NationStates Jolt Archive

This is my favorite quote: Mayor James Valley said. "The citizens deserve peace, that some infringement on constitutional rights is OK and we have not violated anything as far as the Constitution."

And the runner up award goes to: "As far as I'm concerned, at 3 o'clock in the morning, nobody has any business being on the street, except the law," Councilman Eugene "Red" Johnson said. "Anyone out at 3 o'clock shouldn't be out on the street, unless you're going to the hospital."


WTF


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/13/national/main4346790.shtml

Good thing I don't live there; I don't sleep and sometimes crave late-night tacos.

This needs to be stopped immediately before a precedent is set and other towns decide it's a good idea to try it.

Sounds like a fun place to live.

This needs to be stopped immediately before a precedent is set and other towns decide it's a good idea to try it.

What, like Washington DC?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001966.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2216539&page=1

Or the military-style checkpoint?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/04/AR2008060402205.html

I guess you don't live around here...

I don't know what the situation is, but if it really is so terrible and there is no other option then I can see this being justified. Freedom and constitutional rights are meaningless if it's too dangerous to go outside without being shot.

What, like Washington DC?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001966.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2216539&page=1

Or the military-style checkpoint?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/04/AR2008060402205.html

I guess you don't live around here...

Not exactly the same thing, but still just as bad.

This is why I don't venture across the border into DC unless I have to. I'm perfectly fine up here in Maryland.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

This won't last. They will be told to cut it out by a court. They are not just infringing on the Constitution. They are violating it, regardless of what that fascist lackey of a mayor says.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin
Nor do they get either liberty or safety.

This won't last. They will be told to cut it out by a court. They are not just infringing on the Constitution. They are violating it, regardless of what that fascist lackey of a mayor says.

Although from the quote in the article it sounds like he doesn't really care either way. :mad:

Does anyone feel that the U.S. is starting to feel like the U.S.S.R? I'm beginning to feel that our rights are being stripped away gradually...

I don't know what the situation is, but if it really is so terrible and there is no other option then I can see this being justified. Freedom and constitutional rights are meaningless if it's too dangerous to go outside without being shot.

That's where yer secund ahmendment comes in! YEEEHAW!!

"Police in Hartford, Conn., began enforcing a nightly curfew for youths after recent violence, including a weekend shooting that killed a man and wounded six young people."

A federal court found a similar curfew unconstitutional in another CT town so we'll see how long this goes. Ironically for Hartford, all 11 of last weekends shootings happened in broad daylight, 9 of them during a parade on Saturday.

This is my favorite quote: Mayor James Valley said. "The citizens deserve peace, that some infringement on constitutional rights is OK and we have not violated anything as far as the Constitution."

And the runner up award goes to: "As far as I'm concerned, at 3 o'clock in the morning, nobody has any business being on the street, except the law," Councilman Eugene "Red" Johnson said. "Anyone out at 3 o'clock shouldn't be out on the street, unless you're going to the hospital."


WTF


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/13/national/main4346790.shtml

Its tragic to realise that there really is too much danger in decentralised authority.....

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

because I feel like it. And in a free country, that's all the reason I need.

because I feel like it. And in a free country, that's all the reason I need.

come on, say the words, "freedom of assembly"...

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

Because you can?

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

Because all humans aren't diurnal by default.

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

Why do you care?

Just wondering, but wouldn't curfews damage local economies? People do work night-shifts, go to night clubs and watch movies...

So, more or less, you have no reason to be out that late.

You see there is a difference between a need and a want; You may, for example, need a car to travel to work everyday, but you don't necessarily need a Jeep.

The same goes for this argument, you may want to go out at 3 am, but there is no real need to be out that late, and further more, if a curfew is enforce, the crime rate should go down, as the only people on the streets will be criminals.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

So, more or less, you have no reason to be out that late.

And I don't need one.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

That which is of most paramount importance to society is that the government respect the rights of the individual.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

Mussolini is that you?

Why exactly do you need to be out all hours of the night?

Because I can, and if I were EVER stopped or arrested due to it, I'd see to it that whoever dared lay a hand on me lost their house and spent the rest of their lives in prison, in debt, and in courtrooms, so I could make a point of making an example of them. I'd destroy their lives. These are RIGHTS we're talking about.

So, more or less, you have no reason to be out that late.

You see there is a difference between a need and a want; You may, for example, need a car to travel to work everyday, but you don't necessarily need a Jeep.

The same goes for this argument, you may want to go out at 3 am, but there is no real need to be out that late, and further more, if a curfew is enforce, the crime rate should go down, as the only people on the streets will be criminals.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

Which is why, applying your exact thought process, you should be forced to donate all your organs to other, more productive members of society that needed them? Let's see: Three pieces of your liver, two kidneys, two corneas, a heart, two lungs, about seven skin patches, 8 pints of blood and about 10 "doses" of bone marrow.

The needs of 37 people outweigh yours as an individual. Go right ahead and lie down on the operating table. I'd like to say it was nice knowing you, but I'm not a liar.

P.S.: It's called Linguistics and Discourse Analysis. I know what I'm doing.

Which is why you should be forced to donate all your organs to other, more productive members of society that needed them? Let's see: Three pieces of your liver, two kidneys, two corneas, a heart, two lungs, about seven skin patches, 8 pints of blood and about 10 "doses" of bone marrow.

The needs of 37 people outweigh yours as an individual. Go right ahead and lie down on the operating table. I'd like to say it was nice knowing you, but I'm not a liar.

May I do the cutting? I'm not a surgeon, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

May I do the cutting? I'm not a surgeon, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

You can't, you're in jail for breaking curfew, remember? Out of your HOUSE at night. His utopia, his rules. I'm sure a more diurnal doctor will be glad to slice him up, though.

So, more or less, you have no reason to be out that late.

You see there is a difference between a need and a want; You may, for example, need a car to travel to work everyday, but you don't necessarily need a Jeep.

The same goes for this argument, you may want to go out at 3 am, but there is no real need to be out that late, and further more, if a curfew is enforce, the crime rate should go down, as the only people on the streets will be criminals.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.

I think the collective point, that blur that whizzed right over your head earlier, is that you don't need a reason. It's called a "freedom" or "right", not a "need".

Besides, you have to blatantly ignore night businesses to even say there's no need to be out at night.

Because I can, and if I were EVER stopped or arrested due to it, I'd see to it that whoever dared lay a hand on me lost their house and spent the rest of their lives in prison, in debt, and in courtrooms, so I could make a point of making an example of them. I'd destroy their lives. These are RIGHTS we're talking about.

Rights are nothing but ink on paper, dreamed up by philosophers with nothing better to do.

They don't have any real value, nor will they protect you from people who choose to 'violate' them.

Which is why, applying your exact thought process, you should be forced to donate all your organs to other, more productive members of society that needed them? Let's see: Three pieces of your liver, two kidneys, two corneas, a heart, two lungs, about seven skin patches, 8 pints of blood and about 10 "doses" of bone marrow.

The needs of 37 people outweigh yours as an individual. Go right ahead and lie down on the operating table. I'd like to say it was nice knowing you, but I'm not a liar.
Tut tut, your strawman is showing.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
You really do worship that piece of paper, don't you?

In addition, I fail to see how going to taco bell at 1 am in the morning has to do with assemble.

I think the collective point, that blur that whizzed right over your head earlier, is that you don't need a reason. It's called a "freedom" or "right", not a "need".
Your freedom, much like your democracy, is an illusion; according to you, anyone and everyone should be allowed to go anywhere they want, when every they want, for whatever reason, including, say, military bases and the oval office. You should be able to kill people for no reason at all, rape and steal from your neighbors.

Oh wait, you can't do those things! Surprise surprise.

Besides, you have to blatantly ignore night businesses to even say there's no need to be out at night.
Ah, but you see, if no one was allowed out at night, there would be no night businesses, and the only other businesses who need to be conducted under the cloak of darkness are probably illegal to begin with.

Tut tut, your strawman is showing.

Andaras is that you? Well, probably not, you haven't used the word bourgeois yet.

Rights are nothing but ink on paper, dreamed up by philosophers with nothing better to do.

Rights exist, even if governments pass laws against them. They are something to fight for and preserve.

They don't have any real value, nor will they protect you from people who choose to 'violate' them.
Wrong.

You really do worship that piece of paper, don't you?
Not worship, but it's a good guide - better than many.

In addition, I fail to see how going to taco bell at 1 am in the morning has to do with assemble.
I have the right to go where I please in public at any time without being questioned.


Your freedom, much like your democracy, is an illusion; according to you, anyone and everyone should be allowed to go anywhere they want, when every they want, for whatever reason, including, say, military bases and the oval office. You should be able to kill people for no reason at all, rape and steal from your neighbors.
Now you're pulling stuff out of your ass.

Ah, but you see, if no one was allowed out at night, there would be no night businesses, and the only other businesses who need to be conducted under the cloak of darkness are probably illegal to begin with.

I guess we'll close the emergency room at night then. If you have a heart attack, in your country people will just die because it will be illegal to go outside at night, and after all, you've closed the only place they could go to get help.

Sometimes I stay late at my friend's house and don't come home until 3am. I fail to see why that is any concern of yours, Xomic, or why I should be prevented from doing that. I don't tell you when you can visit your friends, you don't tell me when I can visit mine.

Tut tut, your strawman is showing.

Pray tell, what strawman? Didn't YOU say that tripe about the needs of society? So... On a side note, if you're claiming "rights" are inventions of "philosophers with nothing better to do", why the hell are you even mentioning "society", a concept ALSO devised by philosophers, in the first place?

Really, will I get to even break a sweat arguing with you here? You're not entertaining me at all!

Ah, but you see, if no one was allowed out at night, there would be no night businesses, and the only other businesses who need to be conducted under the cloak of darkness are probably illegal to begin with.

Tell that to the 24 x 7 manufacturing lines, the 24 hour transnational call centers, power plants and hospitals, and all the other essential infrastructure that still needs human participation to continue. I've worked shifts that required me to start and/or end at any time of the day or night.

Just because your imagination doesn't extend beyond Taco Bell doesn't mean the world ends there.

Just because your imagination doesn't extend beyond Taco Bell doesn't mean the world ends there.

And here I thought Taco Bell as the Restaurant at the End of the Universe.

Your freedom, much like your democracy, is an illusion; according to you, anyone and everyone should be allowed to go anywhere they want, when every they want, for whatever reason, including, say, military bases and the oval office. You should be able to kill people for no reason at all, rape and steal from your neighbors.

Oh wait, you can't do those things! Surprise surprise.

Notice that nothing you quoted said anything of what you wrote. It's as if I never said anything like that at all...

Ah, but you see, if no one was allowed out at night, there would be no night businesses, and the only other businesses who need to be conducted under the cloak of darkness are probably illegal to begin with.
So, no one ever needs an ambulance, the fire department, electrical repair, plumbing, or wildlife control at night?

Tell that to the 24 x 7 manufacturing lines, the 24 hour transnational call centers, power plants and hospitals, and all the other essential infrastructure that still needs human participation to continue. I've worked shifts that required me to start and/or end at any time of the day or night.

Just because your imagination doesn't extend beyond Taco Bell doesn't mean the world ends there.

Every food processing plant in the damn world. Two shifts working, one shift cleaning. People in and out at all hours.

The fact is, the constitution is law. We may not like it, we may not agree with it, we may hate it, but it's law. Not only is it law, but it is supreme law, the law to which all other laws in this nation are subservient.

They say they do this to "reduce crime", but to do this, in violation of the constitition, is to violate the law. In order to reduce crime, they commit crime. And I'm supposed to support something that is essentially trading one criminal for another? Even worse, we expect criminals to break the law, it's another issue entirely when the government does it.

The fact is, the constitution is law. We may not like it, we may not agree with it, we may hate it, but it's law. Not only is it law, but it is supreme law, the law to which all other laws in this nation are subservient.

They say they do this to "reduce crime", but to do this, in violation of the constitition, is to violate the law. In order to reduce crime, they commit crime. And I'm supposed to support something that is essentially trading one criminal for another? Even worse, we expect criminals to break the law, it's another issue entirely when the government does it.

Bah! The constitution is outdated. Besides, it's more of a suggestion than law.

In addition, I fail to see how going to taco bell at 1 am in the morning has to do with assemble.

I could be assembling there with my friends to get some tacos.

Bah! The constitution is outdated. Besides, it's more of a suggestion than law.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...

Why is it when an actual situation to which the Second ammendment was designed to prevent shows up there aren't people shooting up the place?

I wanted to see some mayhem...

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...

I think he is.

Hey, I frequently take walks at 3 in the morning at college (some nights I just can't get to sleep). I never leave campus, but I'm still up. I've actually befriended the security guards.

Now, if this town has been experiencing a wave of crime, then harsh measures might be warranted. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a cop to ask someone who is out late at night what they are doing.

Hey, I frequently take walks at 3 in the morning at college (some nights I just can't get to sleep). I never leave campus, but I'm still up. I've actually befriended the security guards.

Now, if this town has been experiencing a wave of crime, then harsh measures might be warranted. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a cop to ask someone who is out late at night what they are doing.

I think it's perfectly reasonable for a cop to ask someone.

I also think it's perfectly reason for someone to say "I don't feel like talking to you" if he wants to.

Tell that to the 24 x 7 manufacturing lines, the 24 hour transnational call centers, power plants and hospitals, and all the other essential infrastructure that still needs human participation to continue. I've worked shifts that required me to start and/or end at any time of the day or night.

Just because your imagination doesn't extend beyond Taco Bell doesn't mean the world ends there.
Manufacturing plants, etc, are not the same thing as say, walking on the side of the road at 3 am going 'somewhere' or going out for a taco at 2 am. Most night businesses, like taco bell or convenience stores, don't have any real reason to be open that late, where as, as you point out, a factory or hospital would have to be open 24 hours a day.

In fact, the article in OP even says:
"As far as I'm concerned, at 3 o'clock in the morning, nobody has any business being on the street, except the law," Councilman Eugene "Red" Johnson said. "Anyone out at 3 o'clock shouldn't be out on the street, unless you're going to the hospital."

I still haven't seen a good reason why you need to be out on the street at 3 am in the morning. Going to the hospital or coming from or going to work are all valid reasons, but craving tacos isn't a valid reason, nor is being out late at you're friends house.

I'm not saying curfews like this should be enforced everywhere without reason, that'd be idiotic and pointless, and yes, probably violate these so called rights you hold so near and dear; that being said, I find a lot of the comments on this thread absolutely moronic; Some cities, like the one in the OP article, have really high crime rates, if a curfew is what it takes to clamp down on this problem, then so be it.

If you still don't like it, than offer your own solutions to this problem, rather then complaining about what that city is doing, because clearly they have a problem and they're trying to fix it.

The fact is, the constitution is law. We may not like it, we may not agree with it, we may hate it, but it's law. Not only is it law, but it is supreme law, the law to which all other laws in this nation are subservient.
Laws are suppose to be living breathing things, not static and unchanging; if crime is a problem (which it is in some parts of the States) perhaps an amendment should be made to correct this problem, and allow law enforcement to enact curfews for short periods of time.


They say they do this to "reduce crime", but to do this, in violation of the constitition, is to violate the law. In order to reduce crime, they commit crime. And I'm supposed to support something that is essentially trading one criminal for another? Even worse, we expect criminals to break the law, it's another issue entirely when the government does it.
It's a pity that the document is written in such a manner that yes, you pretty much have to break it to control crime effectively.

It's a pity that the document is written in such a manner that yes, you pretty much have to break it to control crime effectively.

As I noted in a previous post, the curfew in Hartford, Connecticutt had the salient effect of moving the violence to broad daylight during a Saturday parade.

Doing something unconstitutional that isn't effective (and you can't keep doing forever, because you're diverting a lot of resources to enforce it) is a pretty stupid idea.

Laws are suppose to be living breathing things, not static and unchanging; if crime is a problem (which it is in some parts of the States) perhaps an amendment should be made to correct this problem, and allow law enforcement to enact curfews for short periods of time.


It's a pity that the document is written in such a manner that yes, you pretty much have to break it to control crime effectively.

Perhaps, perhaps not. That's not relevant to this issue as there IS no amendment. As of right now, at this moment, it's illegal.

I think she is.
Fixed.:D

Yes, I am being extremely sarcastic.

Fixed.:D

Yes, I am being extremely sarcastic.

Sorry, I, as part of society, just scheduled you for a gender reassignent surgery so I'm not in the wrong and don't feel bad about it anymore. You have to make sacrifices for society after all. ;)

Perhaps, perhaps not. That's not relevant to this issue as there IS no amendment. As of right now, at this moment, it's illegal.

Sometimes illegal actions much be taken to prevent more illegal actions, and to set a precedent for just such amendment.

Sometimes illegal actions much be taken

Except for the fact that, by the very definition of the word, the government does not have the authority to commit illegal acts.

And if you don't respect the law, to the point where you advocate that one entity be allowed to break the law, why should I be punished for breaking the law?

Why should the government be able to violate the law, in order to prevent me from violating the law? If the government can break the law, why can't I?

Fail, try again.

Except for the fact that, by the very definition of the word, the government does not have the authority to commit illegal acts.

And if you don't respect the law, to the point where you advocate that one entity be allowed to break the law, why should I be punished for breaking the law?

Why should the government be able to violate the law, in order to prevent me from violating the law? If the government can break the law, why can't I?

Fail, try again.

Should I let you have your fun with him? Okay, but the next anti-Muslim rant is mine, then, deal?

Except for the fact that, by the very definition of the word, the government does not have the authority to commit illegal acts.

And if you don't respect the law, to the point where you advocate that one entity be allowed to break the law, why should I be punished for breaking the law?

Why should the government be able to violate the law, in order to prevent me from violating the law? If the government can break the law, why can't I?

Fail, try again.
Governments regularly commit illegal actions all the time, I'm pretty sure the Patriot act, for example, should be illegal under your Constitution.

I'm not sure I can respect the law when it's clear it can't be effectively enforced, as it would seem in this city in Ark.

And like I said; you're not exactly offering any solutions or alternatives yourself, other then say, allowing gangs and criminals to control the streets.

And like I said; you're not exactly offering any solutions or alternatives yourself, other then say, allowing gangs and criminals to control the streets.

If the gangs and criminals simply stop operating during the curfew then nothing will really change. They'll commit their crimes before the curfew and after the curfew. Or maybe just during the curfew if the city can't get enough police officers to enforce the curfew.

And like I said; you're not exactly offering any solutions or alternatives yourself, other then say, allowing gangs and criminals to control the streets.

I just thought of a dialogue that would have more or less the foundations of your thought process.

Person 1: - We have nothing to do, and I have no idea what to do this evening!
Person 2: - I have an idea! Let's go to the zoo and masturbate a bear cub!
Person 1: - What? No way!
Person 2: - Well, YOU think of something then, sheesh. You don't have any ideas, at least mine would give us something to do!

So, more or less, you have no reason to be out that late.

You see there is a difference between a need and a want; You may, for example, need a car to travel to work everyday, but you don't necessarily need a Jeep.

The same goes for this argument, you may want to go out at 3 am, but there is no real need to be out that late, and further more, if a curfew is enforce, the crime rate should go down, as the only people on the streets will be criminals.

Rather then whining about you're own personal 'rights', perhaps you should think more of what would be best for society as whole.
It really doesn't matter. If I want to drive to Oklahoma at three o'clock in the morning, I can.

If I want to take a walk to settle my insomnia, I can.

If I want to go outside and stargaze, I can.

If I want to propose under the moonlight, I can.

What right have you to decide that these activities are now banned because you don't feel a need to be out at night?

Kindly stop to think -- because all that will happen is that the crimes will shift to another time of day or the criminals will continue to do their thing -- such as breaking and entering, home invasion, whatever.

Oh, and we'll all have lost some freedom and gained the right to be prisoners in our own homes.

If the gangs and criminals simply stop operating during the curfew then nothing will really change. They'll commit their crimes before the curfew and after the curfew. Or maybe just during the curfew if the city can't get enough police officers to enforce the curfew.

Sadly, it's true.

I guess this city feels they can handle the logistics of the operation.

Sadly, it's true.

I guess this city feels they can handle the logistics of the operation.

"This city" feels no such thing. A few morons that happen to be elected FOR NOW do.

Oh, and we'll all have lost some freedom and gained the right to be prisoners in our own homes.

How do you think these people who are living in the city (of the OP's article) feel, seeing as they can't go out and do any of that to anyways because of the high level of crime?

I just thought of a dialogue that would have more or less the foundations of your thought process.

Person 1: - We have nothing to do, and I have no idea what to do this evening!
Person 2: - I have an idea! Let's go to the zoo and masturbate a bear cub!
Person 1: - What? No way!
Person 2: - Well, YOU think of something then, sheesh. You don't have any ideas, at least mine would give us something to do!

5/10 for the attempt.

But I've noticed you've yet to suggest what the police and government of this city should do to protect it's citizens, as an alternative to it's current plan of action.

"This city" feels no such thing. A few morons that happen to be elected FOR NOW do.

Are you quite sure of that? The only person questioning the curfew in the article is someone from Little Rock, not from Helena-West Helena, where the curfew is in effect.

5/10 for the attempt.

But I've noticed you've yet to suggest what the police and government of this city should do to protect it's citizens, as an alternative to it's current plan of action.

Oh boy. I just pointed out how flawed your argument was, and now you try to pull the same crap again. But fine:

* Reeducation programs for convicts.
* More policemen on the beat.
* Gentrification programs for the seedier part of the town.
* Gang infiltration techniques by the officers.
* Neighborhood watch programs.
* Asking for more funding to implement at least SOME of these ideas.

There. Using that dialogue as an analogy, I just suggested going to McDonald's, going to the movies, going to the mall, going to a pottery exhibit, and playing video-games, including a suggestion to withdraw some cash at an ATM to do so, now will you stop talking about going to the zoo to masturbate the bear cub?

And this is better than catching the criminals, How?

How do you think these people who are living in the city (of the OP's article) feel, seeing as they can't go out and do any of that to anyways because of the high level of crime?

If it were me, I'd feel that the police ought to solve the city's crime problems in a manner consistent with the law so that I wouldn't have to worry about my rights being limited by criminals or by the government.

And this is better than catching the criminals, How?

Criminals only come out at night. (I saw it on Batman.)

Therefore anyone out at night is a criminal. QED.

Sadly, it's true.

I guess this city feels they can handle the logistics of the operation.

They'll have to put a lot of their budget into the police force if this is going to continue for very long. Sooner or later the fact that nothing in the city is getting any funding except the police combined with the fact that everyone in the city is a prisoner in their own home will be the perfect set up for someone to get elected on the platform of ending the police siege of the city(as I'm sure they'd call it).


Assuming that the law doesn't just get overturned.
Are you quite sure of that? The only person questioning the curfew in the article is someone from Little Rock, not from Helena-West Helena, where the curfew is in effect.
I can't see it being easy to get interviews from people under 24 hour lockdown.

Criminals only come out at night. (I saw it on Batman.)

Therefore anyone out at night is a criminal. QED.

Try telling that to the Out of hours GP.

Criminals only come out at night. (I saw it on Batman.)

Therefore anyone out at night is a criminal. QED.

*Attacks Fatsniffage. Onomathopeas are heard*

* POW!!!
* BAMF!!!
* CRASH!!!
* WHAM!!!

*After it's all done, Fartsniffage has Heikoku trapped in something that looks like a big fountain pen, with ink slowly filling it...*

And this is better than catching the criminals, How?

Three of Heikoku's suggestions directly increase the chances of catching the criminals. All five (I'm not counting the sixth because it's a means to implement the others) increase the chances of preventing crimes from being committed, either by addressing the root causes of crime or by helping deter it.

Three of Heikoku's suggestions directly increase the chances of catching the criminals. All five (I'm not counting the sixth because it's a means to implement the others) increase the chances of preventing crimes from being committed, either by addressing the root causes of crime or by helping deter it.

Just round up people that have Big TVs and no money.

Just round up people that have Big TVs and no money.

I have a big TV and no money. The big TV is why I have no money. :p

* Reeducation programs for convicts.
* More policemen on the beat.
* Gentrification programs for the seedier part of the town.
* Gang infiltration techniques by the officers.
* Neighborhood watch programs.
* Asking for more funding to implement at least SOME of these ideas.



See? Was that so hard?

Just round up people that have Big TVs and no money.

Yeah, and, while we're at it, we can round up blacks too, right? And Arabs for terrorism. And whites for hate crimes. And so on. And when all is done, eskimos will finally RUN THE FRICKIN' LAND!

See? Was that so hard?

So you agree that we shouldn't go to the zoo to masturbate a bear cub?

Yeah, and, while we're at it, we can round up blacks too, right? And Arabs for terrorism. And whites for hate crimes. And so on. And when all is done, eskimos will finally RUN THE FRICKIN' LAND!

YAY!

Free Seal hunting!

YAY!

Free Seal hunting!

You're not an eskimo, you'll be in jail. -_-

They'll have to put a lot of their budget into the police force if this is going to continue for very long. Sooner or later the fact that nothing in the city is getting any funding except the police combined with the fact that everyone in the city is a prisoner in their own home will be the perfect set up for someone to get elected on the platform of ending the police siege of the city(as I'm sure they'd call it).


Assuming that the law doesn't just get overturned.
Sure sure, and we'll probably all end up fighting Eastasia in an unwinable war


I can't see it being easy to get interviews from people under 24 hour lockdown.
Please, if Larry King can get interviews with convicts in jail, and news reporters can get into war zones, they can interview someone in the city.

So you agree that we shouldn't go to the zoo to masturbate a bear cub?

That was your idea, not mine.

I can only assume it's cause you're crazy :eek:

You're not an eskimo, you'll be in jail. -_-

Prove I'm not an Eskimo in Exile!

Prove I'm not an Eskimo in Exile!

How many words do you have for snow?

That was your idea, not mine.

I can only assume it's cause you're crazy :eek:

No, dearie, in the metaphor it was your idea.

No, dearie, in the metaphor it was your idea.

it was your metaphor >.>

You're not an eskimo, you'll be in jail. -_-

At least Eskimo jails are easy to melt out of.

Just round up people that have Big TVs and no money.

The other nice thing about Heikoku's suggestions was that none of them broke the law. :tongue:

The other nice thing about Heikoku's suggestions was that none of them broke the law. :tongue:

Mine doesn't. It just upsets lots of poor people.

May I point out that New York City, which has some 8,250,567 souls (yes, that is over eight million, yes, that population is larger than many states -- Maryland, Rhode Island, Alaska, Virginia -- I'm looking at you ;)) there is no curfew?

I can indeed go to a diner at 4am if I want to, or ride the Staten Island Ferry and get the best free view of the city if I want to, or even stargaze in one of its many parks if I want to.

...So how come some tiny little city of 15,000 people is so out of control?

Sure sure, and we'll probably all end up fighting Eastasia in an unwinable war
I wasn't aware that 1984 was based around the people of a democracy choosing to elect someone that promised to free them from a 24 hour curfew. I thought it was more of a dystopian view of a world of total government control over society. But to be perfectly honest, I haven't read it.


Please, if Larry King can get interviews with convicts in jail, and news reporters can get into war zones, they can interview someone in the city.

I'm sure they can. That they can do it doesn't imply that it's easy.
Mine doesn't. It just upsets lots of poor people.
I believe yours violates the 4th amendment.

May I point out that New York City, which has some 8,250,567 souls (yes, that is over eight million, yes, that population is larger than many states -- Maryland, Rhode Island, Alaska, Virginia -- I'm looking at you ;)) there is no curfew?

I can indeed go to a diner at 4am if I want to, or ride the Staten Island Ferry and get the best free view of the city if I want to, or even stargaze in one of its many parks if I want to.

...So how come some tiny little city of 15,000 people is so out of control?

You haven't seen the documentary Flashdance?

The kids will be dancing. Who knows where that can lead?

May I point out that New York City, which has some 8,250,567 souls (yes, that is over eight million, yes, that population is larger than many states -- Maryland, Rhode Island, Alaska, Virginia -- I'm looking at you ;)) there is no curfew?

I can indeed go to a diner at 4am if I want to, or ride the Staten Island Ferry and get the best free view of the city if I want to, or even stargaze in one of its many parks if I want to.

...So how come some tiny little city of 15,000 people is so out of control?

Simple. It doesn't have a song Written about it whose funniest version was in Desperate Housewives.

May I point out that New York City, which has some 8,250,567 souls (yes, that is over eight million, yes, that population is larger than many states -- Maryland, Rhode Island, Alaska, Virginia -- I'm looking at you ;)) there is no curfew?

I can indeed go to a diner at 4am if I want to, or ride the Staten Island Ferry and get the best free view of the city if I want to, or even stargaze in one of its many parks if I want to.

...So how come some tiny little city of 15,000 people is so out of control?

For starters it's run by morons that think curfews are a pretty neat idea.

I wasn't aware that 1984 was based around the people of a democracy choosing to elect someone that promised to free them from a 24 hour curfew. I thought it was more of a dystopian view of a world of total government control over society. But to be perfectly honest, I haven't read it.


Err. I may have misread your comment then.

You haven't seen the documentary Flashdance?

The kids will be dancing. Who knows where that can lead?

That was Footloose. Flashdance was the steel worker chick who got wet dancing. Oh, that sounds horrible....

That was Footloose. Flashdance was the steel worker chick who got wet dancing. Oh, that sounds horrible....

Shit.

I thought I was being clever too.

No it doesn't..

Sorry, I, as part of society, just scheduled you for a gender reassignent surgery so I'm not in the wrong and don't feel bad about it anymore. You have to make sacrifices for society after all. ;)

I guess I could get used to having a penis, but do I get to keep my boobs?

;) I'm not sure that my knowledge of 1980s films is something to be proud of.
BTW, I just checked -- they were released a year apart.

Question: why does most idiocy (like Intelligent Design and curfews) tend to come out of the less densely populated parts of our nation?

I guess I could get used to having a penis, but do I get to keep my boobs?

You'll have to keep the good of society in mind when making that decision.

I guess I could get used to having a penis, but do I get to keep my boobs?

What kind of soulless society would want to reduce the amount of boobage available to it?

Does anyone feel that the U.S. is starting to feel like the U.S.S.R? I'm beginning to feel that our rights are being stripped away gradually...

Beginning? Where the hell have you been?

Manufacturing plants, etc, are not the same thing as say, walking on the side of the road at 3 am going 'somewhere' or going out for a taco at 2 am. Most night businesses, like taco bell or convenience stores, don't have any real reason to be open that late, where as, as you point out, a factory or hospital would have to be open 24 hours a day.

So, when exactly are second and third shift workers supposed to do their grocery shopping if you close the stores at night?

Should I let you have your fun with him? Okay, but the next anti-Muslim rant is mine, then, deal?

I think he's Xomic is spreading enough around for you two to effectively double team him without looking mean.

So, when exactly are second and third shift workers supposed to do their grocery shopping if you close the stores at night?

Big Brother will take care of them.:eek2:

If the gangs and criminals simply stop operating during the curfew then nothing will really change. They'll commit their crimes before the curfew and after the curfew. Or maybe just during the curfew if the city can't get enough police officers to enforce the curfew.

I keep seeing people mention "before" and "after" the curfew, but the article, repeatedly, refers to this being a 24 hour curfew. Unless I'm missing something there is no "before" or "after" the curfew.

I keep seeing people mention "before" and "after" the curfew, but the article, repeatedly, refers to this being a 24 hour curfew. Unless I'm missing something there is no "before" or "after" the curfew.

Yeah, that was a mistake on my part.

So you agree that we shouldn't go to the zoo to masturbate a bear cub?

I don't think we should. If Xomic wanted to I'm not sure I'd try to talk him out of it.

How does a 24 hour curfew work, exactly?

How does a 24 hour curfew work, exactly?

I suppose it reverses the presumption of innocence. If you're out of the house, you have to show a legal reason or you're guilty. Of breaking the "curfew" if nothing else.

"As far as I'm concerned, at 3 o'clock in the morning, nobody has any business being on the street, except the law," Councilman Eugene "Red" Johnson said. "Anyone out at 3 o'clock shouldn't be out on the street, unless you're going to the hospital."

If the cops see you on the street, they send you to the hospital.

It's quite utopian, really. They'll have the biggest and best hospital in the country, and no jail.

Yeah, and, while we're at it, we can round up blacks too, right? And Arabs for terrorism. And whites for hate crimes. And so on. And when all is done, eskimos will finally RUN THE FRICKIN' LAND!

Well then we arrest them for seal clubbing, 'cuz they're just so darned cute when they aren't bleeding from the skull.

Mine doesn't. It just upsets lots of poor people.

And lawyers. Because it's illegal.

I believe yours violates the 4th amendment.

That's OK. It was mostly optional anyway.

So, when exactly are second and third shift workers supposed to do their grocery shopping if you close the stores at night?

It's their fault for not getting a better shift, right?

Although from the quote in the article it sounds like he doesn't really care either way. :mad:

Is there a precedent for state officials refusing to follow federal orders? Apart from integration, I mean.