Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

California City Issues Internet Cafe Moratorium 409

Posted by timothy from the pursuit-of-happiness-and-free-assembly dept.
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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California City Issues Internet Cafe Moratorium More

California City Issues Internet Cafe Moratorium

Comments Filter:
  • Doesn't minors have civil rights?
    • IANAL, but I don't think people in the US have any real rights until they turn 18.

      • Re:Is that even legal? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        No, minors have the same constitutional rights in the US as a full adult. However it is recognized that they are not as responsible and so juvenile courts ususally give different punishments, withold names from the media, etc.

      • Re:Is that even legal? (Score:3, Informative)

        by gorilla ( 36491 )
        The supreme court and the ACLU disagree with you. For example, This page [aclu.org], the ACLU cannot teach every high school kid, everybody in the nation, what their rights are..

      • Re:Is that even legal? (Score:2, Flamebait)

        by 3am ( 314579 )
        IANAL, but I don't think people in the US have any real rights until they turn 18.

        Wow, that was the most immature and ignorant comment I've seen on slashdot in a long time.

        I have an idea, why don't you talk to someone in the 'untouchable' caste in India, a woman in Saudi Arabia, or a political dissident in China about how you don't have any 'real rights'? Grow up...

    • 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.

      • Re:Is that even legal? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by osgeek ( 239988 )
        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.
    • People's rights aren't in question here, since they aren't the owners of the establisments. Although this does affect the minors it is only indirectly.
    • IANAL, and I usually take the side of The Man(TM) in these cases, I see a disturbing possibility here.

      While these Internet Cafes are unregulated, I don't think there's anything besides a temporary moratorium that The Man(TM) can do to shut them down. However, if they decided to step in and make the the operation of these things a legal privlege (such as driving lisences, licquer lisences) that can be revoked, then we'll really start to see them stopm on what used to be our rights.

      • THE CAFES ARE NOT BEING SHUT DOWN (Score:5, Informative)

        by b0r1s ( 170449 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @10:38AM (#2888037) Homepage
        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.
        • I disagree that this has nothing to do with "the internet, geeks, or nerds". Schools and shopping malls cause similar congregation of kids and the "corresponding" violence, and I have yet to see a city council place a moratorium on new shopping malls for this reason.

          Furthermore, to suggest that these events do not raise the specter of shutdowns and bans is short sighted at best. This is how such bans begin.

          I think this situation is expemplary of the cultural divide of fear between people who understand technology and those who do not. As people like Kevin Mitnick or David McOwen well understand, the fear of the latter is outrageous, pervasive, and incredibly destructive. It is a social phenomenon that borders on racism in its capacity for evil. Indeed, the greatest challenge I face as a technology professional is managing this fear on the part of my clients and managers which sometimes expresses itself as outright hatred toward me!

          We have a responsibility to stand up when this fear manifests itself in public policy. It is, in my opinion, nothing less than a matter of civil rights.
    • Of course it's legal.

      This is a local government issue that is dealing with Zoning and licensing, so it's legal.

      People can whine and moan all they want about Speech and Assembly rights, but that's not the issue, the issue is about Zones and the right of a local government to regulate businesses within it's jurisdiction.

      "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."

      This isn't about minors rights, or the right to speak or assemble, 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 an arcade be treated differently?"
        We (in the we're-all-citizens sense) were told that the city was just regulating a rowdy, crime-inducing, immoral, fire-water saloon. We said, "OK, that sounds reasonable, but no more regulatin', ya hear."

        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

  • We've seen how Internet cafe's facilitated the 9-11 bombers, Richard Reid the shoe bomber, and Al-Queda communication. Soon enough, most smarter e-criminals will realize how easily they can be tracked by using the internet @ home, and they'll move to an internet cafe for criminal business.


    Clearly, we need greater accountability and responsibility on the internet. Enough planes have been hijacked, buildings blown up, children threatened and women raped to show that unlicensed, unmonitored, anonymous internet usage (made even easier with Internet Cafes) to show that's it's like carrying around an unregistered handgun, just too dangerous to allow anymore.


    Good riddance I say. If you can't afford a PC and phone line for browsing ( a perfectly adeqate Pentium will do, and you can buy one for under $100), go to a public library for surfing under the watchful eyes of concerned librarians.

    • Uh huh. Seeing as how the bombers also facilitated cars, why not ban and regulate them as well? They probably used cell phones also, so why not tap all cell phones too?

      Let's not forget that the everything the bombers used is used today with a benign intent. Just because some nutcases do crazy stuff with "household" items, doesn't mean the rest of us do.
    • Half the people think this is a joke and the other half take it seriously. It's sad that we live in a world where it isn't overtly obvious that this is a joke and instead is taken as a legitimate fear (at least it sounds like a joke to me).

      psxndc

  • Another great example of parenting by proxy. We can't control our kids so we'll let the government do it for us. To me, if these are violent kids to start out (which it sounds like) then we should be glad they are focusing their anger on video games and not out on the streets.

    Hopefully after 45 days they will open up the cafes again with some proper supervision and this won't be another Indianpolis.
    • One could instead state that "They can't control your kids, so now we have to get the government to do it for them." I can still remember what it was like to be an unsupervised adolescent, and I remember that I did a lot of things of which my mother would not approve, and of which I would not now approve, either.

      Many of the stupid things that people do are done to impress others, so I disagree that these kids must be bad "to start out," for stupidity is amplified in a group of aimless kids.* Unfortunately, you are correct that many parents aren't doing all that you and I think they should do.** Whether they're bad people or have some other reason for not providing the direction the kids need is unknown to me.

      Apparently, they're not all focusing their possible violence on the games.

      Many kids have no responsibilities, and their little group leaders are chosen from this group with little or no responsiblities, so it's not surprising when they don't act responsibly. This law appears to be trying to address a group of irresponsible kids causing trouble at Internet cafes. However, it might be a better thing to have more of these cafes to thin out the ranks of kids loitering at any particular cafe.

      * Well, at least a lot of stupid things I did were done because some one person in the group said it would be "cool." Not everyone is not as easily influenced as I, but I'm sure there are still some who are.

      ** I don't have any children, but that doesn't mean I can have an opinion. ;-)

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:09AM (#2887549)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Close the schools, too! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Corgha ( 60478 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @10:42AM (#2888062)
      From the NYTimes article:
      But here the carnage on the screens has moved into the real world

      [...]

      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.
      Detective Peter Vi, who specializes in investigating gangs, said most problems with youths in the area began in the schools. "It'll start with a personal problem, and then someone will break someone else's window and he'll call in a friend who's a gang member," Detective Vi said. "Then it'll become a beating, and it'll evolve to gang on gang."

      [...]
      "The gangs go look in these places because they know, hopefully, that their enemy is going to be there," Detective Vi said.

      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:
      "I've gone and looked at a few of these places, and I've seen very little wrong with them," Mr. Broadwater [the mayor] said. But just because their patrons are honing their computer skills "doesn't mean they shouldn't be in school," he said.


      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:
      it was the murder of Mr. Ly that brought the confluence of gangs and computer games -- once the province of harmless nerds -- to a dangerous level

      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.

  • Game influence is old news (Score:5, Funny)

    by smaughster ( 227985 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:10AM (#2887550)
    I already noticed this like 10 years ago after noticing the increase in cannabalism due to mrs. pacman.

  • Sigh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 4of12 ( 97621 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:10AM (#2887555) Homepage Journal

    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.

    • Re:Sigh (Score:4, Funny)

      by markmoss ( 301064 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:25AM (#2887646)
      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. And pool halls! [endresnet.com] 8-)

    • Re:Sigh (Score:3, Funny)

      by Restil ( 31903 )
      But you CAN'T blame the parents. I mean.. who are WE to say that parents should have responsibility over their kids? Its always someone else's fault. So in this instance, it must be the fault of the internet cafe's, or whoever else might possibly have an influence. Because it CAN'T be the parents.

      We all know very well that the internet is to blame for every problem since the first kid downloaded a bomb recipie. Everytime a 14 year old girl hooks up with a pedophile, its the INTERNET's fault. The fact that her parents never bothered to keep tabs on who she was talking to or that this kind of activity predates the internet is of no consequence.

      Violent kids? Blame the internet. We used to blame the TV, but everyone's on the internet now so that has to be the problem. Quake and Doom is the REASON that a couple of deranged lunatics shoot up a school. There is NO OTHER REASON. So QUIT TRYING TO BLAME THE PARENTS.

      Ok.. enough sarcasm. Parents have neglected their responsibility. And yes.. They need to be the ones that take care of this problem. But I don't know what we can do to make them. They can be held legally responible for the actions of their children, but this doesn't seem to be much of a deterrant factor.

      But blaming internet cafe's is not the solution. Just as blaming arcades/malls/movie theatres or anywhere else is a solution. And bad neighborhoods are the kind of places where internet cafes are going to be more prominant. More people around who don't have computers at home or can't afford decent internet access. Maybe they need more supervision. If the majority of the customer base are minors, then perhaps some extra supervision is required, but its hard to require that of a low margin company without willing volunteers. And yes, a single parent accompanying their children might assist in these matters.

      Yeah... like THAT's ever going to happen. :)

      -Restil

  • Great solution! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Stiletto ( 12066 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:11AM (#2887561)
    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.

    • Score 5, Insightful???? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      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.

      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 /. crowd modding you to Score 5, Insightful really gives me the creeps.

  • damn this.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by eastshores ( 459180 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:12AM (#2887564)
    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.

    • Re:damn this.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by liquidsin ( 398151 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:35AM (#2887695) Homepage
      I'm beginning to wonder why every politicians response to gang violence is to force children into the streets so that they have nothing to do other than join a gang. Maybe they could try to watch over the kids a little better, or (heaven forbid) let the parents watch them. But then again, if you don't care if your kid's hanging around with street gangs at an internet cafe until 8pm, will you even notice that they're with the same street gang, wandering around looking for trouble, until 1am?

    • Re:damn this.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by dthable ( 163749 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:40AM (#2887725) Journal

      This is just my crazy idea...



      We had the same problem in our local library, so the library decided that kids, especially teens, couldn't use the computers. So a bunch of us professional programmers and open source advocates got the library to open the computers up again as long as we supervised. What I found was that kids are just looking for two things - entertainment and knowledge. While we didn't let them play games, we taught them that this is a profession with a future and that not everyone uses their power for evil. A few of them got the local high school to start teaching computer science classes.



      I really think the tech community needs to make the effort and reach out when necessary. Not only do we keep kids out of trouble, but we might even inspire the next Linus.

      • But you have a resource few others have (or, more acurately, few others are willing to give up): time. Find me a CEO that'll do the same thing. It'd be like winning a lottery.

    • Re:damn this.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cgleba ( 521624 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @10:01AM (#2887821)
      "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"

      Frankly this is probably not a big epidemic or 'problem' at all -- the media just loves to focus on it and the politicans love to have 'issues' that they can fight.

      The relevance of this in light of the 'big picture' is small. There will always be violent kids just as there will always be violent adults. Just because one group of violent kids commits a crime does not mean that all kids are violent and thus must be regulated by the state (think about it, it is commonly *percieved* that 'adult' violent crime is committed at night time. If the government responded by putting a curfew on the nation we would be pissed).

      Ask some of your friends these questions and I'm sure you'll be surpirsed at just how warped the public's sense of relevance is:

      1) Do more people die from suicide in the US or murder?

      The answer is by FAR suicide, but no one cares, no news agency 'reports' it and no politician poses a 'war on suicide' :).

      2) Do more people die from airplane crashes or car accidents?

      Obviosly car accidents, but SO many people mess even this simple fact up.

      3) Is there more violent crime now (per capita) then in the 1950s?

      Most people would say yes, however there is strong evidence that there is in fact much less *violent* crime today, however there was less *reported* crime in the past -- a big difference.

      With these in mind, you can see how the public's perception of 'the issues' around violence and death is completely warped. This 'internet cafe' thingy is probably somthing completely blown out of proportion, a great political biline, an exciting news story but nothing more then the public using kids, the internet and violent games as a scapegoat for their ignorance and mis-understanding.

      As for the line "parent's just don't understand" that is the truth in this case. They don't understand how the world has changed since they were kids and most of all they don't understand technology (aka internet). Their reactionary tendancies in light of this change makes thim spit out this legislative garbage.

  • Right On! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Zargle ( 465109 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:13AM (#2887567)
    Yeah, let's get violence off the computer screens and put it back on the street where it belongs.

  • The Mayor Has No Clothes (Score:5, Funny)

    by diablochicken ( 445931 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:14AM (#2887580) Homepage Journal
    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] [ocweekly.com].
  • Following a violent incident in California grocery stores, the state has issued a 60-day moratorium on eating.
  • Obviously the gang members are violent because they play games about violence. It's highly unlikely that gang members might be violent because of social/economic reasons.

    Clearly if we take away the violent games, gang members will have more free time for doing the activities that gang members are known for. Namely attacking other gang members and acts of violence.

    Gang members don't need games to have a reason to attacking each other. They can use any excuse handy.
    • Obviously the gang members are violent because they play games about violence. It's highly unlikely that gang members might be violent because of social/economic reasons.

      I dont buy the economic theory either, its completely moral and social problem, otherwise the great depression would have been the most violent era in US history...
      • Sorry, I think I went overboard on the sarcasm.

        I was trying to say that it's as likely that it's from violent video games as it is a social or economic reason. In reality it's a combination of reasons.

  • A Quote from Imus (Score:3, Funny)

    by bjtuna ( 70129 ) <<brian> <at> <intercarve.net>> on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:18AM (#2887605) Homepage
    "After all, when adults shoot each other they don't blame Tony Bennett." - Don Imus
  • Singapore, which touts itself as the e-capital of asia came very close to banning internet cafes and in particular half - life due to the "violent nature" of the games.

    Officially the government cited "incidents" where gangs would resolve their problems with a game of counterstrike rather than a good old fashioned fist fights as the reason for banning (temporarily) internet cafes

    However the rumored reason is that an official high in the ministry of education had a son who was performing badly at school (school is very very important here) and blamed the poor grades on time spent playing half life. After going to confront the owner of the internet cafe his son frequented, a shouting match ensured in which the official declared that he would ban internet cafes and half - life. Sure enough it happened soon after. Thats how the cookie crumbles in a one party state
  • In India, it was the burgeoning growth of the ubiquitous cybercafe that brought about more or less, a revolution. True, it was the novelty of seeing and listening to an entirely different medium but as the rage caught on, people and the government began to realize the potential reach of these cybercafes so much so that for some time, it was even subsidized. Today, India isn't far off from having near-complete access to the Internet, something quite unimaginable a few years ago.

    Of course, perceptions vary soon as we take America as a case study. The cybercafe culture has come to symbolize a pseudo-liberation of a youth both from the family as well as from reality. Significantly, it is usually the adolescents in a confused period who throng to these places. Even though, hard-core First Amendment fanatics might come to criticize this move, it is necessary at least temporarily, to enforce peace and order.

  • Video Game Violence (Score:5, Insightful)

    by louzerr ( 97449 ) <Mr DOT Pete DOT Nelson AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:20AM (#2887626) Homepage
    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.

  • fairness... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tazzy531 ( 456079 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:21AM (#2887628) Homepage
    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.

    • Re:fairness... OR another damn liberal (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dada21 ( 163177 ) <adam.dada@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:47AM (#2887749) Homepage Journal
      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.

    • The main diffrence is that the internet cafe provides easy access to pr0n.

    • Internet cafe has now turned into a modern day, high tech arcade. They should not have to do anything different from a arcade owner.

      Reasonable -- except arcade owners are subjected to the same kind of nonsense. Don't forget the Indiapolis case of trying to ban access to violent video games in arcades.

      Every arcade in my hometown has only stayed open six months to a year before it was closed down due to 'gang violence' and 'community standards'. It's the standard knee jerk reaction to any popular teen hangout (other than The Mall, which is protected by tradition and capitalism). This is not something common to Internet Cafes.

      It's so hard to find a good game of skeeball in the Washington area... this is why I'm glad we have places like Dave & Busters, which is an adult-oriented arcade designed for the business class sorts.

      • 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.

  • In Related News... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Catiline ( 186878 ) <akrumbach@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:22AM (#2887636) Homepage Journal
    (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).
    • "Inventions cannot in nature be a subject of property." - Thomas Jefferson

      Oddly enough, he apparently thought that black people could in nature be a subject of property. Goes to show you how much we can rely on the opinions of our forefathers.
    • Two things may be related, but changing one doesn't neccessarily change the other (cause & effect).

      There is another, much stronger relationship here. That between 'little bastard kids' and shit 'couldn't give a rats ass' parents.

  • Great news for seniors! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Oink.NET ( 551861 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:25AM (#2887644) Homepage
    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!

  • I'd prefer my kids... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by wo1verin3 ( 473094 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:26AM (#2887653) Homepage
    were playing Counterstrike then being booted out of a cybercafe at 8pm and hanging out on the streets.

  • Heh (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Ooblek ( 544753 )
    I grew up in an LA suburb that was pretty much gang free until the early 90s. They opened a minature golf/arcade/car racing park there probably about 1995. The gangs drove for OVER AN HOUR just to come there and cause trouble. This included gangs from Garden Grove.

    Garden Grove is not an area I would want to hang out in after dark. The fact that the kids are playing games probably has nothing to do with the violence. If you simply have a bunch of hoodlums haning out, there will be a problem, no matter what it is that they are doing.

    On the other hand, if you want to go to Garden Grove during the day, you can get some tasty Chinese or Vietnamese food. It is actually a cool place to go shopping at as long as you are in a well lighted area.

    I wonder why a newspaper in Sacramento is running a story about it....I doubt they could accuratly report about any happenings in GG since Sacramento has to be about 700+ miles away.

  • Everybody Offtopic (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Try reading the article instead of making assumptions from the title and summary.

    Not once in the article does any governmental or authority figures claim a link between the gang violence and video game violence.

    Rather, the concern is over having an area where a large number of minors gather, while having virtually no method of enforcing security. Sure, the solution doesn't seem like a very good one, but this topic is relevant to Slashdot just because the internet is mentioned?
  • wasn't it ruled unconsitutional to have cerfews for kids?

    I mean city imposed ones... isn't that like the same thing?

    • While Indiana's curfew law was struck down on by a Federal Judge on July 3, 2000, the ruling did not say a Constituional curfew law could not be passed with narrower language.


      On Nov. 6, the same Judge preliminarily upheld [freedomforum.org] a modified Curfew statute.


  • Beijing and Jiddah will follow suit.... (Score:3, Offtopic)

    by John Murdoch ( 102085 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:33AM (#2887683) Homepage Journal

    Back in the days of the Cold War there was a joke that went like this:

    Q: Mr. President, the Russians have just deported the Moscow reporters for the Associated Press and the New York Times. How do you intend to respond?

    A: We're aware of the situation, and in accordance with standard protocols we will be deporting the Washington reporters for the AP and New York Times as well....

    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 [peopledaily.com.cn], a slightly different perspective from the Digital Freedom Network [dfn.org]).

    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.

    • Another side of the story that is very rarily reported is that in Taiwan at least, Internet Cafes have become a big industry targetting school children. One thing that they found in a number of these internet cafes which eventually lead to the shutdown of these cafes is that a number of them use the ventilation systems to pump high oxygen concentration and drugs into the air. Basically the increase oxygen leads the kids to have more energy and be more addictive, however, when they leave the cafe, into normal air, they become all sluggish, making them want to return to the cafe again. The vaporized drugs leads the customers to develop an "addiction" and make them want to return or spend more time there. Often kids stay at these internet cafes for days on end.

      There had also been rumors that during the early years of Las Vegas, the casinos pumped higher oxygen level air into the casinos so that the people don't get tired and leave.
    • 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.

      It's because people are mostly ignorant and stupid. Ignorance you can attack through education. Stupidity is a genetic condition. We'll either solve the stupidity problem by taking control of our genetic future, or continue to live with it for the rest of human existence.
  • It's disappointing that they're not going after the real problem, gangs, and are instead treating all youths as a problem. But then this isn't new either. I remember well seeing signs "No more than 2 students in the store at a time" or "All school bags must be left outside" and so on as a teenager. The significant difference is that the local government is making the regulations. A private store should probably be allowed to do this, but for the government to do it should be unconstitutional, its directly squashing the right to free assembly. Of course that doesn't matter, juveniles can't vote, most adults have carefully excised any memory at all of what it was like to be a teenager.

  • HOLD ON A MINUTE (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Marcus Brody ( 320463 )
    I, like many others, have already stuck the boot in with a sarcastic comment [slashdot.org] about this turn of events.

    However, could there not be a link between on-line "clans" and off-line "gangs"? Where rivalry and competition on-line spills over into violence and bloodshed in the real world? After all, this has happened elsewhere [time.com] in the world before, as reported by slashdot. [slashdot.org]
  • While slashdotters will bitch and moan about this because they are quick to jump to conclusions this moratorium comes after several internet (cafe) related crimes in Southern California in the past couple months. A UC Irvine student raped and killed a teenage girl he met online a couple months ago. Then the stabbing of the guy recently. This is a moratorium on any NEW establishments opening in Garden Grove for 45 days while other provisions say minors not accompanied by an adult have to leave after 8pm on days where the next day is a school day (Sunday - Thursday) and 10pm on Friday and Saturday. It sucks it had to happen because it means not enough parents are keeping tabs on their fucking kids. The cafes themselves also aren't charging people anything to be on the property so people are inclined to hang out for free which is just a welcome sign for people you'd just as soon not have around.

  • My Own Experiences (Score:5, Insightful)

    by neema ( 170845 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @09:42AM (#2887732) Homepage
    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.
  • Moral Panic regularly shows it's ugly head.
    It tends to hit all new, and all youth related trends in society.
    For example, every single new kind of music since the renaisance(sp?) has been accused of courrupting the youth. (Jazz, Rock, Rap...) Not to mention, comics, novels, violent movies etc.
    There is a very obvious pattern of finding scapegoats for complex issues. This is probably as old as man, and very hard to get rid of.
    Fact is that scapegoating is a easy way to analyze a problem. Of course it's not accurate, but people tend to like simple explanations. And if you think you have an explanation to a problem it makes the consequenses of the problem less frightening.

    For example, the statements:

    Children kill eachother because they play too much quake!

    Al Quaida bombed us because Bin Laden is evil incarnate!

    Makes people feel good, because they see a clear cause to the problem, an easy fix, and most importantly:
    It's not their responsability! It makes people feel good that it is not their fault.
    They don't want to hear things like:

    People join Al Quaida because their lives suck so much they think it makes sense. They blame you for their misery, partly based on that you have (for example) bombed at least one country in the middle east region every decade for some time now. If you or your family got beaten wouldn't you consider the person on the other end of the stick an enemy? With a different US foreign policy Bin Laden might not have (m)any followers.

    This statement is probably at least equally true to the statement of Bin Laden being Evil. But for the reasons above it will obviously gather less followers.
    I think this is just a basic flaw in humans and the only way to deal with it is to be aware of it, and show some healthy skepticism about overly simple solutions to complex problems.
    Because they don't work.

    ...and sometimes the consequenses can be really, really horrible.

  • same old crap (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Em Emalb ( 452530 )
    Oh boy, not another death where a bunch of people get together?

    While it is sad, the loss of human life, this had absolutely jack shit to do with the location. Anywhere a large group of young people (hell even middleaged people) gather, there is a good chance someone will get hurt or killed. It's human nature. Putting a moratorium on the i-net cafes won't do a damned thing.

    Sheesh
  • Things never really change. I remember the same arguments about video arcardes when I was a kid. The thing is anywhere teens hang around* will attract negative parental/adult attention since the teens will experiment with alot of things that make adults uncomfortable. Gangs, sex, drugs, violence (etc) have always been around and probably always will.

    * excluding certain pre-approved places where adults are welcome (eg. sports games) or that seems innocuous (eg. school or music classes)
  • 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.
    • 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.

  • Can someone adjust the focus? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @10:04AM (#2887836) Homepage

    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:

    • minors not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian may only stay at the cafes until 8 p.m. Sundays through Thursdays.
    • Simpsons "Squeeky Voiced Acne Kid" Shift Supervisor: Sirs, you all appear to be a minors, and it's after 8pm. I'm required to instruct you to leave the premises.
    • Horde of knife toting adreneline junkies: [seeing Terminator red overlays] Scanning possible responses...
      • The blond kid with the goatee down the end is our legal guardian. We're all orphans, he's thirty six, he's called Mrs Conchita Aguillerra, and he has the ID to prove it.
      • I'm chatting to my mom on ICQ and she says I can stay until 2am. Look, that's her on the webcam. Yeah, she has a thing for whips and rubber. She's real strict, OK?
      • Fuck you, asshole.

    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.

  • The articles are about gang violence spilling over into internet cafes because that's where people are hanging out.
  • (Some Anonymous Coward posted the idea in some comment. Now I can't help but try.)

    ---

    In a related story, the federal government imposed this morning a moratorium of 60 days on public education, claiming that schools are "improperly supervised environment".

    "This is only a natural reaction to the recurrent violence in public property." said a senator, "After Columbine and other shootings, stabbings and acts of violence, it is time we protect our children from these nests of gangs and criminals. In most schools the children spent the time between classes almost completely unsupervised!".

    It is a known fact that most gangs hang out in schools during school times, where they plan their acts of violence against each other and society. Unstable teenagers meet and get to know most of their friends in school, which can lead to the creation of close-knit groups, encouragement of anti-social interests, defiance of authority and even sexual experimentation.

    Even more worrying, according to the experts, is the education imparted on teenagers within this dangerous environment.

    "Some of the classes include chemistry and physics, and the children are exposed to the use of dangerous chemicals for nefarious purposes. Public schools are potentially training our young to build bombs and other weapons of destruction!" - said a concerned pundit. "Recently, there are even courses in computer science in some schools. Kids are learning to use this Internet and computers beyond the knowledge of their parents. Without supervision, it is clear that they are exposed to be recruited by international terrorists such as the Al-Qaida, or the guy who destroyed that Yahoo.com website last year".

    Parents, however, are more concerned with the ideological bias in their childrens education.

    "I never really thought much about it. But when I heard the news I picked up some of the history books my two teenage kids have to read for school, and I was appalled! They're full of stories about rebels and anarchists defying authority. I know this Washington fellow and Martin Luther King are supposed to be the good guys, but I don't know if telling my kids that almost everyone rebelled against their government is such a good idea".

    Federal officials are considering extending the moratorium indefinitely, until Congress can pass a law that solves the problem permanently, possibly by extending the moratorium indefinitely as well. It is not clear if the new legislation would dissolve private educational institutes or not.

    "The sooner we can get our children out of the schools and their evil influence, the better. Only then will we be able to go to work each morning with the certainty that neither knowledge, nor education, will interfere with the normal and innocent activities of our teenagers in the streets".

    -----
  • Chances are this is political grandstanding -- there's never been a local elected official who didn't envision themselves as someday being President of the United States, so they tend to want to show They Doing Something About The Problem at every turn.


    The 45-day period gives the city attorney and city manager time to review case precedent and figure out what they can do. And what they may do (to show they're Doing Something) could include:

    • Impact fees for the business owner (it takes more cops to look after gaming-crazed kids!). These might be tied to the business-licensing process.
    • Mandatory content filtering ("Didja know they can get pr0n on them there Ninternet screens?!?")
    • Zoning changes (no Net cafes near schools, etc.)
    This might be about genuine concern, but the PR guy in me says this is more about making a splash in the paper and taking a moment in the resulting flap to figure out a way to squeeze more municipal revenue from a small business.

  • The article says the City Council "placed a 45-day moratorium Tuesday on the opening of any more of the establishments". This is significantly different than what this Slashdot story implies -- that existing internet cafes would be shut down for 45 days.

    While it may not make sense to forbid the opening of new cyber cafes, obviously it would be hugely more harmful for a cafe to be shut down for 45 days.

  • It figures (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blocsync ( 320897 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @10:26AM (#2887950) Homepage
    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...
  • and onto the internet. And you thought script kiddies were a pain. Maybe I'm getting old, but when I was a minor, the LAST thing that your average "gang" would do is gather to go play on computers.

    How times have changed. And as they change, the less reputable members of our society have adapted.

    -Restil

  • Comic Books, Arcades, and now THIS! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Big Sean O ( 317186 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @01:32PM (#2889248)

    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.

  • Um... no. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gnovos ( 447128 ) <gnovos.chipped@net> on Wednesday January 23, 2002 @03:54PM (#2890263) Homepage Journal
    "...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?

Slashdot Top Deals

It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster. - Voltaire

Close