be deterred from visiting an area if groups of "thug-looking teens" gather there regularly, act like idiots, say inappropriate things to passerby, and degrade an area's family-friendly environment?
Does that make me racist? Does the charge of racism get negated if my skin is dark?
It seems that far too often, we are scolded about someone being "racist" because they point out the obvious: Gaggles of black teens hanging around Gallery Place that hassle people; gaggles of Hispanic teens in Silver Spring that act like idiots; etc. Apparently we need an equivalent gaggle of obnoxious white teens in order to balance out the complaints and thereby negate any charges of racism.
Some of the best commentary on the issue has been provided by comedians like Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, and Chris Rock. For decades, they've pointed out the lunacy of crying "racism" when talking about issues of common sense. Yet we keep having the same discussions, accomplishing nothing, and then complaining that we need a "serious discussion" on race.
by Fritz on Aug 9, 2011 12:46 pm • link • report
It costs money to have enough cops out at night and to keep a database on where teenagers are "hanging out". Once you do catch them, it's difficult to effectively prosecute a child for petty crimes. Teenagers pay 0% of that extra police force.
Unlike adults who have inherent rights because they bear the full weight of responsibility, children have limited rights because they have almost no responsibility. Wanting to go to a late movie does not trump the cost of extra policing required to 'parent' kids with no/irresponsible parents. If the kids want to go to a late movie, find an adult to chaperone.
by ahk on Aug 9, 2011 12:52 pm • link • report
Several times residents have posted information about shady characters they've observed in the neighborhood acting highly suspiciously (ringing successive homes' doorbells, looking through the windows, checking if the door is unlocked, going to the rear entrance of the property, etc.). And they've provided a description of the shady character, including the person's race (kind of a key piece of information).
Inevitably, someone takes offense at the mention of the shady person's race b/c it's an awful thing to be a racist or to even be an Archie Bunker-type bigot who sees only people's race and not the beauty they possess inside. Which then leads to a more sensitive person describing another recent shady character in the neighborhood acting oddly, but leaving out the person's race (All Units: Be on the lookout for a person in the neighborhood wearing jeans, sneakers and a blue shirt.).
I feel bad for cops: If they try to prevent crime by reacting to suspicious behavior by minority youths, they're clearly racially profiling. If they ignore kids that are pretty clearly up to no good so that they're not accused of racial profiling, they're useless at crime prevention.
by Fritz on Aug 9, 2011 12:54 pm • link • report
There are places where white teenagers hang out. It's called Bethesda. Even if there haven't been gang fights, downtown Bethesda has had issues of its own - an open-air drug market flourished outside the movie theatre on Wisconsin Avenue for many years - yet somehow the debate over a curfew in Montgomery County has focused on downtown Silver Spring, where white kids in addition to minority youth gather.
by dan reed! on Aug 9, 2011 12:59 pm • link • report
Fritz, not wanting to visit an area because of rowdy behavior (from black teens) certainly doesn't make you a racist. However, if in your everyday life, you maintain the belief that "black teens" are rowdy, then while that doesn't suggest racism, it is an issue only you can address. It's no different than a black person stating that they don't like being in white rural areas after dark. Nah, it ain't racism..but it's something.
by HogWash on Aug 9, 2011 1:05 pm • link • report
Is standing around, cursing, acting like a jerk against the law? No, of course not. There would be no way to write a law that addresses the sort of behavior that some (not most) teens congregating in DTSS engage in. So, by enacting a curfew law, the police now have a tool to get this element out of there (not the A student who just saw Harry Potter). Now that the police have the tool to do so(and words spreads that police are actually enforcing it), such behavior drops off dramatically. And, as a result, would-be customers who actually come to DTSS to spend money and support the local businesses (which is vital if you truly want DTSS to thrive) will have the sort of experience that brings them back again and again.
by BS_Dawg on Aug 9, 2011 1:06 pm • link • report
Yes, somehow it has. Wonder why the comments here focus on Silver Spring . . . . oh, here it is. Looking back as your article, I notice that you mention Silver Spring twice (and it's in the tags, too) - yet there's no mention of Bethesda. In other words, if you don't want the focus to be on Silver Spring . . . don't focus on Silver Spring.
by dcd on Aug 9, 2011 1:10 pm • link • report
I've only been to DTSS twice at night, versus countless times in downtown Bethesda, but there certainly seemed to be more teens loitering in DTSS versus more teens patronizing business in downtown Bethesda (e.g. hanging out at Cosi, the frozen yogurt place, gelato). Maybe I went to DTSS on off nights, I don't know. Or maybe I don't notice it in downtown Bethesda.
by Fitz on Aug 9, 2011 1:14 pm • link • report
White kids hang out in Bethesda (and don't get into fights) and there used to be a drug market years ago outside a movie theater?
Well then, I guess that settles it: Non-fighting white kids hang out in an area where there once was an open-air drug market.
Should I be offended that you identified those non-fighting teens in Bethesda as white, rather than as merely teens?
And perhaps the focus is on Silver Spring b/c that's where large groups of youths gather, loiter, fight with one another, and harass passersby in a necessary, still revitalizing commercial area. Same reason there's lots of DC attention on youths gathering to do much the same at Gallery Place versus Dupont Circle or Eastern Market or Historic Anacostia or Deanwood.
@Hogwash: Sure gaggles of black teens can be rowdy. So can gaggles of mixed-race teens or just about any other sort of teens.
But here's a thought experiment: If a white person is in a mainly minority neighborhood after dark, wouldn't that arise most people's suspicions? Or maybe a thought of "that guy shouldn't be around here at this time of day"? Is that a racist thought? Or simply a common sense sort of reaction?
by Fritz on Aug 9, 2011 1:17 pm • link • report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVd0n1BI1lE
by oboe on Aug 9, 2011 1:34 pm • link • report
No.
by Vicente Fox on Aug 9, 2011 1:37 pm • link • report
There was an article years ago in The Gazette entitled from "Corn to Porn" where a writer went from where 97 comes into the county by Tridelphia and took it all the way down to the city line. It was years ago, but very insightful.
Also, while I agree with come of the comments that are critical of the article I will say that the county does not see everything through the prism of race like the city does. Despite folks from all over the world with different cultures, religions, etc. people tend to get along, OK.
With regards to MCPD -- they don't have enough to do, which is a good thing but might be reason why they hassle skaters and other young kids, of all races, in Silver Spring. These young officers are all amped up on a couple 5 hour energy drinks, maybe some steroids, etc. and they know that have one the county's "tougher" beats so they might feel like showing off.
MCPD cops are known as "dicks" to all county residents, but they do close the murder cases and usually catch the criminals. But it looks like some might be stretching to do their job.
There is one racist cop on MCPD -- Matt Marizjack - formerly of Rockville City but no with the County.
by Green Castle Blvd dude on Aug 9, 2011 2:16 pm • link • report
Depends on the neighborhood. On DC's Gold Coast, no. At W and 12th NW c. 1985? Cops thought that person was there to buy heroine or crack, and they were mostly correct.
I was a law abiding teenaged college student who was twice harrassed by and accused by police of prostitution, both times while either coming or going to school by public transit (1x waiting at a bus stop; 1x waiting for a ride at a subway stop). Twice may not sound like a lot but it was ugly and disturbing enough to make a life-long lasting negative impression. I wouldn't trust a cop to have good judegment about a 17 y.o. girl waiting for a ride after midnight. I don't trust cops anywhere when it comes to teenagers. Yes crooks should be apprehended. But giving cops an excuse to harrass teens is a bad idea imo.
by Tina on Aug 9, 2011 2:17 pm • link • report
I'm not a teenager and not particularly close (27). My biggest argument is not that there should be no curfew because its unfair to teens. My argument is that a curfew would be ineffective because it does not stop the ones who do not care about breaking a rule or a law and is unfair to honest teenagers who won't break the law. Yes, cops cost money and yes, going up to those who act suspiciously is a subjective activity. However, I am not convinced that a curfew handles anything. What about those at 18, 19, 20, or 21 who are hanging out and committing dangerous illegal acts? What about someone older? The problem here is that it is assumed that all crime is committed by those under 18 and that those under 18 engaged in crime are going to listen to a curfew, when they haven't listened to any other law or rule. I've walked downtown silver spring at night. I've also walked Barracks Row, Navy Yard, Chinatown, and a plethora of places in DC at night. I feel no less safe in DTSS and certainly can't see a curfew making things any better. Yes, cops are expensive and teenagers don't contribute, but a curfew doesn't address that problem. Also, who is going to enforce a curfew if you have less cops out and about?
by J on Aug 9, 2011 2:19 pm • link • report
I don't have a problem with the principle of a law that targets unruly or disorderly teens or teens doing something that hurts businesses. I'd even be ok with a law that said that no teens can out past a certain time with some exceptions. Maybe I'd ok with a law that says that no teens can be out past a certain time WITHOUT exception.
BUT, this law doesn't do any of that. Rather, it creates a law that will be selectively enforced based on the discretion of police officers. That's a terrible way to write laws and is just asking for abuse. A curfew should be a straightforward law. Either it's enforced without exception on everyone equally and fairly or exceptions should be written into the law.
by Falls Church on Aug 9, 2011 2:22 pm • link • report
Then I would also say it depends on the area.
A "thought" does not necessarily make you racist or biased.
by HogWash on Aug 9, 2011 2:30 pm • link • report
by Dave J on Aug 9, 2011 2:33 pm • link • report
which is exactly why cops already have the power to harrass teens (or prevent teen crimes) and don't need the extra oomf of a curfew law.
@Falls Church +1
by Tina on Aug 9, 2011 2:42 pm • link • report
You know, back in the 1970s, my family went on a big road trip from our home in Florida to a big extended family reunion in Iowa.
When we were passing through Nebraska, we tried to go to a McDonalds late at night. We had a hard time getting to it because of the (white) teens circling 'round and 'round the road around it. And then came the scary part: they started hurling cans and cups of soda onto our windshield.
I could also describe the white boys from my suburban high school and some of the ugly pranks they pulled on drivers because they were bored. Way back in the 1970s.
Yeah, kids these days....
by lou on Aug 9, 2011 3:02 pm • link • report
by Kate W. on Aug 9, 2011 3:11 pm • link • report
And the curfew supporters are the racists?
by Dave J on Aug 9, 2011 3:37 pm • link • report
Teenage=kid
Cop=adult
Kid misbehaves=adult has the right to call them out.
It's really pretty simple. We just need to focus more resources on the problem.
by MJ on Aug 9, 2011 3:43 pm • link • report
I totally agree. We don't need curfew laws for this.
This does not use cops' discretion or judgement, such as deciding that a girl waiting outside a subway stop at 11pm MUST be a prostitute, to the same degree as observing some kids belligerently blocking entrance to a Mcdonalds restaurant. The former is all discretion; interferrence in the latter would be stopping a blatant crime requiring only powers of observation, no descretion needed.
by Tina on Aug 9, 2011 3:58 pm • link • report
I agree. MoCo placed mounted cops and bike cops in downtown Silver Spring last weekend and I'm sure it was well appreciated. Police presence is helpful. And over the years I've noticed that some of the kids who hang out there have developed relationships with the cops and security guards (not always because they're in trouble). These are all good things and I'd like to see more of them.
However, it's hard not to talk about giving cops more "tools" without talking about discretion. We should be holding young people accountable for their actions, but we should ensure the people who enforce the laws and social norms in this space are held accountable as well and not given extra leeway when it's not necessary.
by dan reed! on Aug 9, 2011 4:20 pm • link • report
You can't have a perfect solution. Liberty and security have pro's and con's and you're probably going to compromise one for the other. Like I said, I don't think this curfew is the optimal solution, but it's not even that restrictive, IMO.
And while we focus on activities for these kids to do after midnight on weekends, the behavior that a lot of the youth in question exhibit tells us that we need to do a lot more.
by Vik on Aug 9, 2011 4:21 pm • link • report
1. You refer to African-Americans in cul-de-sacs as "token blacks." I'm going to leave that alone, though I think it's demeaning to the African Americans who have worked, like lots of people in Montgomery County, to be able to live in that cul-de-sac.
2. You are framing the curfew issue as a white backlash debate. I think the changes in the County have been tough for some people, that is true. But who is the lead advocate for this bill? Ike Leggett. Who opposes the plan, but supports a curfew in downtown Silver Spring? Council President Valerie Ervin. This is much more nuanced than a white vs. others debate.
3. Many of the individuals involved in activity that the County wants to curtail aren't from the County. In the stabbing incident that preceeded the introduction of this bill, the participants told police that they thought of going to Silver Spring because of its accessibility and the lack of a curfew in the County. Your plans to increase activities for young people in the county, while noble and worthy of anyone's support, won't solve the issue alone.
4. The drug activity at the old United Artists (now Regal) Bethesda was not what I would call an open air market. At 19, I'm young enough to remember when that was going on. Granted, drugs were being sold, and things were not too subtle. You throw away the detail that there haven't been gang fights in Bethesda, as if that isn't significant. These aren't little scuffles in Silver Spring. They involve a lot of people. I was walking down Fenton Street one night when thirty teens swarmed into the City Place garage. I waited 10 minutes before going to my car because I figured something was up. Did the MoCo police start flashing their lights and chase after these individuals? No. So don't act like suspicious behavior in Bethesda is never investigated and suspicious behavior in Silver Spring always is.
5. I also liked your comment that "white kids hang out in Bethesda." As a white kid who lives in Bethesda, I hang out in Silver Spring plenty. And in Bethesda, in Rockville. Lots of different types of people hang out in Silver Spring. That's what gives it its character and its strength. There are compromises that have to be made. In the end, maintaining the vibrant culture of downtown and keeping the retail jobs there (many of which go to young people) may be best achieved through a curfew.
by thesixteenwords on Aug 9, 2011 4:21 pm • link • report
by Phil on Aug 9, 2011 4:54 pm • link • report
There is no need to provide "things" for children to do at night. That is for their parents to do. Send them home.
Curfew teens back to their parents, so adults can enjoy the amenities our taxes pay for and businesses can enjoy paying customers.
by greent on Aug 9, 2011 5:24 pm • link • report
It's kind of sad that Gallery Place has become a by-word for uncontrolled troublesome teen loitering, but now we're at the point where the big priority for any suburban development centers is, "make sure it doesn't turn into Gallery Place."
if the solution isn't a curfew, then the solution is, "get the kids better parental supervision." Parents typically set curfews for their kids. Since they obviously aren't doing their job, I don't see anything wrong with the MoCo lawmakers stepping in to take care of the issue.
by JustMe on Aug 9, 2011 5:33 pm • link • report
I appreciate your well thought out and nuanced reply, though I think we agree about the strength of Silver Spring (and Bethesda) being its diversity, and that the issue isn't just white-vs-black. But I was responding to an insensitive comment made by a MoCo police officer about concerns for racial bias. I know some people think it's unnecessary whining, but if you grow up - in MoCo, in DC, anywhere - as a minority, you become aware of it. Both Councilmember Ervin (who supports the curfew) and Councilmember Craig Rice, who is black and (I believe) opposes it, have asked about the potential for profiling.
@Vik
I drive down Beach Drive often, and right before Connecticut Avenue there's graffiti on the underside of the Duke Ellington Bridge that says "those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." Compromises? I'm sorry, but giving police officers the ability to detain anyone just for being out after a certain hour, regardless of whether they did anything wrong, isn't a compromise.
Everyone agrees that we want a safe downtown Silver Spring/downtown Bethesda/Montgomery County. But I disagree that a curfew is the way to make it happen.
by dan reed! on Aug 9, 2011 5:49 pm • link • report
It's not "anyone." It's minors who do not have full rights.
I disagree that a curfew is the way to make it happen.
Well, that's noted. But neither is youth coffee shops and community centers, etc. Loitering laws, maybe, could serve as an alternative to curfews. But parents should give their kids curfews. If they don't, then maybe the curfews need to be mandated. And if kids object to curfews, point them to the problems in places like downtown Silver Spring and other MoCo malls/shopping areas and tell them, "this is why we can't have nice things."
by JustMe on Aug 9, 2011 5:52 pm • link • report
I know the quote well, and it's one that everyone should know, but it shouldn't be used haphazardly in every context. Do you feel the same way about guns? Maybe these kids should have the right to stay out as late as they want while simultaneously, everyone should have the right to carry a whatever weapon they want as well. Maybe that'll solve the problem...
Guns and privacy-related laws that attempt to make use safe are probably the issues where you hear that quote used most frequently, but I don't think either one of those issues is black/white like some who use the quote would like to suggest. I think just a lot of gridlock and nothing being done is the result of people not wanting to actually come to a solution or compromise.
by Vik on Aug 9, 2011 6:33 pm • link • report
by thesixteenwords on Aug 9, 2011 9:30 pm • link • report
by Cyrus on Aug 9, 2011 11:47 pm • link • report
1. If I parental permission to hang out or go somewhere and I am doing something legal, socially acceptable, and not being a nuisance ...then guess what it is not the government's business, politicians need to make actual plans against crimes rather than make parental decisions.
2.A curfew's mechanics rely heavily on discrimination of an entire age group and further reinforces Ephebiphobia.
3. Curfews cause antagonism and tension between local government/police and minors.
4.They are hard to enforce.
5.Most juvenile crimes happen in the evening.
6.Will not deter actual juvenile criminals.
7.Criminalizes perfectly legal actions (just being outside)
8. A curfew meant to deter outside criminals but instead will hurt perfectly law abiding citizens who mostly don't have voices in politics is unfair.
9. If the curfews in DC and PG aren't working then maybe...just maybe its ineffective.
10.Instead of using a simple solution to a very complex problem like a curfew and making criminals out of minors actually make a plan to combat the issue instead of taking away civil liberties to make the illusion of safety.
by Fau on Aug 10, 2011 1:22 am • link • report
"Masses of young people from communities across the county line recruit our young people into their gangs and incite fights, stabbings, and rape."
Dan's the one who's fear mongering??? Really???
by jag on Aug 10, 2011 1:24 am • link • report
Go re-read JustMe's comment:
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/11604/a-color-blind-montgomery-county-is-still-a-myth/#comment-111559
by oboe on Aug 10, 2011 9:39 am • link • report
If the curfews in DC and PG aren't working then maybe...just maybe its ineffective.
Depends what your definition of "working" is. We heard similar critiques of DC's handgun ban. "It doesn't work!"
But the intention was never to end criminal handgun violence. The point of the ban was to allow the courts to throw additional charges at people caught with illegal handguns. Without the ban, and easy, legal access to handguns, there's no way to intervene until the shooting starts.
by oboe on Aug 10, 2011 9:42 am • link • report
by HogWash on Aug 10, 2011 9:47 am • link • report
Moco definately doesn't a youth curfew, all of the youth there are all angels
by Mikem on Aug 15, 2011 1:01 pm • link • report
good luck with your dreams...my advice is "you never know you live in a shit hole until you travel outside the toilet", you can make all the excuses you want about diversity, but when you get robbed/shot/bled to death...I would rethink your location. I had a friend who was trying to keep his family diversified he bled 2death capital hill DC
by forest glen on Aug 15, 2011 11:08 pm • link • report
Add a Comment