Jump to content

What's with the ads?


Photo

Daytime curfew ordinance for children under 18 not at school during school hours


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

What's with the ads?

#1 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 07:28 PM

http://www.followpro...rfew-ordinance/

Why aren't truancy laws enough? A homeschooled student is not truant simply because s/he is not at home. (Homeschooled students are on record with their local school district.) A public schooled student who has authorization to be out of school is not truant. A public schooled student who is skipping class without authorization is truant.

What points would you emphasize in communication with council members?

#2 54879525

54879525

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55102 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 07:30 PM

Talk about ridiculous...

#3 JoyfulMama

JoyfulMama

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2068 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 07:35 PM

Why aren't truancy laws enough? A homeschooled student is not truant simply because s/he is not at home. (Homeschooled students are on record with their local school district.) A public schooled student who has authorization to be out of school is not truant. A public schooled student who is skipping class without authorization is truant.

What points would you emphasize in communication with council members?


I would look further into the existing truancy laws, and try to give a case for why they ARE enough.

#4 TKDmom

TKDmom

    Kicks Like a Girl

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3335 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 07:37 PM

Because Provo is such a hotbed of juvenile delinquency... *Snort*

I don't even know what to tell you. :confused:

#5 happi duck

happi duck

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4007 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 07:55 PM

Our town and surrounding towns already have a daytime curfew. The same was true in another state in another region. I thought it was common.

In our area if you are with a parent you are not truant. My kids just don't go out alone during school hours. If this was not the case it would make me crazy!

The photo of the boy in handcuffs cracked me up! :lol: (Just a 'little' over the top)

#6 Photo Ninja

Photo Ninja

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1340 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 08:09 PM

If there are truancy laws in existence already then there is no need to add another. Enforce the current laws first.

Schools take attendance. Schools know the name of all students who are not in class, as well as their home addresses, phone numbers, and parent(s) addresses, work phone numbers and home phone numbers. If the city is really concerned about truancy, the schools can seek out the students who are truant.

There is no need to assume that every person under the age of 18 who is out in public during the day is truant. It would better serve the community if school officials and truant officers focused on the students who they know are truant.

#7 Tiffnkids

Tiffnkids

    Hive Mind Level 2 Worker: Nurse Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 226 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 08:27 PM

This is ridiculous.

A lot of young adults look like they may not be 18, but let's harass them!

It is legal to drop out of high school at age 16, but let's harass them!

There are early college admission programs, but let's harass those bright kids!

Perhaps, our town has tourists, but let's harass the kids on vacation!

Or maybe, leave law-abiding kids alone!

The world has much bigger problems . . .

#8 kalphs

kalphs

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1128 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 08:45 PM

If there are truancy laws in existence already then there is no need to add another. Enforce the current laws first.

Schools take attendance. Schools know the name of all students who are not in class, as well as their home addresses, phone numbers, and parent(s) addresses, work phone numbers and home phone numbers. If the city is really concerned about truancy, the schools can seek out the students who are truant.

There is no need to assume that every person under the age of 18 who is out in public during the day is truant. It would better serve the community if school officials and truant officers focused on the students who they know are truant.

:iagree:

#9 coffeefreak

coffeefreak

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3850 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 09:03 PM

This proposal has passed the committee of the NM legislature and it's absolutely ridiculous! The legislator that proposed it is a former sheriff of a rural community. He says this is his solution to daytime crime. If the increase in age of mandatory school attendance (went from 16 to 18 a couple of years ago), and the stricter truancy laws(parents fined up to $400) didn't solve your problem, why will this? I don't live in a house, I live in an apartment. Are my kids going to be allowed to go across the street without me to play during the day without being harrassed? We have at least 4 different school districts in my area, how do the police officers know which district my children are in? Not to mention the parent teacher conferences and half day schedules?!? What a nightmare for our public defenders that have BETTER things to do than find out why a child is not in school. Here's the letter I wrote to our legislators:

We are writing to ask that you vote against House Bill 254. This bill will allow counties and municipalities to enact restrictive curfew ordinances that would violate the constitutional freedom of law abiding parents and children. Daytime curfews will interfere with our fundamental right to parent and care for our children. There is little evidence that daytime curfews significantly reduce juvenile crime during curfew hours. In Sandoval and Bernalillo county, there are countless schools and organizations that all work on different calendars and time schedules. If nothing else, this will create a logistical nightmare for our law enforcement as they will be expected to know which school a child is enrolled in and what hours that school is supposed to be in session. If a teenager needs to go to a Doctor or Dentist appointment, and is of legal driving age, will we be required to take off work and escort them there? What about the students who are attending classes on college campuses? Or the students who are part of work programs through the various alternative high schools in New Mexico? If my child's school is not in session on a particular day, or is released early, will they be required to play inside for fear of the daytime curfew? What about family emergencies? These are decisions that parents should be making, not our legislators. This law has been tried in various states including California, and has only punished the law abiding parents and children which make up the majority of the population. We cannot continue to limit law abiding citizens and take away their rights because of the few that refuse to take responsibility for their children. We are strongly opposed to House Bill 254 in spite of any amendments that might be proposed.


HTH!
Dorinda

#10 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 09:10 PM

I look quite young for my age and wonder a little if I might be questioned. :glare: I attended college in this town at age 17 (parents in another state). It's ridiculous to think that I should have been suspected of truancy or delinquent behavior. This ordinance is ridiculous. I can't see how it would possibly help prevent crime. Maybe they are banking on this and are hoping to collect fines? :confused:

This proposal has passed the committee of the NM legislature and it's absolutely ridiculous! The legislator that proposed it is a former sheriff of a rural community. He says this is his solution to daytime crime. If the increase in age of mandatory school attendance (went from 16 to 18 a couple of years ago), and the stricter truancy laws(parents fined up to $400) didn't solve your problem, why will this? I don't live in a house, I live in an apartment. Are my kids going to be allowed to go across the street without me to play during the day without being harrassed? We have at least 4 different school districts in my area, how do the police officers know which district my children are in? Not to mention the parent teacher conferences and half day schedules?!? What a nightmare for our public defenders that have BETTER things to do than find out why a child is not in school. Here's the letter I wrote to our legislators:

We are writing to ask that you vote against House Bill 254. This bill will allow counties and municipalities to enact restrictive curfew ordinances that would violate the constitutional freedom of law abiding parents and children. Daytime curfews will interfere with our fundamental right to parent and care for our children. There is little evidence that daytime curfews significantly reduce juvenile crime during curfew hours. In Sandoval and Bernalillo county, there are countless schools and organizations that all work on different calendars and time schedules. If nothing else, this will create a logistical nightmare for our law enforcement as they will be expected to know which school a child is enrolled in and what hours that school is supposed to be in session. If a teenager needs to go to a Doctor or Dentist appointment, and is of legal driving age, will we be required to take off work and escort them there? What about the students who are attending classes on college campuses? Or the students who are part of work programs through the various alternative high schools in New Mexico? If my child's school is not in session on a particular day, or is released early, will they be required to play inside for fear of the daytime curfew? What about family emergencies? These are decisions that parents should be making, not our legislators. This law has been tried in various states including California, and has only punished the law abiding parents and children which make up the majority of the population. We cannot continue to limit law abiding citizens and take away their rights because of the few that refuse to take responsibility for their children. We are strongly opposed to House Bill 254 in spite of any amendments that might be proposed.


HTH!
Dorinda


Good points. Thanks!

#11 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 09:13 PM

Because Provo is such a hotbed of juvenile delinquency... *Snort*

I don't even know what to tell you. :confused:


Maybe all the juveniles got Jimmered? :tongue_smilie:

Yeah, I have no idea. I've never seen any suspicious kids loitering about during school hours.

#12 Trish

Trish

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3277 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 09:35 PM

Private schools give days off that don't always coincide with public school holidays. They also at times take a half day.

Cannot homeschools do the same? How about if the student travels with a note from his teacher? I am principal of my school.

#13 RayDad

RayDad

    Hive Mind Worker Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 70 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 10:52 PM

Rules and regulations, they just keep coming.

#14 LittleIzumi

LittleIzumi

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6276 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 10:56 PM

:001_huh::001_huh:Maybe they don't like all the teenagers at the skatepark during the day. I wonder if we come down the hill from Orem (your library is better) if they'll be waiting at the border to nab my kids :lol:. Time to email the council....

#15 MamaSheep

MamaSheep

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3905 posts

Posted 22 February 2011 - 11:49 PM

Good grief! Don't let that one leak out to the south. Are you planning on going to the council meeting?

Some thoughts that come to my mind:

Provo is a college town. How much time (and therefore money and other resources) will be wasted by police officers carding young-looking college students, and "processing" them if they don't happen to have an ID with their age on it? And as you say, what about college students who started before they turned 18?

If the ordinance just says "outside", does that apply to homeschooled kids who are in their own front yard, or the park across the street with their parents' knowledge and permission? What about a 16 year-old homeschooled student with a driver's license who has been sent by his mom to pick up a gallon of milk down at the convenience store? Or who is taking his 14 year old brother to the museum while his mom does math with the 8 year old?

What about a teen who is enrolled in the state's online high school program, the Utah Virtual Academy, the Open High School of Utah, or one of the other online public schooling options, but is doing his work in the evenings and just wants a little fresh air while his mom is at work? I mean, if he's causing problems, sure, but can't a he just go for a walk around the block? I mean...really.

What about a teen with a work permit on his way to his job?

This is a highly LDS community we're talking about here. What about kids walking from school to the seminary building for release-time seminary classes? They would be outside during the day.

It seems to me that if kids are causing problems or being chronically truant, then yes, that needs to be addressed, but there are already laws on the books for that. Why penalize the kids who are not being problems, but are just utilizing an alternate schooling option, or who are out of school for perfectly legitimate reasons?

I haven't read the thing, but I would certainly hope that a child outside during school hours WITH A PARENT would be excepted.

Even if they make an exception for homeschoolers and have the school district issue some kind of "pass" for homeschooled kids, or have a "pass" for kids with work permits or whatever other exceptions, that will necessitate a whole new level of bureaucracy, complete with burdening the public with the expense of paying people to administer it, paying for facilities to house it, paying people to come up with rules to govern it, all written in legalese and approved by the appropriate designated governmental officials (whose time could be better spent on more important things), paying for design and production costs of said "passes" in a manner that would make them difficult for their target 'delinquent' population to counterfeit. Not to mention the cost of mailing the things.

There are just way too many things wrong with a blanket curfew as it's described in your link. It would be a major headache (and expense) to enforce, in addition to being a pain for parents and unnecessarily penalizing to good kids. And the one's they're trying to target would most likely find a way around it anyhow and go on doing whatever thing it is the powers that be are irritated over in the first place.

#16 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 12:57 AM

More info:

http://www.sltrib.co...curfew.html.csp

http://www.sltrib.co...curfew.html.csp

More good points, Amy. Would my 16yo be allowed to drive herself to seminary or a class at UVU?

#17 LittleIzumi

LittleIzumi

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6276 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:05 AM

I heard they're having another council meeting on it March 1st.

#18 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:06 AM

I heard they're having another council meeting on it March 1st.


Yep. 7pm. 351 W. Center St.

#19 LaissezFaire

LaissezFaire

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 770 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:07 AM

My town has had a daytime curfew for decades. No one enforces it really though.

#20 meggie

meggie

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2295 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 02:19 AM

:001_huh::001_huh:Maybe they don't like all the teenagers at the skatepark during the day. I wonder if we come down the hill from Orem (your library is better) if they'll be waiting at the border to nab my kids :lol:. Time to email the council....


Sha-what? I always go up the hill to orem cuz I think your library is better.

But really though, this makes me super p*ssed, (uh-oh are Mormons allowed to say that?). I want to go to the meeting, but I doubt I'll be able to, what with a 3 week old baby and all. If anyone goes, will you keep me updated?

#21 Heigh Ho

Heigh Ho

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6836 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:08 AM

Perhaps this law is needed so the police officers have the authority to take teens to the truancy center, rather than depending on one truant officer to do everything.

The need for it says that the community and schools have big issues to address.

Or maybe someone's relatives need jobs.

#22 sheryl

sheryl

    Daughter of the One, True King!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4879 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:26 AM

http://www.followpro...rfew-ordinance/

Why aren't truancy laws enough? A homeschooled student is not truant simply because s/he is not at home. (Homeschooled students are on record with their local school district.) A public schooled student who has authorization to be out of school is not truant. A public schooled student who is skipping class without authorization is truant.

What points would you emphasize in communication with council members?


Laura, Dare I say this sounds like "D" to me? Yes, it sounds like discrimination AGAINST h'schooled kids. Add that and watch the snowballs fly.

I think your reasons above are sound. Turn those thoughts into "bullet points" to clearly show the descrepancy.

Also, who's to say those kids weren't on a "free or vacation day"? My dd is s.n. and I always "allow" our schedule to take 1 day off a month in addition to Christmas, etc. It just so happens sometimes our days off coincide with the ps and other times not. HTH! Keep us posted.

#23 54879525

54879525

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55102 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:32 AM

I look quite young for my age and wonder a little if I might be questioned. :glare: I attended college in this town at age 17 (parents in another state).


I had this same problem when I was younger. When I was 18 my mother took me to Friendly's for lunch. The waitress handed me the 12 and under menu! :lol:

#24 In The Great White North

In The Great White North

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6151 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:50 AM

I wonder if anyone has taken daytime truancy laws to court. Several arguments could be made for them being illegal.

Perhaps the 5th Amendment: no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." It is essentially house arrest without any process of law at all.

Or against Federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on age? On appearances?

How about federal regulation of Interstate Commerce, since it would apply to out-of-state tourists as well.

#25 Murmer

Murmer

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1130 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 09:38 AM

That's AWFUL! The school district I live in has vacation in Feb out here in the east and we like to visit grandparents in Utah...so if this goes into effect everytime my kids are on vacation and we go see grandma my kids can't be alone without me or grandma...that's CRAZY.

#26 Laura in CA

Laura in CA

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1225 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:34 PM

I had this same problem when I was younger. When I was 18 my mother took me to Friendly's for lunch. The waitress handed me the 12 and under menu! :lol:


When I was 22 -- a college graduate, and after college had lived in Europe for a year -- a nurse insisted I was 14!
I was :glare: at the time, but now wouldn't mind if someone thought I was 8 years younger than I am :D

~Laura

#27 dakarimom5

dakarimom5

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 576 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:41 PM

I think HOMEschooling is a misnomer (I bet I spelled that wrong). We are on field trips, going to the library or co-ops. I homeschool so I don't have to chain my child to the house for 7 hours a day. Just today we walked the dog and did language arts outside on scooters. We learn whether we are at home, in the car or somewhere else...consumer math at Walmart anyone?

#28 54879525

54879525

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55102 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:47 PM

When I was 22 -- a college graduate, and after college had lived in Europe for a year -- a nurse insisted I was 14!
I was :glare: at the time, but now wouldn't mind if someone thought I was 8 years younger than I am :D

~Laura


I hear ya!

#29 Harriet Vane

Harriet Vane

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10736 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:52 PM

I wonder if anyone has taken daytime truancy laws to court. Several arguments could be made for them being illegal.

Perhaps the 5th Amendment: no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." It is essentially house arrest without any process of law at all.

Or against Federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on age? On appearances?

How about federal regulation of Interstate Commerce, since it would apply to out-of-state tourists as well.


What I highlighted here really is the key. In this country we do NOT restrict the movements of law-abiding citizens.

#30 MeaganS

MeaganS

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2087 posts

Posted 23 February 2011 - 02:02 PM

I lived in Provo for 5 years. I don't remember there ever being an issue of kids running wild over town. Also, I personally know/knew several University students who are younger than 18. There's no way they could/should not be allowed out and about.

ETA: Also, tons of schools in Utah school year round, so there's almost never any way to know if a kid is supposed to be in school or not just by the time of year. Should all of the kids that happen to be off track not be allowed out either?

#31 MamaSheep

MamaSheep

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3905 posts

Posted 01 March 2011 - 11:50 PM

Just thought a follow-up might be of interest:

http://www.abc4.com/...gv3poGZQDw.cspx

http://www.sltrib.co...ouncil.html.csp

#32 Veritaserum

Veritaserum

    The Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5087 posts

Posted 01 March 2011 - 11:54 PM

Just thought a follow-up might be of interest:

http://www.abc4.com/...gv3poGZQDw.cspx

http://www.sltrib.co...ouncil.html.csp

http://www.welltrain...ad.php?t=250295 :)

#33 MamaSheep

MamaSheep

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3905 posts

Posted 02 March 2011 - 12:18 AM

http://www.welltrain...ad.php?t=250295 :)


Heh...thanks. I guess I didn't look hard enough before posting. :)

Hey everybody, look over there! :D


What's with the ads?