Slashdot Mirror
California City Issues Internet Cafe Moratorium
DarkZero writes: "The Sacramento Bee is reporting that the City Council of Garden Grove, California has issued a 45 day moratium on internet cafes following a fatal stabbing and several other crimes, with the justification that internet cafes are "improperly supervised environments" that very large groups of minors frequent daily (mostly to play games), and that a lot of gang violence has cropped up because of this. Another new restriction is that minors may not stay in any internet cafe past 8PM on a school night, though it isn't clear whether or not that restriction will be lifted after the 45 day period." The New York Times has a similarly breathless story, emphasizing the violence of games played at such cafes.
Roads were closed in California because they make people prone to anger and violence.
I already noticed this like 10 years ago after noticing the increase in cannabalism due to mrs. pacman.
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
All these instituted regulations on minors remind me of the fundamental flaw that is at work here.
Namely, if it is so important for said minors to not be playing violent video games after 8 PM in the evening, then where are the parents? If you want to replace parents with government, then just say so and call the modern family a failure.
I doubt "the Internet" has anything to do with this issue. It's just another thing for kids to do. Movie theaters were probably thought to be similar breeding grounds for dissoluteness back in the 1920s when the problem was really that the parents didn't care enough about what their children were doing.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Doesn't minors have civil rights?
no, they doesn't. Or perhaps even don't.
Sure it's legal. As a minor here in california, i have the rights of a turnip. Curfew, age restrictions on movies, drinking, driving, etc. Even 18 year olds, while technically adults, can't drink. Nobody will notice if they step on our toes some more.
One of the new restrictions will be that minors not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian may only stay at the cafes until 8 p.m. Sundays through Thursdays. Fridays and Saturdays they can stay unaccompanied until 10 p.m., city spokeswoman Kathy Moore said.
That solves it! So what do you think these youngsters are going to go do after they get booted out at 8/10 p.m.? I assure you, they won't be going home for bed-time. This just gives the kids a few extra hours to get even more bored--just think of all the stabbings they could accomplish with all this new free time.
Good to see government still knows how to protect the children.
I wish just for once.. i could read about a problem with kids and hear about a solution instead of some rediculous feel good legislation.. For gods sake help these kids.. become mentors.. work on getting better parenting for them. Solve the F*cking problem! Making them leave an internet cafe is brilliant?! So they walk down to the local park, field, parking lot.. and kill each other there. The people in charge don't care enough to do anything that would make a positive difference so they do something.. just so they cant be accused of doing nothing. It disgusts me.
Yeah, let's get violence off the computer screens and put it back on the street where it belongs.
Of course, the amusing part fo the story is that the mayor ran on a platform warning voters that without him, the town would turn into a police state [ocweekly.com].
goats.com: better than
The supreme court and the ACLU disagree with you. For example, This page, the ACLU cannot teach every high school kid, everybody in the nation, what their rights are..
"After all, when adults shoot each other they don't blame Tony Bennett." - Don Imus
Intercarve Networks, LLC
I used to work for a company that would break every Friday at 3 to play UnrealTournament or HalfLife. Two hours of every week we'd spend splattering eachother's body parts across digital walls and floors. A good time was had by all. And when the boss stopped paying us because he'd wasted all the company funds, we simply walked away, and called our lawyers. We didn't kill him, like we had done so many Fridays in the digital universe - we didn't even give him a severe pounding (which he sorely deserved). Somehow, despite the excellent sound and graphics of the game, we still seemed to grasp the difference between the game and reality.
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -- "Step Right Up", Tom Waits
Internet cafe has now turned into a modern day, high tech arcade. They should not have to do anything different from a arcade owner. If an arcade owner has to apply for a license, so should internet cafe. If an arcade has to abide by a certain regulation, so should the internet cafe. However, extra burden should not be place on the internet cafe because it is modern and may seem different.
That's what I find troubling with a lot of new regulations coming out. There are a number of prior laws that could be used to cover the computer industry but they often make new laws specifically targetted at it. Remember, computers are only another tool.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
(c. 1923) Police in an unamed mertoplitan area banned all sale of alcohol, after noting its' strong correlation to domestic crimes. "People expect the police to protect them," a spokesperson said. "We can't do that if these crime-enducing liquors are on sale."
Wow, you'd think people could learn from history. Two things may be related, but changing one doesn't neccessarily change the other (cause & effect).
Do you like Japanese imports?
Now that they're kicking the minors out early and extending the hours, that leaves 6 hours for the old folks to frag each other instead of getting fragged to oblivion by twelve-year-olds!
Let's not knee-jerk in response to this either. It's one town, not the whole state, and it appears to be in response to a real problem they're having. They've put a time limit on the moratorium, with a mandate to revisit and re-evaluate the issue in 45 days. That gives them some time to come up with a more measured response.
Maybe increased police patrols in those areas to deal with the bad guys, so that the good guys can go on living life as normal, surfing their net, etc. Maybe something completely different.
If, after the 45 day trial period, they maintain the restrictions, then let's complain. But let's not deride them just because they reacted to a real problem in their community. After all, if the gangs have moved in and become violent in and around the net cafes, that means the geeks are probably being restricted already. I know I'd stick out like a sore thumb with a sign on it that said "beat me to a pulp and steal my lunch money."
Hot Damn! It's the Soggy Bottom Boys!
were playing Counterstrike then being booted out of a cybercafe at 8pm and hanging out on the streets.
Back in the days of the Cold War there was a joke that went like this:
In a very real sense, the Internet will come to be viewed as the ultimate secret weapon. Information is very hard to control, and free access to information is a serious threat to the despot. The Chinese and the Saudis both fear free access to information--they're sufficiently connected to the rest of the world to know that they can't simply disconnect their people from the Internet, but they're trying very hard to prevent access to "bad information." The Chinese, in particular, are cracking down on Internet cafes (here's an article from the official People's Daily, a slightly different perspective from the Digital Freedom Network).
An effective way to attack injustice is publicity--and an effective retort is to say, "oh, but [name other country] is doing it too--we agree completely." In this case, the Chinese and the Saudis can loudly and publicly proclaim their agreement with "the Americans" and continue tightening the screws on their citizens access to information.
One of the great strengths of America is that any clown can run for elective office. One of the great weaknesses of America is that so many clowns manage to get elected.
Last year, I use to visit the internet cafes (though these are in NYC) pretty often. I, like most other people, went to play Counter-Strike.
When one or two first opened around my place, they were relatively quiet, filled with kids who would rather be out with friends playing a game than sitting at home doing it.
But then they started getting pretty popular. Soon, we'd all go in and almost all the computers would be taken up.
And when you played, kids would truly get violent. You'd make a kill on someone and they'd get up out of their seat and start saying stuff like "Yo! Who da fuck is _______ (insert username of person who just killed him here)"
The thing is, you can't just go about banning these places because of these assholes. Unfortunately, there is normally only one person supervising the place and they normally try to avoid doing anything but collecting the 3 dollars a hour you pay.
At first, when I read about the 45 day stall, I was kinda taken aback. But now that I look at it, it's appropriate. It's not permanent. It gives these places a month and a half to hire more staff, or security, or what else is going to be needed. It's really unfortunate that this stuff is needed in the first place, but kids apparently can't take a game.
One other thing: To say it's the game itself that causes violence is bullshit. Absoutely bullshit. If this is the reason the restriction is being placed, then you better do it to all competition. Gangs are formed there too, except they're called "teams".
They key to competition is having it supervised tightly so it never gets out of hand. As lame as that sounds, it's the fault of kid's my age that brought it to that.
Regulation will solve it? Licensing will solve it?
Come on. How about considering the option that the person responsible for the teenager should be held liable to the full extent of the law.
Don't make cigarette shops card a teenager, don't make internet cafes card a teenager, don't make ANY commercial or private individual become a watchdog for the government or a parents -- because that's how we've become a nanny state.
Parents are lazy because they feel they don't need to parent anymore. Instead of watching TV with their kids, they can set their V-chip to "Rated G" and forget about it. Instead of browsing the web with their kids, they can install software, in hopes it will work 100%. Instead of finding out why their kids weren't home by 10, and grounding them for a month or three, they can hope the government will regulate a coffee house, arcade, net cafe, whatever. Instead of searching their teen's jackets and drawers looking for drugs or cigarettes, they can rely on the nanny state.
I say get rid of all regulations like these, and lets finally force parents to do the job they are responsible for: parenting.
Mod me the fuck down, if you dare:
US minors are not responsible, but they can be sentenced to death. Almost no other country in the world does that. Way to go, USA!
US adults below 21 cannot drink alcohol, but they can serve and get killed in the army. Way to go, USA!
First of all, I don't think the part you highlighted means what you think it means. Second of all, if you look at a number of laws and regulations, children and minors are often not afforded a good amount of the constitutional rights in exchange for laws to protect the minors.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
A man is stabbed in an internet cafe. The response: put a moratorium on opening new cafes, but not on selling more knives. Knives don't kill people, people don't kill people, internet cafes kill people. God help us all.
This is where it gets really funny:
Let's suppose that they could magically enforce this. Do they know nothing about the history of trying to control demand by stifling supply? Heard of a little thing called Amendment 18? "Hey, I know of a great little Clickeasy behind the funeral parlour... I wannanother cuppa Java..."
Semi-seriously, I'm reminded of a curfew in Paisley in Scotland, when all of the nightclubs were instructed to kick everyone out at 2am on the dot. The result? The emergency services quickly learned to dispatch units at about 1:50am to arrive in time for the stabbing frenzy. If gang violence is really an issue here, I don't in all honesty see how this situation would be any different.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
With todays society it figures the disease would be considered the place and not the people, and the cure is to ban the people from the place.... I'd rather a kid at a computer keeping network security professionals on their toes than out on the streets killing. There are already laws against guns, drugs, and violence. It sounds to me like the police need to do a better job of making sure people in places like these are following them rather than restrict their hours, I'm sure the business owners can't be too happy.
Maybe I'm just biased, after all, sitting at a keyboard is likely the only reason I've never been arrested, or in jail, or on drugs.... I say give the kids access to computers throughout the night, just make sure the places are adiquetly policed...
Please, ignore the poorly worded intro on slashdot, and read the article for yourself. The City Council, responding to a fatal stabbing and other crimes at this Los Angeles suburb's many cyber cafes, placed a 45-day moratorium Tuesday on the opening of any more of the establishments. (emphasis added)
They're not shutting anyone down. They're putting in place an 8pm curfew on weeknights, and asking that the established cafes enforce the standard 10pm curfew the on the weekend.
Please, lets not let this turn into "this city is trying to take the internet away from the people because there are violent video games on the computers". This is a response to gang related stabbings. It has nothing to do with the internet, or geeks, or nerds, or whatever you choose to call yourself. It has everything to do with a rise in the number of cafes in a bad area, and the consequential rise in gang activity at those cafes.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
The beginning of the article seems to be trying to imply some link between violent video games and real-world violence, but the statements of experts in the article don't seem to support that idea.
It looks like the violence has moved from the schools, not from the computer screens, to the parking lots outside the cafes (or, presumably, anywhere else the kids might gather).
It seems to me that the mayor and others involved are imposing these restrictions because they were just recently exposed to the fact that the kids were ditching school, not because of some presumed causal link between video games and violence:
Now that I think about it, the whole darn article is just a bunch of bunk holding together a few useful statements by people who might actually know something. Other favorite parts are the repeated references to race with no apparent point ("umm, by the way, they're all Vietnamese -- draw what conclusions you will, *wink*, *wink*"), and this classic bit:
The "harmless nerds" bit is just funny, and the idea that gangs are somehow not dangerous until mixed with video games is laughable as well.
As a human being, you start off life with no concept of boundaries. In one study I saw, small children were given intense lectures on the dangers of handguns and what to do if they came across one. Then, they were allowed to play while being secretly observed. While playing, they came across realistic handguns. Invariably, they'd pick the things up and start trying to shoot each other with them.
Children don't understand limits enough to be reasonable functioning members of society. Although some people never come to understand those limits, by consensus, our society has decided that generally people achieve sufficient understanding to be allowed to have their full privileges in the 18-21 year old range.
Ironically, the fact that I'm having to explain this simple needed restriction on younger members of our society is a measure of proof of its need.
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
Oops. Chalk another one up to dumb-ass americans who can't tell Asian {cities|countries|people} apart.
This just gives the kids a few extra hours to get even more bored--just think of all the stabbings they could accomplish with all this new free time.
/. crowd modding you to Score 5, Insightful really gives me the creeps.
If I read correctly through your sarcasms, you basically say 2 things here:
1. Kids attending these cafes are actually would-be criminals. According to the article, investigators don't even assume that; they seem to think that the cafe was merely a battleground. i.e. gangs just met there to fight, they were not usual customers of the cafe.
2. You then fall into the usual (yet unacceptable) ultimatum/blackmail to society/gov : "give us what we want or we use violence."
I can live with the fact that you posted your comment without thinking of its implications, but the
How did government ever obtain to the right to tell me how to raise my kids?
Because you weren't doing a good enough job.
Before you all erupt in mindless rage, I'm not referring to anyone specifically; this law, like most laws that attempt to regulate parenting, was done in response to a problem.
I'm not saying it's a correct response. I'm not saying it's moral. I'm not even saying it's Constitutional. But the automatic negative characterization by people on these forums of those who try to deal with these problems is just pathetic. These are NOT comic-opera villains passing laws simply out of a desire to restrict YOUR freedoms, as they twirl their long black moustachios and chortle gleefully. They're not always ambitious and greedy bureaucrats bent on advancing their career by passing frivolous legislation.
Quite often they're dealing with serious problems that don't have easy answers, and the fact that so many people here try to reduce everything to such simplistic terms reflects poorly on this community. Instead of complaining, why not suggest an alternate method of dealing with the problem?
other than The Mall, which is protected by tradition and capitalism
Funny you should say that. One of the malls in my home town was always plagued by gang violence. There were no extra laws passed to get the kids out of there. The mall was never closed because of the violence. People were so afraid to go there that most of the employees quit and shoppers went elsewhere. The mall closed only to lack of funds.
I agree with you. Had an arcade place or one of the so called "coffee bars" had the same amount of problems the city would have shut them down in a second.
He has to manage to fight the tide of everyone over 21 who "just doesn't give a damn" anymore. Actually, he has to deal with people like you. Not only does he himself have to vote for someone sympathetic, he has to convince a sufficient number of dolts like you to do the same.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Then we were told that the city was just regulating a sleezy, crime-inducing, immoral, women-degrading filthy porn shop. We said, "OK, that sounds reasonable, after all we regulate bars, why should a porn shop be treated differently? But no more regulatin', ya hear?"
Now, in my neck of the woods, video stores aren't regulated. But since they seem to be in yours, you (in the you're-all-citizens sense) were told that the city was just regulating [insert inflamatory adjectives to get people to give up more freedom here] video stores. And you said, "OK, those sure are scary words you used, so yeah it sounds reasonable. After all we regulate bars and porn shops, why should a video store be treated differently?"
And now...we're being told that internet cafes are crime-inducing, violent, immoral, gang-fostering, unsupervised, and appeal to certain ethnic groups therefore they need to be regulated. This, dispite the fact that the gangs developed elesewhere, that the conflict was carried over from the school yard, and that there no reason to single internet cafes out. Well...no reason except that we already regulate bars, porn shops, video stores, and whatnot, why should an internet cafe be treated differently?
-sk
That's just it. Our (U.S.) culture is extending adolescence to the point where for many people, it lasts until the mid-20's. A simple example is when I was in Virginia Tech my senior year in 1987. I heard that they had established a "freshman" dorm and had programs to help freshmen get acclimitized to college.
;-)
These are 18-year-olds for crying out loud, not 6-year-olds. The best thing that happened to me when I started college was to live on a hall with mostly upperclassmen. A group of college freshman will act like high-school students. I group of college freshman _and_ upperclassmen do not. (Of course, that could be worse, but that's another story
Society seems to be following a similar pattern, which is what the original poster was complaining about. The amendment to lower the minimum voting age was probably the last of the trend to allow younger people more responsibility rather than less. But as I noted in my joking post above that everyone took as a troll: No one cares, because once you can do something about the problem, you don't have it anymore.
We need the real-life version of that ol' short-lived DC comic from the 70's called "Prez" about the first teenage president. Wait. No we don't. We already suffered through enough presidents with arrested development (cough*Clinton*cough).
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
In the early days of this century, Pool Halls were condemmed as polluting our youth with sin. Anyone remember the Music Man from High School?
In the 30s, it was "Jitterbugging", Swing Dancing, and seditious characters like Benny Goodman and Louis Armstrong that were ruining America's youth.
Back in the 50s violent comic books (Like EC's "Tales of the Crypt Keeper") were blamed for "Juvenile Delinquency". A popular book "Seduction of the Innocent" by Frederic Wertham caused the creation of the Comics Code Authority which pretty much censored news stand comics for 30 years.
Back in the halcyon late 70s and 80s, similar claims were made about Video Game Arcades. XTC jokes aside, Pac Man didn't ruin American youth.
Same old denial. My kid isn't bad, it's that damn (fill in blank) that's making her bad. To paraphrase Ann Landers: Wake up. Smell it.
My father is a blogger.
"...it's about a city legislating a business. It happens all the time with Bars, Porn Shops, Video Stores and whatnot, why should an arcade be treated differently?"
...it's about a city legislating a business. It happens all the time with Bars, Porn Shops, Video Stores and whatnot, why should a Church, a YMCA or a Library be treated differently?
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"