Curfew After 11pm for 17 and under?
-
actually got youngsters loitering around meh? thot they all at home pah-ing game?
-
If it is really what i understood from the paper, then i think it is an utter waste of time and paper. Send letter to parents for? Tell them where their child is and what he or she is doing? Like a few days after they were out?
wow, SPF to much manpower? -
its right on the front page of the straits times.Originally posted by vIn.Warrior:newspaper? new law is it? -
Is it weird that I actually feel excited about this?
-
LOL, got such thing?Originally posted by Uncle_MooMoo:Wah like that sian 1/2 leh, lucky in 4months time I 18 liao.
I have seen police patrolling at very weird hours, but they don't question people unless you come out at weird hours as well. -
whats the rationale for introducing this law
will it realli improve things
-
Yes, good. Give those police some work to do. We pay tax one leh! Must make sure they are busy all the time.
-
make things worse for the police and the kids... must be some initiative by the smart pple on top
-
I never buy today's newspapers.Originally posted by Marco_Simone:I read that those under 17 found hanging outside after 11pm will be questioned by policemen on patrol.Then the police will call the family of the kid.Something like this.No joke.In other words,ya it is as good as curfew.\
Which is good,kids nowadays behave like hooligan and act tough/create trouble outside.Need some discipline to keep them in order.
I support this move! *salutes*
That means I have to bring my IC out nowadays. If not they mistake me for a kid. I have been questioned many times over this. 
-
Dont you think better time is spent on catching, for example, a loose gunman, or to be on call when a murder occurs, than to be busy going around checking on teenagers?Originally posted by Honeybunz:Yes, good. Give those police some work to do. We pay tax one leh! Must make sure they are busy all the time. -
But it helps to reduce crime rate. No doubt it is straining their resources, but reducing crime rates and make sure the teenagers don't go down the stray path is also good. Have to balance both. Cannot strain our resources to an extent that major crimes go unsolved while minor crimes are getting attention and vice versa.Originally posted by laurence82:Dont you think better time is spent on catching, for example, a loose gunman, or to be on call when a murder occurs, than to be busy going around checking on teenagers? -
But above all, they are law enforcement agents, not nanny.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:But it helps to reduce crime rate. No doubt it is straining their resources, but reducing crime rates and make sure the teenagers don't go down the stray path is also good. Have to balance both. Cannot strain our resources to an extent that major crimes go unsolved while minor crimes are getting attention and vice versa.
I think large part, if not all, should be handled by for example, Neighbourhood Police Watch, parents or any volunteer organisations. -
If we can count on parents to do so, we don't need police already.Originally posted by laurence82:But above all, they are law enforcement agents, not nanny.
I think large part, if not all, should be handled by for example, Neighbourhood Police Watch, parents or any volunteer organisations.
But the others are worth a consideration. -
could be a reason behind it. too many youngster getting into trouble? like fights...
-
cool~
so next time i outside see youngster loitering and i bei song, can i call up the police ask them come down chase those irritating kids away? -
maybe increase of gang fights?
17 years old also must stay at home? -
hope i dun get checked tmr though im above 17 .... gonna be loitering in e wee hrs. and screening by police is a waste of time.
-
That the irony isnt it?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:If we can count on parents to do so, we don't need police already.
But the others are worth a consideration.
We pay taxes for the police to keep watch on OUR kids, instead of just protecting our kids -
Eh, come catch me on the roads with my bike.
-
I overlook this point....Originally posted by laurence82:That the irony isnt it?
We pay taxes for the police to keep watch on OUR kids, instead of just protecting our kids -
what did the paper say? is it going to be long term or just temporary? what about those who's parents know they're out, every weekend I see so many kids at cineleisure after 11
-
ya lor weekend cineleisure outside packed wiv kidsOriginally posted by Jock:what did the paper say? is it going to be long term or just temporary? what about those who's parents know they're out, every weekend I see so many kids at cineleisure after 11 -
Haa..anyway it's good..now got alot of small boy and girl, want to act ah lian and ah beng..so small then want to act big liao..
don't know how to spell die..if really fight with those people like us, 20 plus years old, one punch they down there crying liao...go home sux nei nei la
if i the mata, don't need to send letter, i whack them 1st -
u obviously havent been whacked by a gruop of 20 'underage' kids eh..heh heh... imagine them knocking u unconcious and smashing ur lifeless body against cement stools n tables.. moral of story is dun under estimate these so called kids. thats why i always carry parang.Originally posted by kendoboi:Haa..anyway it's good..now got alot of small boy and girl, want to act ah lian and ah beng..so small then want to act big liao..
don't know how to spell die..if really fight with those people like us, 20 plus years old, one punch they down there crying liao...go home sux nei nei la
if i the mata, don't need to send letter, i whack them 1st
-
I am 18 dis yr
Think cos below 17 commit crime wont go jail,at most RTC nia
But,if u over 18 ,u commit crime nia..can eat black rice at changi prison liao.
So more freedom nt always dat gd