Council Committee Begins Work on Curfew
Andrews opposes measure, Berliner skeptical and Rice wants to prevent racial profiling.
Videos
Proposed teen curfew legislation goes before the Montgomery County Council's Public Safety Committee at a Thursday morning work session, the next step for a controversial measure proposed to combat teenage violence.
The committee's chairman, Councilmember Phil Andrews, opposes the bill.
"It's not justified based on what has occurred in Montgomery County," Andrews (D-Dist. 3) said. "A curfew is only justified in an emergency situation. We don't have an emergency in Montgomery County. ... A number of council members are undecided. It’s a knee-jerk reaction to one serious but isolated gang fight in downtown Silver Spring."
County Executive Isiah Leggett proposed the bill in mid-July on behalf of the Montgomery County Police after a highly publicized gang fight in downtown Silver Spring. The measure would prohibit youth 17 years old and younger from being in any public place or establishment from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and from midnight to 5 a.m. Friday and Saturday.
Abigail Burman, 17, of Silver Spring, is leading a youth group opposing the curfew.
"It is outrageous to think that the thousands of teens who have done nothing wrong should be confined to our homes, asked to give up our rights and those of our parents, when there is no evidence that this will reduce crime or victimization," she said. "Curfews are just security theater. They don't actually make us safer, but they do distract us from looking for real solutions."
Leggett (D) submitted changes late last month after receiving comments from the public. He requested that a curfew violation be considered a civil offense instead of a criminal offense. He also asked to drop a requirement for curfew violators to perform 25 hours of community service and parenting classes for parents. Under the revised bill, youth would now be allowed to attend movies, sporting events and concerts after 11 p.m. on weeknights and midnight on the weekends.
"The county executive's proposal was never intended to be a final product," Montgomery Police spokeswoman Lucille Baur said. "We knew there would be changes to it."
The Public Safety Committee's work session, scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Thursday, is open to the public and will be broadcast on County Cable Montgomery.
The bill has been proposed as an expedited bill, meaning passage will require six votes instead of a simple majority of five.
Councilmember Roger Berliner (D-Dist. 1), a safety committee member, is on the fence. "I am skeptical. It's too soon. I have not yet been convinced it's the appropriate way to go."
Councilmember Craig Rice (D-District 2) represents the Germantown area, where a group of teens allegedly conducted a flash mob to rob a convenience store. He favors the concept of a curfew, but would like to fine-tune the legislation to ensure there is no racial profiling.
"I am definitely on board in understanding the need of the curfew law and its importance. It's just tailoring the law to put proper protections in place. We need to continue to strengthen the law to alleviate the concerns a lot of people have expressed," Rice said.
Final action on the bill is not expected until after Oct. 17, when the council hosts its second student town hall.
Tim Fahey
7:16 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
How about focusing on the idea of public safety and the idea nothing good happens after midnight? Racial profiling? Give me a break!
Dan
7:28 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
I am confused - how does a curfew have anything to do with the race of the teenager?
I agree with Tim - nothing good happens after midnight. And besides, what can a teenager do in this area after midnight? Go to 7 Eleven or some fast food restaurant, everything else is closed! I would include an exception for a teenager that attended an event that ended after midnight (Sunday/Monday night Redskins game, etc...). THIS SHOULD NOT BE MADE ABOUT RACE!
Sharon
10:48 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
In agreement with both Tim & Dan! I don't know about the rest of you but even when I was a teenager my parents set curfews...home by the stroke of midnight. No need then & absolutely no need now for kids to be wandering (usually aimlessly) on the streets. If parents won't set 'rules' or, at least, offer their homes as 'gathering places' (safe get-together havens), then someone has to step up to the plate. It is not just a curfew to restrict (as though we in agreement for curfew are somehow 'mini-Hitlers') or trying to inflict ridiculous 'power play'. The curfew is for teens safety as well! In case no one has noticed, times have changed & a curfew is a protection for 'our teens' ("It takes a Village!), County teens! And profiling? Give me a break as well! I do notice though.... When something occurs & police need to be called, the caller is almost paranoid (even when officers ask specifically for description which is customary) to say what race or color for fear that 'police requested description' will be miscontrued as caller being prejudice! This profiling paranoia AND excuse has to stop!
Peter Mork
9:18 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
Once upon a time, I was a teenager. My friends and I would frequently be out after midnight: walking, exploring, etc. (in a suburban environment). We weren't getting into trouble; we were just being kids. Curfews need to be a) reserved for extreme circumstances and b) as limited as possible. A standing curfew is a horrible violation of civil liberties.
In terms of racial issues. From the Gazette: "police officials say they would enforce the curfew selectively." The moment a curfew is selectively enforced there's a huge risk of the selection criterion becoming based on skin color.
Beth
10:26 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
A curfew will not work (period). Flash mobs can be assembled at ANY time (before curfew, for instance). Gang activity can happen at any time. What good would a curfew do to end this type of crime that more police officers on the beat in the areas where this type of crime occurs most often would not? Our County Exec needs to put the public safety money where his mouth is.
Jeannette Lemieux
11:24 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
I agree with Beth - I don't think it is the Governments job to parent our children ( they do enough of that already). I think this is an over reaction and curfews should only be in place in an emergency situation that cannot be controlled (such as the recent riots in London).
Peter Mork
11:28 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
Agreed: On occasion, we need to set curfews, but those curfews need to be as limited as possible in both geographic extent and temporal extent. Moreover, the curfew needs to have as few exceptions as possible. The MoCo proposal fails on all accounts: It applies to the whole county, it applies indefinitely, and it excepts all persons over a certain age. Those are all hallmarks of poor policy.
Sharon
12:05 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Maybe, if we all got away with making this a 'parenting issue' or stepping on the rights of parents & teens & focused on the fact that this is a safety issue for 'all' of us (even those good & respectful teens out late at night who aren't looking for trouble as a form of entertainment/fun), then maybe we can move forward w/topic at hand. The County has every right to propose & enact laws that involve the welfare of the 'general public'. No one is telling parents how to raise their children e.g. when it comes to picking & choosing friends or what clothes to wear or what to eat, etc. No one is judging or scolding those parents, even those who find it easier to set their children loose on the streets (& I have seen as young as 13 & 14) or those parents who want to be 'friends' to their children rather than parents who set limits, guidelines, EXAMPLE. Contrary to the 'new parent & socity message' of 'do what you want', "we & society will pay the consequences if such arise", parents can say NO! These kids are gonna have a hell of time when they get out in the real world (e.g. work force) to suddenly discover that even there will be restrictions (& time clocks) & those (employers) who have 'rules & guildelines' they must follow or they 'kiss their jobs good bye'. Sidebar to Jeannette: Isn't example of 'waiting' till riot (extreme used... London) a bit late to avoid or curb a situation or protect a 'society'! Rhetorical!
Peter Mork
12:17 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Part of the proposal is to fine the parents of children that violate the curfew, or at least to require parenting classes. That certainly qualifies as "judging or scolding" in my opinion.
In terms of consequences, staying out late doesn't mean that you don't show up to work on time. And, with respect to waiting for an actual riot, that's exactly the difference between an actual crime (the riot) and a mindcrime (possibly thinking about a riot as evidenced by being out at night).
Peter Mork
11:25 am on Monday, September 12, 2011
Parents can (and often should) set curfews. But, that is to the discretion of the individual parents. It's not MoCo's responsibility to set a curfew. Some people (including teens) enjoy being out at night. That's their right.
Beth
1:53 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Agreed. We do. But, by the way, while we're on the topic, just because I set a curfew doesn't mean my child will choose wisely and follow what I've asked her or him to do. Consequences for parents would also not "fit all." This idea is fundamentally flawed in its entirety!
Ben Gross
12:17 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Thanks to everyone for expressing their opinions on the curfew!
If you haven't already, please vote in the poll (as of 12 noon, it is about even between those who feel MoCo does need a curfew, and those who don't.)
Doug Tallman
2:03 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
A comment was deleted for violating our Terms of Use.
Charles L.Garris
5:21 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
As this event involved a 7-11 store, I will comment. I had 2 brothers who were 7-11 store managers in separate stores in FL. If they noticed a large group of young people headed for the doors - day ornight, they could stop the crowd at the door and allow 2-4 in at a time and FL law allows for such action.
Sharon
5:49 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Comment directed to Peter & Beth: I have not as yet in previous comments focused on specifics of curfew law. Merely stated or, at least, clearly implied that I am for a curfew. I am not for fining parents & not for parenting classes (though whenever such classes are mentioned I think it is quite unfortunate when what is really needed in most cases of raising children is common sense & we seem to be 'low in the gene pool' when it comes to common sense anymore in any roads life takes us down'). And I certainly did not intend to equate lack of curfew w/possible teen riot/uprising. Just expressing my opinion that introducing London riots into the mix was extreme. Reference to jobs was not the ' work' but rather deciding on a whim when one wanted to come & go 'as some sort of freedom'. More of emphasis on fact that there will be 'schedules/deadlines' in life whether we like them or not! So, I guess my earlier comments created 'maximum misinterpretation'. Hummm! Bottom line: I agree with this quote from Councilman Rice "I am definitely on board in understanding the need of the curfew law and its importance. It's just tailoring the law to put proper protections in place. We need to continue to strengthen the law to alleviate the concerns a lot of people have expressed," Rice said." The only thing I don't agree w/ is Rice's inference that a curfew (of any sort) would open doors to profiling.
jnrentz1
6:42 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
"Councilmember Craig Rice (D-District 2) represents the Germantown area, where a group of teens allegedly conducted a flash mob to rob a convenience store. He favors the concept of a curfew, but would like to fine-tune the legislation to ensure there is no racial profiling."
This is what one gets with one party government. Rice is worried about racial profiling? Rice is a hand wringing wuss.
The curfew is a good idea.
Theresa Defino
10:44 am on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
He's black and has to worry about racial profiling. It's real. He said he wanted to fine tune the legislation. That makes him a reasonable person, not a "hand-wring wuss" and this isn't a political party issue.
Brad
7:52 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
We allow illegal aliens to walk our streets with impunity from the law but the County Executive and Council are prepared to detain, fine and possibly jail our children.
Sharon
8:08 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
You know, Brad, you hit the nail on the head for another 'very hot topic'. And I have to admit.... I never thought of that when discussing curfew. But you do have a point! It's just another 'fiasco' that neither County, State or Federal government want to seriously address & minutely resolve. Maybe we can promise the teens arrested for curfew a 'discount or full college tuition scholarships' if they 'promise to abide by curfew. Sounds like something O'Malley might consider. LOL!
jag
11:59 am on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Agreed. It doesn't make sense to harass teens who aren't committing crimes, just like it doesn't make sense to harass undocumented aliens who aren't committing crimes. Both would just lead to profiling and would be a huge waste of resources.
Stephen Kelley
9:33 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Brad is a genious! Why hasn't this question been asked before? Why so many rights for illegal aliens but not for OUR children? Genious, Brad! Thanks for the thought provoking question.
Sharon
9:57 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
Again, kudos to Brad! I just forwarded PATCH site (this article w/all comments) to every member of the County Council stating we now have two pertinent subjects here & asking if they wish to address in personal response to me or a 'public response/rebuttal on this PATCH site. Stayed tune to see if any council members indeed respond.
Brad
10:19 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
All, please join www.HelpSaveMaryland.com and fight illegal immigration in Maryland
Stephen Kelley
10:06 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
No chance any of them respond, Sharon. Thanks for trying though.
Sharon
10:16 pm on Monday, September 12, 2011
I beg to differ, Steve. Can we take bets &, if I get that response & win the bet, I can look forward to a year supply (gift cards) of Starbucks coffee (which I don't need 'cause I am hyper enough...LOL!). I'm not a politician; so this is not consider payola! Hummm! You don't know what a 'determined' woman I am when it comes to 'hot issues & causes'. And I have in past received emails from 4-5 council members on several occasions. If response from any is forthcoming via my email, I will be happy to provide copies on PATCH. To get a little insight into my 'relentlessness' when on a mission, click on my name for other comments that have appeared on PATCH. But you yourself might wish to indulge in a few cups of Starbucks coffee or some No-Doze. Heehee!
Sharon
3:09 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
For Your Information, Steve...a response from Leventhal that basically said nothing & did not even mention 2nd (somewhat overlapping issue of gathering illegal aliens @ any hour of day or night). But, then again, Leventhal was going to deal with our panhandling problem as well...if nothing more than to personally go out to these people or send County representatives (most panhandlers in need; many just scamming general public for quick change). I have never once (in one particular location, same gentleman I feel will lose balance & fall into traffic) ever seen Leventhal or any sort of committee (a promise of such to address issue) approach to assist or direct one specific panhandler (absolutely crippled & more obviously requiring that someone transport him to location & 2 others on what appears to be 'a schedule') to the County assistance programs that could show interest in man's plight or concern that gentleman is also 'being used' by whomever is transporting him.
Dear Sharon:
I am weighing the pros and cons of the curfew proposal and have not yet made up my mind how I will vote on it. Knowing your views is helpful.
Best regards,
George Leventhal
jnrentz1
9:15 am on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
We allow illegal aliens to walk our streets with impunity from the law but the County Executive and Council are prepared to detain, fine and possibly jail our children.**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
I do think the curfew is a good idea, and I think ending aid to CASA de Maryland is also a good idea.
Why should an advocacy group for a criminal interest group get tax payer money?
There is no good reason.
JH
1:46 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
That is a valid point ----- the Council needs to make certain all laws are enforced and the County should help enforce federal laws. No more sanctuary policies. The safety of citizens must come first.
jnrentz1
2:55 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Theresa Defino
10:44am on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
He's black and has to worry about racial profiling. It's real. He said he wanted to fine tune the legislation. That makes him a reasonable person, not a "hand-wring wuss" and this isn't a political party issue."
"He's black and has to worry about racial profiling."
That is a bunch of Bull Manure. He does not have to worry about racial profiling. The suggested curfew law has no racial language in it.
As far as this not being a political party issue, name the second party in Montgomery County Government?
That is right, there is not one. We have one party government.
And he and most of the others are hand wringers. Wusses all.
Pass the curfew and stop giving tax payer money to illegal immigrants.
Theresa Defino
7:41 am on Wednesday, September 14, 2011
What a mindless retort. So all Republicans are against the curfew (especially those trying to repeal the Dream Act) and all Democrats are for it? How idiotic,
Peter Mork
8:21 am on Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Wait, because I'm staunchly opposed to the curfew I cannot be a Democrat?
jnrentz1
5:59 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
jag said:
"11:59am on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Agreed. It doesn't make sense to harass teens who aren't committing crimes, just like it doesn't make sense to harass undocumented aliens who aren't committing crimes. Both would just lead to profiling and would be a huge waste of resources."
How odd of you to equate our teens with ILLEGAL ALIENS. I am sure you meant illegal aliens when you used the less than accurate term, "undocumented aliens." Yea, I know a drug dealer is an unlicensed pharmacist.
One of the crucial differences is that the illegal alien is in a constant state of violation. Every minute of everyday, the illegal alien is in violation of United States law(s) regarding Illegal Entry into the United States.
Personally, I am in favor of a curfew law. The fact is that minors, do NOT have the same and complete rights that an adult possesses. Therefore curfews do not violate the rights of the minor.
jag
6:25 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Thanks for eventually getting to a point, jnrentz1, but of course proper curfew laws don't violate constitution rights (thus how they exist in other counties and cities across the country), just like no one debates that illegal/undocumented (way to freak out, word-nazi) aliens are allowed to be deported.
The point is that there are moral, logistical, and economic issues that surround the debate. You think it's right to harass everyone hispanic just to weed out the illegal immigrants; you think it's right to harass all teens just for the sake of some perceived increase in threat from them lately? You think that's a good use of police resources or tax $$?? Those are the issues at hand - feel free to address them, or just cry some more about how illegals are such a threat to the sanctity of U.S. law. Whichever.
jnrentz1
10:12 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
jag:
Please clarify your statement. I cannot tell what is a question as opposed to a declarative statement.
jag
12:14 pm on Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Sentences that end in question marks are questions.
Brad
10:16 pm on Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Those interested in joining the fight in Maryland, please go to www.HelpSaveMaryland.com
Beth
1:35 pm on Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Those of you who are interested in reading the proposed Bill 25-11 "Offenses-Curfew-Established" along with the currently recommended Amendedments, can visit http://montgomerycountymd.gov/content/pdf/CE-signed_transmittal_amendments.pdf
Doesn't martial law allow for the imposition of curfews in times of emergency, such as those that London recently experienced with rioting? Why do we need to enact this as a daily law when the majority of our youth (17 and under) are obeying the law and household rules? What IF my child works at a restaurant and works until or just past the curfew? A restauranteur cannot predict the needs of the restaurant and will, therefore, schedule non-youth on busy nights. Also, carrying a work permit (recommended for deletion from the bill) will not demonstrate that the minor is currently employed. Are we going to sit by and allow this law to be enacted and for all of those jobs to be given to workers 18 and older? It's already though enough for our kids to find jobs!
Sharon
11:49 am on Saturday, November 12, 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/maryland-politics/post/vote-on-montgomery-youth-curfew-set-for-early-dec/2011/11/11/gIQALPCzCN_blog.html
Sharon
11:17 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/175981/158/50-People-Involved-In-7-Eleven-Mass-Theft
There is more of a 'parental problem' (absence) here than anything. Parents, do you set curfews & know where your teens are tonight? Rhetorical question! Sadly, too many do not! Maybe when & if there are arrests of teens, they AND their parents should be arrested as well & experience some 'bonding time' by being locked up in the same cell together. Hummm!
Sharon
12:32 pm on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
In case there was a misinterpretation that I have changed my 'stance' from my 9/12 comment regarding parents being or not being held responsible.... My comment 11/21 about 'bonding and locking' parents & teens in same cell involved those teens & young adults (and I use the word adult loosely; street thugs is better terminology) actually 'convicted' of 'criminal behavior' as this 'new game'/mass theft/gang rushing 7/11's.
jnrentz1
6:06 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
What progress or lack thereof has been made on the Curfew Law?
What progress or lack thereof has been made on suspending aid, in the form of our tax dollars, to CASA de Maryland?