Mall Rats no more?

[teflon]

If someone is denied access due to racism I will stand alongside them to protest. But that's a different issue.

Age discrimination and racial discrimination are all discrimination.

There are comic book stores that don't require malls. Plus a 10 year old should not be at the mall alone in the first place, so he would have a parent present.

That's not the point. The point is that the young boy would not have caused any trouble, and would only provide business to the store. It is not fair that he cannot do something as simple as buying a comic book because of actions of others. Also, by the logic of some posters, comic book stores are private properties as well, and teenagers could cause a chaos in there, so they can ban youth regardless the location of the store. Then the young boy would not be able to buy comics by himself at all.
Also, I went to the mall with my friends on weekends when I was 10 or 11. Nothing bad ever happened to me or my friends because of it. And many people I know back then were allowed to go to the mall without their parents.

Because trouble makers, by their very nature, cause trouble. Why should a mall spend a small fortune dealing with problem children? much easier and more cost effective I imagine to manage a blanket ban.

I don't know how much easier or cost effective this would be. This policy only keeps out the good kids. The trouble makers are likely to cause trouble and retaliate, such as dashing in, causing scene outside and scaring away the shoppers, vandalizing etc. The mall would also be losing quite a bit of business as teenagers DO buy things. I don't think the business they gain would be more than the ones they lost.

Malls will eventually become extinct with or without teenagers. More and more people - young AND old - favor online shopping, standalone box stores, and superstores (Walmart, Target, etc...). When I was young we hung out at malls and caused problems - nowadays, kids "hang out" on PS3 and XBOX.

Online shopping is not the same as you can't try out things before you buy. Especially clothes, some things looks good in the picture, but in real life they look like crap. Or they look good on the rack, but they look horrible on you. Additionally, lots of times each store have different sizes, and even in the same store the sizes can be different. So in one store you are a M, in another you're S, or in the same store you are a M for t-shirts and S for tanks. It would just be a lot easier to shop in real shops. Even electronics, many people like to play around with it and see how it works before buying it. Superstores are not always ideal for buying clothes, especially if you like brand names. Plus, many superstores are in malls.
The kids nowadays obviously don't only hang out on PS3 and XBOX or we wouldn't have the mall rats problem .

Here in the Sacramento, CA area, the new trend is essentially a bunch of large box stores connected together to form what amounts to an outdoor shopping center. The two malls on Truxel Road just north of I-80 in Sacramento, CA are the best examples of this.

What happens to those malls if it rains/snows, especially the ones located in colder cities?

yoyo5280, nice avatar! It scared me for a second there. I thought my computer froze!!

 

[SactoGuy18]

What happens to those malls if it rains/snows, especially the ones located in colder cities?

Strip malls like Sacramento Gateway and Natomas Marketplace (the two places I mentioned earlier) tend to be way more popular in states with better weather. I think conventional shopping malls would be more popular in states with bad weather in winter, especially snow.

Mind you, I would have enjoyed an air-conditioned climate of an enclosed shopping mall given it was over 100 degrees in Sacramento, CA yesterday.

 

[TomsMacBook]

I have one thing to say: You guys have terrible security guards.

Hell, we have the biggest mall in the Middle East ten mins from me. It's always the same story here. A new mall opens, and it's the **** for a few months. Then, it gets swamped by tourists, little kids, and overzealous shopkeepers. I'm 16, and me and my mates resort to just chilling around Dubai, going to the various cafe's, going to the beach, the usual. Its normally the little, little kids that are the pains. I'm talking 10-11 year olds. The main problems are, though, from the tourists. Americans mainly. Learn how to use a damn map!

I say just get better security around malls, and not just blame the whole agegroup for the problems.

 

[ErikCLDR]

Hah.

There is a mall near me where they don't allow people in under the age of 18 unless they are accompanied by a parent.

They've been doing that for years.

 

[Gray-Wolf]

You have to remember, that some adults equate a large group of kids as a gang, and they fear that and always will, no matter what they are told. Hence the need to "Protect" themselves.

 

[iJohnHenry]

About time we fought back.

 

[MacNut]

Age discrimination and racial discrimination are all discrimination.

So because a 17 year old can't vote he is discriminated?

That's not the point. The point is that the young boy would not have caused any trouble,

Have you seen how young kids act, they would cause plenty of trouble alone in a store.

and would only provide business to the store. It is not fair that he cannot do something as simple as buying a comic book because of actions of others. Also, by the logic of some posters, comic book stores are private properties as well, and teenagers could cause a chaos in there, so they can ban youth regardless the location of the store. Then the young boy would not be able to buy comics by himself at all.
Also, I went to the mall with my friends on weekends when I was 10 or 11. Nothing bad ever happened to me or my friends because of it. And many people I know back then were allowed to go to the mall without their parents.

"Back then" and now are way different. Kids today respect nothing. And who is saying the 10 year old can't shop, he would have a parent with him. Why would a 10 year old be alone in the mall in the first place?

I don't know how much easier or cost effective this would be. This policy only keeps out the good kids. The trouble makers are likely to cause trouble and retaliate, such as dashing in, causing scene outside and scaring away the shoppers, vandalizing etc. The mall would also be losing quite a bit of business as teenagers DO buy things. I don't think the business they gain would be more than the ones they lost.

How do you know who the good kids are until after they are in the mall. Why wait for the fight to happen when you can stop it all together.

What happens to those malls if it rains/snows, especially the ones located in colder cities?

Plenty of those outdoor malls around here and they are still in business.

 

[dukebound85]

So because a 17 year old can't vote he is discriminated?

there is a law concerning voting, not one for shopping at a mall

 

[dukebound85]

So because a 17 year old can't vote he is discriminated?
]Have you seen young kids act, they would cause plenty of trouble alone in a store."Back then" and now are way different. Kids today respect nothing. And who is saying the 10 year old can't shop, he would have a parent with him. Why would a 10 year old be alone in the mall in the first place?
How do you know who the good kids are until after they are in the mall. Why wait for the fight to happen when you can stop it all together.

Plenty of those outdoor malls around here and they are still in business.

parents of EACH generation say kids are disrespectful hardly anything new

stop saying a 10y/o wouldnt be at a mall without a parent. fact is he COULD buy something and not cause trouble

oh yea, as far as premetive banning to stop problems, how bout we just round up all the people that are poor and ban them from shooping as they are more prone to steal lol. i mean why wait for the theft??

not good logic at all

 

[RaceTripper]

I don't think law against discrimination of age applies to minors.

 

[egor]

Have you seen young kids act, they would cause plenty of trouble alone in a store.

Your argument falls apart because you're stereotyping. "Have you seen young kids act" is an ignorant statement, especially your assertion that they would (not could) cause plenty of trouble alone in a store.

Everyone is different. Up until very recently I worked in retail, a store which attracts alot of young kids (and adults of all ages too). The behaviour of the kids varied, many would come in on their own and be fine whilst some who misbehaved were accompanied by their parents, the point is it varied. The most offensive and disruptive customers who drove other customers away were adults, no question about it.

 

[MacNut]

parents of EACH generation say kids are disrespectful hardly anything new

stop saying a 10y/o wouldnt be at a mall without a parent. fact is he COULD buy something and not cause trouble

You honestly think, it is a good idea to leave a 10 year old alone in a mall. What if the kid gets abducted, whos at fault, the parents or the mall. How is he going to get there, someone will drop him off and pick him up later? What will he do at the mall for a few hours? What is he going to buy alone? Are parents that bad now that they can't even take a 10 year old to the mall.

 

[dukebound85]

You honestly think, it is a good idea to leave a 10 year old alone in a all. What if the kid gets abducted, whos at fault, the parents or the mall. How is he going to get there, someone will drop him off and pick him up later? What will he do at the all for a few hours? What is he going to buy alone?

why are you focusing on 10??? that is not my point, lets say its 14 sheesh try to look past the number

its not about should he be alone, but could he?

 

[MacNut]

why are you focusing on 10??? that is not my point, lets say its 14 sheesh try to look past the number

its not about should he be alone, but could he?

That is stupid, a 14 year old COULD get drunk he COULD have sex he COULD stay home alone and burn the house down. Should he NO. Case closed, he is too young to do any of those things.

 

[dukebound85]

That is stupid, a 14 year old COULD get drunk he COULD have sex he COULD stay home alone and burn the house down, yes, should he NO. Case closed, he is too young to do any of those things.

14 year old drinking is against the law, so is having sex at 14

shopping at a mall is not illegal. you are comparing apples to oranges

stop providing arguments aganst young people doing actions ILLEGAL at the age. of course its wrong. last time i checked going to a mall at 10, 14 whatever is not illegal and that is why this discrimnation is uncalled for


heck, i COULD get drunk and i COULD burn a house down, i COULD do alot of things that doesnnt mean i should do them. but what "should" be done by teens is not the issue, its what is defined by LAW and law alone

not some "policy" that codones discrimination

 

[MacNut]

The point that you seem to be missing is that a 14 year old should not be at the mall alone, or with his other friends that don't know any better at that age. Parental supervision, Why should the mall be a babysitter for the parents that don't know how.

 

[dukebound85]

The point that you seem to be missing is that a 14 year old should not be at the mall alone, or with his other friends that don't know any better at that age. Parental supervision, Why should the mall be a babysitter for the parents that don't know how.

the point you are missing is that many 14 year olds/whatever age are responsible kids. people react to just a few bad ones

heck, i went to the mall at 14 by myself and never caused trouble, as did so many of my frineds

how bout this, there are riots at college campuses near buisnesses that caused SO much more damage than a food fight. should the city ban all college students from that area to shop? i know i had no part in riots and consider myself a responsible citizen, so why should i be punished for the actions of a few? but no, the city punished those that were only involved.....like it should be

what age you draw the line? seriously

 

[teflon]

So because a 17 year old can't vote he is discriminated?

Like with drinking, voting has a legal age set by the government. Shopping does not.

Have you seen how young kids act, they would cause plenty of trouble alone in a store."Back then" and now are way different. Kids today respect nothing. And who is saying the 10 year old can't shop, he would have a parent with him. Why would a 10 year old be alone in the mall in the first place?

That is extreme stereotyping. There are many kids who do respect other people and/or properties, and are well behaved. I just spent 20 hours volunteering at the Relay for Life two days ago, and the kids that I worked with during children's activities were all very pleasant. Some were in there alone, yet they caused no trouble at all. By your logic, they would have threw paint at each other, jabbed the volunteers with scissors, randomly wasting the construction paper etc. The worst thing anyone did was dipping their blue paintbrush into the gold palette.
Interestingly, the rudest person that I encountered during that whole shift was actually an adult.
When I was chatting with one of the volunteers, they mentioned that some university students threw water balloons at other students during one of their protests. Now those are all over 18 year old students who are suppose to be adults, and in your mind, responsible.
Why can't a 10 year old go to the mall to pick up a present for his friend, or buying that action figure he/she wants? And they don't have to be alone, they can go with their friends.

How do you know who the good kids are until after they are in the mall. Why wait for the fight to happen when you can stop it all together.

What my post meant that it may not stop the fight. The good kids who caused no trouble before anyway simply would not go to the mall, but the trouble makers who were the ones that caused the chaos would still try to get into the mall or make life difficult for others who want to go in by hanging around outside. Just banning a whole group of people like that only creates more hate, misunderstanding and miscommunication.

That is stupid, a 14 year old COULD get drunk he COULD have sex he COULD stay home alone and burn the house down. Should he NO. Case closed, he is too young to do any of those things.

Actually, IIRC, you can stay home alone by the time you're 12. I remember the first time I stayed home alone I was probably 7. I never burned anything or did any damage.
At least none that I can recall. I'm sure if I burned down our apartment I would remember.
Heck, I stayed home alone and babysat my brother by the time I was 10 or 11, and both of us came out of that unscathed.

 

[MacNut]

You draw the line at being a responsible adult, face it if you are not 18 you are not considered either of those things.

The kids are not being banned, where does it say they are banned, they need a parent to be with them, that is not banned.

 

[dukebound85]

You draw the line at being a responsible adult, face it if you are not 18 you are not considered either of those things.

thats a stupid line as i know just as many responsible minors as irresponsible adults

i was resposible under 18, heck the govt deems it so by the fact i got a license to drive a car that could potentially kill people

guess what, i have yet to ever get a ticket. im sure im not alone in that reagrd

also, i know many kids who dont drink before 21 and get all a's and work to help their parents. man is that irresponsible lol

 

[mpw]

... consider myself a responsible citizen, so why should i be punished for the actions of a few?... ...what age you draw the line? seriously

That's the point isn't it? The mall wants only responsible citizens and the law makes the parents, or adult guardians, responsible for the minors, not the minors themselves; so to exclude, legally, irresponsible people isn't unreasonable.

The age to draw the line, legally, would be the age of majority.

 

[MacNut]

thats a stupid line as i know just as many responsible minors as irresponsible adults

Can a stupid irresponsible 25 year old drink, yes. Can a responsible 15 year old drink no. There is your answer.

 

[dukebound85]

That's the point isn't it? The mall wants only responsible citizens and the law makes the parents, or adult guardians, responsible for the minors, not the minors themselves; so to exclude, legally, irresponsible people isn't unreasonable.

The age to draw the line, legally, would be the age of majority.

i like how you edited out the rest of my post that illustrated that it was people over 18 that are causeing riots and hence being irresposnsible

that in itself prooves the 18 age limit is utter rediculous

 

[dukebound85]

Can a stupid irresponsible 25 year old drink, yes. Can a responsible 15 year old drink no. There is your answer.

and how does that relate to shopping at a mall??

if anything, the irresposnible 25 year old should not be allowed to shop by your logic as he is irresponsible while the 15 y/o should as he is responsible

i mean you are the one that said thae mall does not want irresponsible people shopping lol

 

[MacNut]

i like how you edited out the rest of my post that illustrated that it was people over 18 that are causeing riots and hence being irresposnsible

that in itself prooves the 18 age limit is utter rediculous

I think a lot of things are ridiculous, but those are the rules, dont like it fight to get it changed. The problem is if you are under 18 nobody will listen.