Children..

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong » Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:18 am

trudred wrote: If you are going to bring up racism and homophobia I would rather start a new forum because I hate straying when taking.

Let me get this straight: you cite studies which include, among other things, sexual activity, pot smoking, and traffic accidents as evidence of immorality, but you consider racism and homophobia to be irrelevant to morality, hence "straying" from the thread subject? :roll:
If you are going to bring up racism and homophobia I would rather start a new forum because I hate straying when taking. But I will go with you can, since you like to. Just because prejudiced behavior has not only become politically incorrect and in most cases illegal if blatant, you would be a fool to think that it does not exist. And I can’t imagine you being that stupid.

So if it hasn't been completely eradicated, then we should assume there has been no change in the prevalence of racist attitudes between 1965 and today? Nice black/white fallacy you've got there.

Kids change. Society changes. Behaviour changes. But if you're going to make a blanket declaration that kids are more immoral today than they were a long time ago and you have to consciously ignore certain kinds of immorality in order to cling to your claim, then you have a problem. And no, calling me "stupid" will not solve that problem with your argument.
Not a three-foot tall green gnome in real-life: My home page.
My wretched hive of scum and villainy: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:10 pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Rabidus_Lupus wrote:You do realize you are suppose to think before your read right? The graph shows that crime rose steadily from 77 to about 91. Just like in the combined graph. This makes it pretty safe to say that in the years before 77 it increased proportionally, though maybe not exactly, to the combined graph. You really don't know what you're talking about, do you?

Only if you assume that youth and adult crime rates are inextricably linked together, so that all trends are coincident. If that is the case, then it is impossible to make a generalization about youths as opposed to people in general. Or perhaps this did not occur to you?
You're right, but added to the other links, this informations stands as a fact that youth's are worse than in the past.
Why don't you try asking a Toronto police officer about how many young offenders quote the Young Offenders Act to them when they're arrested? Why don't you ask a Toronto police officer about how many arrogant young punks throw it in their faces during interrogations? Oh that's right, you are incapable of admitting error.

That's nice, and the fact that they are still arrested means nothing to you huh? You still haven't brought up anything about the fact that it is no longer the young offenders act. How bout you bring some facts to the table from now on.

How does the fact that they are arrested change the fact that they are less inhibited about committing crimes or being defiant to the police thanks to the Young Offenders Act?
[/quote]It doesn't. But give me just a shred of evidence to support your claim that they are more likely to commit crime because of this.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong » Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:40 pm

Rabidus_Lupus wrote: You're right, but added to the other links, this informations stands as a fact that youth's are worse than in the past.

No it doesn't, and thank you for missing the point. It means that people, both young and old, were arrested at an increasing rate during that specific time window. And some of that can be quite misleading, since the War on Drugs has produced a vastly escalating number of drug arrests even though drug use was assuredly quite rampant during the 1960s before this "War on Drugs" started. The statistical anomaly produced by the War on Drugs is one of the reasons I prefer to focus on specific crimes such as murder, which has gone down.
It doesn't. But give me just a shred of evidence to support your claim that they are more likely to commit crime because of this.

You already provided that for me, by linking to a study which specifically shows that youth crime has gone up since the Young Offenders Act was created. And do I really need to explain why a softening of criminal punishment would result in increased crime? Do you understand the deterrent principle? Hey, why don't we just eliminate all criminal record-keeping, since it costs a lot of money and according to you, the existence of a permanent criminal record has zero deterrent effect?
Not a three-foot tall green gnome in real-life: My home page.
My wretched hive of scum and villainy: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/

Fat Clemenza
Registered User
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:11 pm
Contact:

Post by Fat Clemenza » Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:29 pm

A big problem with kids nowaday is their lack of interest to succeed. A very small minority of kids actually put forth effort in school. I think it's just depressing.

tanner_S.
Registered User
Posts: 446
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:04 pm

Post by tanner_S. » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:50 am

Fat Clemenza wrote: A big problem with kids nowaday is their lack of interest to succeed. A very small minority of kids actually put forth effort in school. I think it's just depressing.


I know. They spend little interest in what the teacher is saying, do horrible on tests, get bad grades, and then when they get there report card they are like "What?!!?". Atleast I do hear them say that they are going to lose something ex cell phone. So that tabs them onto the right track. For example there were two girls in my class this year, loved basketball, did horrible on the grades. Little did they know that they had to have an education to be a basketball player. I guess you could add a little blame on their parents who don't really care about their grades. For example they may think a 70 is fine. I can't get an 89 without losing something. They think what is happening now. Not what will happen. If I skip class I can go out with my friends. Next day the person would be clueless what happened in class, possibly be very behind. And then get the answers from a friend. There were millions of times in homeroom where someone would have to copy someones homework. Everyday that happened. If someone asks me the answer, I'll say no or help them get the answer. I even had a student ask me to an answer on the Gateway (aka big test, determens whether going to 8th grade...).

My two cents from my point of view.

-Tanner

zerokewlz
Registered User
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:02 am
Contact:

Post by zerokewlz » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:50 am

Okay, I am not even going to bother to read the next 6 pages, I read the first pages and I was given enough information to give my two cents on the issue.

For starters, all of you posting links about child robberies/sex assults/stealing crap that happened by kids, guess what, there are just as many, if not MORE of the same type of posts by those over the age of 21. Using example doesn't help your case any. And please dont refer to all kids in the same way... "They dont care about anything now a days". Please, that is saying like all adults are lazy, achoholic and overweight. Guess what, several of them are, but you can't say simple beacuse they are a kid 'they dont care, 'they are lazy or, 'they have no interest'. you have no right and no privledge to say this.

Second, The government is making all of these idiotic laws to try to prevent crime before it starts. Yes, I am a teenager, 16 years of age. Most of my friends and I have gotten our licences (its late I could care less about spelling) within the past few months (and days). I'm assuming most of you are aware of curfew, a time restriction set in cities for youth to be HOME and not ourside/driving around. This is crap, how can the GOVERNMENT control what time we will be home at night, its rediculous. Rants aside, being a teen of course I have done my fair share of 'stuff'. I usually end up not following curfew because I dont believe in it, but usually I am not stupid enough to get caught like these other idiots in our city. For one, I don't drink, smoke, party with people who do (usually). So I avoid those problems. And those people who do do those things are either to drunk/ DONT CARE about the laws put in place, meaning the GOOD kids (us, usually) are affected by time restriction laws while the bad kids are supposed to follow them but none of them do.

With this said and out of the way, talking about the 'bad' kids of today. As the second user state so graciously, youth crime is going down for sure. Our government really has no control over the situation, its up to the parents. Our government is too large anyways, them freaks need to stop thinking they can control when people take a shit in their own house, which may very well happen in the next 100 years... The parents are the cause. My parents dont really care what I do/ when I get home (usually) because they know im a 'good' kid and i've never been in any real trouble. Its because of them and not because of our idiotic government laws which seem only to punish the kids who try to obey their laws (except for speed laws... I tend to be a fast driver, BUT soa re 9/10 drivers on the road).

And as for the issue with school, it really depends on the classes. I am in mostly Accelerated classes, which are considered the pretty much highest level without taking college credits which is only for upper classment, but there are some classes that can only be taken at normal level. There is a HUGE difference in who is placed in the class, how the kids act, and what race they are. My school is about 40% and 40% caucasion with the rest mixxed in there. And as far as interest is concerned... It depends on how they were brought up really. I Know alot of people who dont give a crap about their life, but then I know MANY people who deeply care about where their life leads.

It all depends on who your talking to and their 'bringing up'. And yea, this is from a 16 year olds point of view. Take it or leave it, though I generally deal with this crap everyday of my life... The good, the bad kids, the cops, laws, and yes even The Rents.

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta » Sat Jun 11, 2005 6:47 am

zerokewlz wrote: I'm assuming most of you are aware of curfew, a time restriction set in cities for youth to be HOME and not ourside/driving around. This is crap, how can the GOVERNMENT control what time we will be home at night, its rediculous.


whoa, where do you live? I've never seen any government imposed cerfew for teenagers/kids anywhere around where I live. The only such limit is with driving, where when you first get your liscence you can't drive at night during certain times I believe(here in Canada there are 3 levels to your basic driving liscence: G1. G2, and G, G1 being your beginners, and so forth, hence where the time restriction is), and that has nothing to do with age, but simply your liscence level. If your 16 or 30 you'd have the same restriction there. However, here there is no such thing as any government controlled cerfew, so can you specify where it is your located, since your use of "the government" makes it seem as though it's a common thing everywhere.

Anyways, moving on, I think someone said it best earlier with how we always seem to view the past as perfect, and the young generation as rude delinquents(spelling?). I mean, look at the 50's: we view that as a bunch of clean cut kids, where the most roudy behaviour presented was going out to the local dance club to dance away to Little Richard, followed by a date out to the drive thru, finished up with some french fries and soda, and back home by 8 o'clock. Back then, these kids were practically considered to be sinners and controlled by satan by acting like that. Today though, seems ideal doesn't it? Yes, now let's go back and take a quick step into the classroom. Ahh yes, all I see is white. Hmmmm, seems racial tolerance wasn't something understood by them. Heck, the closest thing to a swear word these kid's used was "darn", but I'll bet you any money that calling someone a "fill in racial word starting with N here* was a perfectly acceptable word in one's vocabulary. Hmmmm, far from ideal now, isn't it. Oh, and what about how all the boys were nice gentlemen, eh? Hmmm, yes, perfect gentlemen as they're out trying to find a woman that will for the rest of their lives do nothing more than clean the house, raise the kids, and present him with a nice home cooked meal when he arrives home. Oh, she want's a job now? That's ok, we can just slap that crazy femenist thought out of her head. [sarcasm]yup, perfectly ideal[/sarcasm], well it is if you feel that the youths of today would benefit from a completly white-male supremecist train of thought. Move to the next generation and you'll find the same thing, the youths then are now these crazy hippies, while the 50's kids are now "how things used to be, and how they should be now". Apply it to every generation, and the youths will always be considered to be worse, even though we can plainly see that in many social areas things are actually FAR better: racism, sexism, and violent crimes seem to be far down. I'd say thats a pretty good trade off for simple things such as vandalism and a bunch of stoned teenagers, unless you find that such a horrible thing and would rather live in a world where instead the kids(white kids) go around chasing the black kids with knives and guns, and afterwards go to their girlfriends house to slap her around, instead of a few spray painted walls. In 25 years time, a bunch of kids wearing baggy pants, smoking some joints, and listening to 50 Cent, will then be considered "the good ol' days" and whatever kids are doing then will be considered far worse, even though they'll probabaly be smarter and have actually made even more progress on serious social issues, and be committing even fewer crimes.

User avatar
smithy_dll
Former Team Member
Posts: 7630
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Name: Lachlan Smith
Contact:

Post by smithy_dll » Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:25 am

Fat Clemenza wrote: A big problem with kids nowaday is their lack of interest to succeed. A very small minority of kids actually put forth effort in school. I think it's just depressing.


Thats not true, and there is a large amount of evidence to suggest that kids (especially increasing number of boys, cite past trend was for girls to perform better than boys at studied, this is starting to even out now.) have a much greater will to suceed in their studies than in the past. This is mainly prevalent in the senior school years.

Or at least from my recent experiences.

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:52 pm

zerokewlz wrote: For starters, all of you posting links about child robberies/sex assults/stealing crap that happened by kids, guess what, there are just as many, if not MORE of the same type of posts by those over the age of 21.
This forum is about kids.
Using example doesn't help your case any. And please dont refer to all kids in the same way... "They dont care about anything now a days". Please, that is saying like all adults are lazy, achoholic and overweight. Guess what, several of them are, but you can't say simple beacuse they are a kid 'they dont care, 'they are lazy or, 'they have no interest'. you have no right and no privledge to say this.
People actually do have the right to say this. They have the right to say whatever they want.
Second, The government is making all of these idiotic laws to try to prevent crime before it starts.
You're right, let's get rid of all crime prevention tactics. It's all crap, yeah?
Yes, I am a teenager, 16 years of age. Most of my friends and I have gotten our licences (its late I could care less about spelling) within the past few months (and days). I'm assuming most of you are aware of curfew, a time restriction set in cities for youth to be HOME and not ourside/driving around. This is crap, how can the GOVERNMENT control what time we will be home at night, its rediculous.
If there is no rule, the bad kids can't get busted for walking or driving to the crime they are about to commit. But of course we're getting rid of crime prevention, right?
Rants aside, being a teen of course I have done my fair share of 'stuff'.
When I was a teen, I did my share of stuff as well, it was called basketball and other productive things. Not breaking the law for kicks. [qoute]I usually end up not following curfew because I dont believe in it, but usually I am not stupid enough to get caught like these other idiots in our city. [/quote] Which makes it perfectly right to break the rules, because you didn't get caught. Good parents usually follow laws, are your parents following the laws by letting you stay out past city curfew? No.
For one, I don't drink, smoke, party with people who do (usually). So I avoid those problems. And those people who do do those things are either to drunk/ DONT CARE about the laws put in place, meaning the GOOD kids (us, usually) are affected by time restriction laws while the bad kids are supposed to follow them but none of them do.
How can you classify yourself as the good kids if you don't follow the curfew? Which is a LAW.

With this said and out of the way, talking about the 'bad' kids of today. As the second user state so graciously, youth crime is going down for sure. Our government really has no control over the situation, its up to the parents.
You're right, it is up to the parents. And for those parents that choose to not take care of their children by making them follow laws, what is your proposition? Let me think, I'm sure I'll come up with one. Oh, how about...... Government.

Our government is too large anyways, them freaks need to stop thinking they can control when people take a *beep* in their own house, which may very well happen in the next 100 years... The parents are the cause. My parents dont really care what I do/ when I get home (usually) because they know im a 'good' kid and i've never been in any real trouble.
I just want you to really think about what you wrote here.

Its because of them and not because of our idiotic government laws which seem only to punish the kids who try to obey their laws (except for speed laws... I tend to be a fast driver, BUT soa re 9/10 drivers on the road).
Which makes it right.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Sat Jun 11, 2005 1:31 pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Rabidus_Lupus wrote:You're right, but added to the other links, this informations stands as a fact that youth's are worse than in the past.

No it doesn't, and thank you for missing the point. It means that people, both young and old, were arrested at an increasing rate during that specific time window. And some of that can be quite misleading, since the War on Drugs has produced a vastly escalating number of drug arrests even though drug use was assuredly quite rampant during the 1960s before this "War on Drugs" started. The statistical anomaly produced by the War on Drugs is one of the reasons I prefer to focus on specific crimes such as murder, which has gone down.
It doesn't. But give me just a shred of evidence to support your claim that they are more likely to commit crime because of this.

You already provided that for me, by linking to a study which specifically shows that youth crime has gone up since the Young Offenders Act was created. And do I really need to explain why a softening of criminal punishment would result in increased crime? Do you understand the deterrent principle? Hey, why don't we just eliminate all criminal record-keeping, since it costs a lot of money and according to you, the existence of a permanent criminal record has zero deterrent effect?
This forum was about bad kids. Not just murderous kids and certainly not about an attempt to help children out with the youth offenders act. Your arguments against it are pointless because you pretty much know nothing about it's effects. (I assume this because you have given nothing whatsoever in the form of evidence.) Besides that, it doesn't even exist anymore which I've already pointed out.
I don't really remember saying the existence of a permanet criminal record has zero deterrent effect. Let's go back and take a look for it, since it should still be on the forum. Well, I didn't see it. I did see a question asking for any kind of evidence supporting your assumptions of human behavior and quite frankly, you've given nothing. I see actually no evidence of anything on this forum other than one single crime lowering in rate in one single state. I see lots of links to sites that show different statistics, but it seems to me that the evidence shows kids behavior is worse than earlier years. I've heard first hand from people that children are "worse today than when I was a child". I'd be willing to bet everyone here has heard that from an elderly person, or something similar. How many times have you heard the words, "children are so well behaved compared to when I was a child"? Darth, I think you should provide some overall evidence of kids being better behaved today than in the past before you post on this thread.
One more thing, Let's see, youth offenders act, 1984. Actually chart starts at 77 and increases until 81. Drops off in 82, rises in 83. 84 and 85 there is no stats though we'll say its rising anyway since it's back up in 86. I'm sorry, I just don't see where it proves the youth offenders act started the rise in crime among youths.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong » Sat Jun 11, 2005 2:11 pm

Rabidus_Lupus wrote: This forum was about bad kids. Not just murderous kids and certainly not about an attempt to help children out with the youth offenders act.

And you have not provided any evidence whatsoever to prove that kids are generally worse than they were in the past. Examples of immoral behaviour from the past such as rampant racism and homophobia are simply ignored even though they are indisputable, while you rely on statistical chicanery such as ignoring the effect of the War on Drugs on youth arrest rates as your so-called "evidence".
Your arguments against it are pointless because you pretty much know nothing about it's effects. (I assume this because you have given nothing whatsoever in the form of evidence.)

I have; you just ignored it. Or are you seriously going to pretend that Jew-beatings and black segregation of the 1950s and 1960s were not immoral? Are you going to seriously ignore the murder rate and focus on things like drug arrests, which are as much a function of changing enforcement policies as they are of actual behaviour? Or how about your laughable attempt to use increased cheating in school as proof, even though that is clearly a result of changing technology?
Besides that, it doesn't even exist anymore which I've already pointed out.

What doesn't even exist any more? The Young Offenders Act in Canada? Stop fabricating information; that is totally false.
I don't really remember saying the existence of a permanet criminal record has zero deterrent effect. Let's go back and take a look for it, since it should still be on the forum. Well, I didn't see it.

Yes you did. I pointed out that the Young Offenders Act is a major factor you're ignoring, and you denied that it should make a difference.
<snip more long-winded evasions>

Darth, I think you should provide some overall evidence of kids being better behaved today than in the past before you post on this thread.

For the umpteenth time, you're the one casting negative stereotypes about all young people today; YOU bear the burden of proof. Not me.
One more thing, Let's see, youth offenders act, 1984. Actually chart starts at 77 and increases until 81. Drops off in 82, rises in 83. 84 and 85 there is no stats though we'll say its rising anyway since it's back up in 86. I'm sorry, I just don't see where it proves the youth offenders act started the rise in crime among youths.

Obviously, that whole point I made about the rise in drug-related arrests during the so-called "War on Drugs" sailed over your head.
Not a three-foot tall green gnome in real-life: My home page.
My wretched hive of scum and villainy: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:04 pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Rabidus_Lupus wrote:This forum was about bad kids. Not just murderous kids and certainly not about an attempt to help children out with the youth offenders act.

And you have not provided any evidence whatsoever to prove that kids are generally worse than they were in the past. Examples of immoral behaviour from the past such as rampant racism and homophobia are simply ignored even though they are indisputable, while you rely on statistical chicanery such as ignoring the effect of the War on Drugs on youth arrest rates as your so-called "evidence".
You know what? You're right. We really should ignore all facts and statistics because your evidence is proof that kids are much better than they used to be. Let's ignore that little kids are telling their parents to f off and calling cops on their parents because they get spanked and the fact that they have no respect for elders other than their parents. We'll also ignore the kids going to school's and shooting up their fellow students. Might as well ignore the fact they steal and are having babies as teens. Well hell, murder's down in California. The kids are really turning out great aren't they?
Your arguments against it are pointless because you pretty much know nothing about it's effects. (I assume this because you have given nothing whatsoever in the form of evidence.)

I have; you just ignored it. Or are you seriously going to pretend that Jew-beatings and black segregation of the 1950s and 1960s were not immoral? Are you going to seriously ignore the murder rate and focus on things like drug arrests, which are as much a function of changing enforcement policies as they are of actual behaviour? Or how about your laughable attempt to use increased cheating in school as proof, even though that is clearly a result of changing technology?
What the hell does all that have to do with the young offenders act? Which you obviously left out of your quote in order to make you sound like you know what you're talking about. Besides that, how is cheating in school a result of technology? Is murder a result of technology? What kind of stupid remark is that? People cheat because they have no honor or discipline.
Besides that, it doesn't even exist anymore which I've already pointed out.
What doesn't even exist any more? The Young Offenders Act in Canada? Stop fabricating information; that is totally false.
In February 2002, the House of Commons passed the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). The Act came into effect in April 2003, replacing the Young Offenders Act. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/cr ... e-act.html
If you're going to be so against something, you should at least know weather or not it still exists. Looks like you're the one fabricating totally false information.
I don't really remember saying the existence of a permanet criminal record has zero deterrent effect. Let's go back and take a look for it, since it should still be on the forum. Well, I didn't see it.

Yes you did. I pointed out that the Young Offenders Act is a major factor you're ignoring, and you denied that it should make a difference.
You pointed it out as if it makes all the difference in children making the decision of weather or not to commit crimes. I said it doesn't, which is true because the crime rate was rising prior to the act.
Darth, I think you should provide some overall evidence of kids being better behaved today than in the past before you post on this thread.

For the umpteenth time, you're the one casting negative stereotypes about all young people today; YOU bear the burden of proof. Not me.
First off, in debates both sides provide proof. Otherwise there's no point in debating.
One more thing, Let's see, youth offenders act, 1984. Actually chart starts at 77 and increases until 81. Drops off in 82, rises in 83. 84 and 85 there is no stats though we'll say its rising anyway since it's back up in 86. I'm sorry, I just don't see where it proves the youth offenders act started the rise in crime among youths.

Obviously, that whole point I made about the rise in drug-related arrests during the so-called "War on Drugs" sailed over your head.
Obviously, there wouldn't need to be a "War on Drugs" if drugs wasn't a problem. Maybe that should be ignored as well, kids doing drugs.
So far, you haven't got a leg to stand on in your arguments.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

Ferdinand
Registered User
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 1:03 pm

Post by Ferdinand » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm

Oh, common! People (children) are not dirt! You just CAN'T speak for ALL children, you need to discuss them individually. For example, I am doing great at school, totally interested in what my teacher is saying, never killed/robbed/raped anyone; and all 'children' I know are not criminals and are doing good in school as well. But by your logic we all are criminals and dumbass retards only interested in cutting old ladies in half. I hate when people apply this "statistic" shit on people. Wake up! We are the only intelligent creatures on Earth, we are the only 'things' that have a mind and a personality (well, most of us anyway). You can mix roses up in statistic, you can mix dogs, cats, rocks, water etc. because it's all the same. But never mix people. People are different. Each person is a world of his own. Each child has a reason to be a criminal ot a good person. Discuss the reasons. Children are different. You can't just say: "Children are more violent today". I guess since I am 15, I am kind of a child as well. Am I violent? Nope. Then why the hell do you post all this bullshit?! Post: "Mikey T., Peter B., Sarah F. are violent" instead. It's just damn wrong to make everyone equal.
They've banned me from using an avatar so now I have no identity :(

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:34 pm

Ferdinand wrote: It's just damn wrong to make everyone equal.
Tell that to feminists. Anyway, people have to use statistics, that's how things get changed. Beginning of time. Murders not illegal. It happens more and more, which makes it a statistic, so that's how it becomes illegal. That's how things work. More and more people have shaking baby sydrome or whatever, so now we counseling and what not to help new mothers so that this won't happen.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

zerokewlz
Registered User
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:02 am
Contact:

Post by zerokewlz » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:36 pm

zerokewlz wrote:


For starters, all of you posting links about child robberies/sex assults/stealing crap that happened by kids, guess what, there are just as many, if not MORE of the same type of posts by those over the age of 21.
This forum is about kids.


What the heck do you mean this forum is about kids. Do you mean this TOPIC, let's create one about adults and post everything about them too then.
Quote:
Using example doesn't help your case any. And please dont refer to all kids in the same way... "They dont care about anything now a days". Please, that is saying like all adults are lazy, achoholic and overweight. Guess what, several of them are, but you can't say simple beacuse they are a kid 'they dont care, 'they are lazy or, 'they have no interest'. you have no right and no privledge to say this.
People actually do have the right to say this. They have the right to say whatever they want.

Okay, you know what, you are right here, technically in most countries. Freedom of speech is allowed, but that's not what Im talking about. I'm talking about the same thing teenagers deal with in high school every day, 'people talking about them in negativeways'. People SHOULDN'T talk about people they don't know or even if they do know them. People should have the maturity to keep their mouth shut, generally referring to the HS'ers and not this topic. Though, my original statement was typed to mean you can't judge all kids based on the acts of some.
Quote:
Second, The government is making all of these idiotic laws to try to prevent crime before it starts.
You're right, let's get rid of all crime prevention tactics. It's all crap, yeah?

No, what im saying is many of them aren't working OR they don't enforce them.

Quote:
Rants aside, being a teen of course I have done my fair share of 'stuff'.
When I was a teen, I did my share of stuff as well, it was called basketball and other productive things. Not breaking the law for kicks. [qoute]I usually end up not following curfew because I dont believe in it, but usually I am not stupid enough to get caught like these other idiots in our city.
Which makes it perfectly right to break the rules, because you didn't get caught. Good parents usually follow laws, are your parents following the laws by letting you stay out past city curfew? No.Quote:
For one, I don't drink, smoke, party with people who do (usually). So I avoid those problems. And those people who do do those things are either to drunk/ DONT CARE about the laws put in place, meaning the GOOD kids (us, usually) are affected by time restriction laws while the bad kids are supposed to follow them but none of them do.
How can you classify yourself as the good kids if you don't follow the curfew? Which is a LAW.
[/quote]
The thing is though when I'm out after curfew I am either always at a friends house (with their parents there) coming straight home after say midnight. OR coming back from a roadtrip we usually end up taking. Not out with spray paint trying to vandelize or smoking pot along the beach.


Quote:
Its because of them and not because of our idiotic government laws which seem only to punish the kids who try to obey their laws (except for speed laws... I tend to be a fast driver, BUT soa re 9/10 drivers on the road).
Which makes it right.

Now you are just trying to argue. I made that reference because of all the laws they are passing to enhance the graduated licensing for children who drive. In Illinois now, they passed a law where you either can't talk on your phone in the first six months OR until you reach the age of 18 (still don't know which) while driving. Fact is, there are more adults getting in accidents because of cell phones than kids. More adults talk on their phone than kids. Yet, because we are more inexperienced, which may be true, but facts don't lie. I know of at least 9 other countries who have banned ALL cell phone use while driving, to both kids and adults.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”