Teen loitering is nothing new in any corner of the globe, in fact its a mainstay that appears to transcend most ethnic divides. For what does one do when you simply have no where to go, parents cramp your young adult style, you tend to have little money, and there really isn’t any place to go? You tend to find an unconventional place to hang out.
In my day we tried the parks or lakes, but they tended to frown on late night visitors and I can remember many a times the cops chasing us off. Mostly we found ourselves hangout in the local supermarket parking lot engaging in plain old silliness from putting on skits, just chatting, to shopping cart races. Other groups of teens found their place cruising up and down the main street, hanging outside the Dairy Queen, or wherever else they could get away with an assembly of their peers, and almost all of this ‘loitering’ was harmless. Sometimes we would chip in and rent the local community hall and throw concerts, but honestly there was really no where to go, and it appears little has changed over the decades.
So what does one do to curb teen loiterers? Many cities and states have imposed curfews, neighborhood watch, CCTV (Closed Caption Television), and increased security or police patrols. But when does putting the clamp down on teen loitering go to far? How about an actual device to repel teens! A device has been created, which is oddly akin to a dog whistle in the essence that apparently is usually only heard by those under the age of 25 years-old, and is rarely heard by anyone over 30 years-old. The mosquito, or “teen repellent”, as it is often called, was created for installation mainly outside shops, to dissuade teens from loitering in the streets and causing disturbances. However many debate its usefulness;
“It hurts my ears, but I’ve grown used to it. We’re still here,” says one person who is part of a group of older kids willing to comment on the issue. “It’s like swimming underwater, but we’re used to it,” says another (Dutch Debate Use of ‘Teen Repellent’).
while others have given rise to the device violating civil rights;
“These devices are indiscriminate and target all children and young people, including babies, regardless of whether they are behaving or misbehaving,” Sir Al told the BBC. “The use of measures such as these are simply demonizing children and young people, creating a dangerous and widening divide between the young and the old.” (Teen-repellent ultrasonic device violates kids’ rights)
The device’s use is growing in European states such as the Netherlands and the UK, and has also been installed in many Australian and American cities and towns. However the installation of the device has some civil rights groups and citizens to making some noise. The town of Great Barrington, Mass., banned the device last year after a movie theater owner installed one;
“There was an outcry, and people didn’t like the idea of torturing kids’ ears like that,” said Ronald Dlugosz, a town official. “People here don’t tolerate that kind of stuff” (High-pitched device serves as teen repellent).
However the technology behind the device has also been flipped by the teens, who have now turned the device into an Adult-Proof Ringtone to enable themselves to text undetected in class. It appears that debate is set to continue on both the use of the device as a practical solution or a civil rights violation. The name alone is simply insulting to teens everywhere, however maybe cities should look to further address providing alternative solutions and activies for teens.
