California Mall considers banning teens ...

[kibbles]

IMO I think it is stupid, if some teens are causing a problem then call the police. What that mall is doing is painting all teens with the one brush and it shouldn't be allowed. JMO of course.

[myswtghst]

It does suck that it paints all teens as the problem, but it is the age group most often left at the mall to their own devices, with relatively limited cash flow, and the least maturity. While I know I was allowed to go to the mall when I was only 14 or 15 and I was relatively well-behaved, I probably would have understood, even at that age, why the ban was in place.

The vast majority, in my experience and opinion, of kids in that age group are immature, insecure, eager to prove themselves, and often loud/obnoxious when in large groups.

Also, I completely agree with the posts above noting that businesses are losing money because of this. I love stores like AE, Lucky, the Buckle and even Hot Topic, but I hate being stuck in the shop with a bunch of out of control, shrieking teen/pre-teens running amok. It makes me want to leave, and go elsewhere to spend my hard-earned money.

[Irving Patrick Freleigh]

IMO I think it is stupid, if some teens are causing a problem then call the police. What that mall is doing is painting all teens with the one brush and it shouldn't be allowed. JMO of course.

Problem with that is, you can't call the police unless a crime is being committed. And last time I checked, wandering around a mall aimlessly with a bunch of your friends is not a crime. About all you can tell them to do is move along and that doesn't work either. They'll just be back later

When people go someplace and see a bunch of kids hanging around looking intimidating, they're going to want to get the hell out of there. And when you get lots of kids together in one place it won't take much before a fight breaks out, or the bad ones in the group decide to cause problems for others.

How is this good for their business? Usually the kids aren't buying things. The people they scare away do.

The few mess it up for the many sometimes. This isn't about your right to hang around in a mall because you've got nothing else to do. This is about my right to go to that mall and not have to worry if I'm going to end up the middle of a fight or be mugged.

[blas]

I can sympathize.....I am a young adult (ok, 20) and I love to shop at AE and Aeropostale but I CANNOT stand going to the mall into those stores full of bubblegum snapping "OMIGOD" yelling, theiving, kaniving pre teens and teenagers.

And since I can pass for 16....I can easily get painted as a dumb teenager as well just for looking the same as they do, even though I am well behaved and I never steal and I always have enough money for my purchases.

[Mr. Rude]

"But the new policy concerned City Attorney James Sanchez, who warned police not to enforce the ban, saying it could violate state or federal civil rights laws regarding free speech and the right to assemble.:

Hmm...Last time I checked, the right to assemble was in a public place...Hmmmm

Private property...You lose

[kibbles]

IMO, I still don't agree with it, because if the teenagers who are causing trouble are told to leave and don't or just come back, well then they are loitering and trespassing, so then the police could be called.

[Broomjockey]

It's private property. If they said they wanted to ban everyone OVER the age of 17, they can do that. It's not even a total ban, just a "you must be escorted." Broad policies suck as good people often get caught up in them, but you can be sure they didn't institute this lightly.

As for calling the cops to get them "trespassed off the property," how long do you think it would take the cops to show up, if they did at all? Especially after the first half dozen times. And even if it took only five minutes for the police to show up (ha, dream on) how far do you think the kids could get in that time? The other end of the mall? And they don't even need to get that far. They just need to get in to a large group of teens, because they can't kick them all out under your way, kibbles, because they haven't all been told.

It's a nice idea of yours, but not really feasible. This one is, sadly.

[Soulstealer]

"But the new policy concerned City Attorney James Sanchez, who warned police not to enforce the ban, saying it could violate state or federal civil rights laws regarding free speech and the right to assemble.

Hmm...Last time I checked, the right to assemble was in a public place...Hmmmm

I still haven't figured out where the free speech right comes in, no one is stopping them from complaining about it or applaud it.

[Emrld]

well let's compare this to an actuall situation in the market place . . .all over the US their are area's of housing only sold to those who have achieved living a specific number of years and above. Some are called "Retirement Villages", "Assisted Living" or Nursing homes.
The only time it is legally allowable to limit who can purchase or live in a specific place based on the person themselves alone.
Law of Averages . . . .History . . .and several other factors prove that majority of the humans on this planet will age/ become older. Therefor it is considered legal to say that you must be of a certain age to see, do, buy something.
Movie Theatres can say that certain humans can't see movies based soley on age - and I don't here screaming over that.
Clubs say that you have to be at least age of consent or legal drinking age to enter . . .I don't see people outside their doors picketing.

The parents may be upset that they are losing the freedom to go out and have adult fun and not worry that junior is going to burn down the house - but sorry if they had raised him/ her correctly they could safely leave the kid at home.
"pre -teen / teens" will be upset because they are losing an option and have to have an adult around . . .and I am sure that their are those being unfairily punished because they do behave . . . maybe they will start to take a stand and expect more from their peers. . .(hey dreaming is allowed)

I will now step off my soap box and give the floor to the next poster

[DesignFox]

I like that idea! I work in a mall. I hate Friday nights. Damn teens everywhere.

I have a high tolerance, and a very high threshold for dealing with nonsense (mainly because I love children and animals...they teach you patience like you wouldn't believe! ).

But for poorly behaved teenagers? No. They come in, trash the place, and rarely spend any money.

The mall is private property. As such, I have no problem with the mall owners forcing parents to babysit their teens on the weekend. It would make the environment much more pleasant for the kids that DO behave themselves, the parents who are out with young children, the adults who don't want to deal with poorly behaved teens, and god forbid, a much more pleasant WORKING environment for the employees.

The good kids need to start kicking their peer's asses into shape. Or, just be like my friends and I were- start hanging out where those kids don't. As a teen, I had no tolerance for most of my peers. My close friends and I stayed away from them like they had the plague.

[kibbles]

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree

[Aldous]

It's teenagers like the ones they want to ban that give us all a bad name. I'll be the first to admit that I've done some shit that I am not proud of, but I've never gotten banned from anywhere (Except a Bowling Alley, story for another day) I don't go and pick fights, and I sure as hell don't fight on property when I did fight. It was always some abandoned place where no one was. I hate going to the mall, and seeing the rowdy bunch, loud and obnoxious, and causing a scene. I never go to the mall unless it's to visit Spencer's Gifts. Or where I used to live a kick-ass bookstore, where all the employees read the same stuff I do. I don't "hang out" at a mall, I never saw the mentality behind that. One time I did, with two of my buds, but we were there on a mission, not just to hang out, and cause a scene. The whole time we were followed by a security guard. Yes let's follow the 3 kids, one dressed in all black with a fedora (Me), one dressed in anime gear (My best friend) and the youngest also in all black (Other best friend) Yes we were a real danger, considering we bought: Books for myself; Anime stuff for Friend A; and a Pair of Jeans for Friend B.

[DesignFox]

Aldous, kids who are good, like you, I make sure to treat like gold.

When I was a teen, it used to frustrate me, too, to be treated like a criminal when I hadn't done anything. But, I understand it now. I feel old every time I start watching kids like a hawk. But it's a necessary evil. Unlike the stupid security guards, though, I can tell when a group is behaving, and I leave them alone.

I still think having restrictions on the weekends is a good idea. Far too many teens rove around unsupervised and create disturbances.

Another solution to the problem would be for more cities to have places where teenagers can go...something for them to DO. Unfortunately, no one seems to want to babysit a bunch of teens...so it doesn't seem there are many activities or meeting places for them...hence, they end up at the mall...or other stores...because they are BORED.

I certainly remember being bored as a teen...we spent an awful lot of time at the diner... or just driving around aimlessly. *sigh*

[CSR Kim]

There is a mall near here who has done this, and I say, woot! to that. The mall where I work? Won't do it. They say it will "offend" the parents of said teenagers and they won't want to shop. I say, what? They aren't shopping anyway...they're just dropping their kids off!

I work in a kiosk which is right near the center court. It is like working in a funhouse friday nights, except minus the fun. To try and "pacify" the prostitots and kinderpimps, the mall started playing classical music after 6 p.m. Oh, yeah, that did wonders I have lost so many customers because herds of 30-40 teens mill around center court being loud and obnoxious, and security can only do so much.