Poll: No-kids-allowed movement. Yay or nay?

[A.A.K]

Oh jesus yes!

Though sadly I don't have much of an argument for or against. I just really hate children, and I hate it when they annoy the shit out of me. Most of the time, yea, that happens at restaurants and movies.

 

[joetalbot1]

-le snippity snip snip- and would drastically cut the birth rate. Which would really screw things up 40-60 years down the line.

Cutting the birth rate is not a bad idea, since we already have too many people! Less people, more resources towards each individual. And this decreased bith rate idea is better than my original idea of population control, which involved Yahtzee, 4 uzis, 1,000,000+ bullets for said uzis, roomy trousers, and half of China's nuclear arsenal.

 

[JediMB]

I'd rather see parents being better parents.

 

[blase]

Yes, call all supporters of this initiative "child haters" and order them to get a vasectomy. That's an entirely valid argument.

In the meantime: the decision to have children is exactly that, a DECISION. You can't have them against your will in the 21st century. It's an expense and a sacrifice by definition.
You get to experience wonderful things but in exchange you lose a lot of your freedom just from the responsibility of looking after your offspring.

You may love your child all you want but the fact that you procreate doesn't give you any right to be annoying to those around you.

 

[Wedgetail122]

well it all depends on the location and the definition of a "kid" (and whilst I know thats stupid but to be honest the government is putting up the R18 rating on games,which would be a good thing if BF3 wasn't R18 and im fucking 15, weird thing is, im old enough to get my PILOTS licence, or at least my gliding, shoot an F88 Austeyr Assualt Rifle [see avatar for gun yes it looks like an A.U.G. BUT ITS NOT] but im too young to play BF3 in the US??????) there are some places, and no, dispite the fact that it is annoying WE CANT BAN CHILDREN ON DOMESTIC NOR INNTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS - becuase they are still a citezn and they have rights, we can ban them from some places, but think about it, if you ban children from theaters, well there goes the animation industry..... it will work in some areas but not in all

 

[Captain Booyah]

I'm inclined to say yes because God I hate kids, but the problem with an all-out ban is that it's blindly censoring a whole age group; I was always extremely shy and quiet as a child, and I never kicked up any kind of fuss, especially in a public place. There should be some places that have a limit -- you don't want a visit to an expensive restaurant ruined by a baby screaming blue murder, do you? -- but otherwise, it would be a lot fairer to make it so every establishment has the right to boot out any parents who refuse to do their job and let their kid wreak havoc. Warn them at first, and if the bad behaviour continues, GTFO.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

-le snippity snip snip- and would drastically cut the birth rate. Which would really screw things up 40-60 years down the line.

Cutting the birth rate is not a bad idea, since we already have too many people! Less people, more resources towards each individual. And this decreased bith rate idea is better than my original idea of population control, which involved Yahtzee, 4 uzis, 1,000,000+ bullets for said uzis, roomy trousers, and half of China's nuclear arsenal.

A decreased birth rate is not a bad thing at all. A heavily reduced one, however, is. Eventually, people get old, and ill, and need more help with their lives in various ways. Normally, this help would come from younger people, probably even the children/grandchildren of said old folk.
With a drastically reduced birth rate for even 2 generations, you have an awful lot of old people needing medical help, help moving house, or even just help working the VCR, and nowhere near enough younglings to do so. Also, it'd throw a huge tax burden on the reduced younger generations, as there would be fewer people paying, and more people claiming some kind of pension. Britain should be going into a mini-version of this fairly soon, courtesy of the post-war baby boom.

But that was massive (and unlikely) extrapolation of the original point. It probably won't come to that.

 

[blase]

WE CANT BAN CHILDREN ON DOMESTIC NOR INNTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS - becuase they are still a citezn and they have rights, we can ban them from some places, but think about it, if you ban children from theaters, well there goes the animation industry..... it will work in some areas but not in all

Yes, we can. "Rights" don't mean that you can't deem a service "unsuitable" for people below a certain age. It's your business, you run it, you set the safety/liability rules. It also depends on the type of the public place in question.

For example a fast food place is busy and chaotic by definition. Comfort and peace isn't implied or considered an essential part of the service. First Class on a plane on the other hand.. There's a reason some places are "bars" while others are called "restaurants".

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

Personally, I'm for a different sort of legislation. If someone brings a loud kid in, boot 'em. So long as the kid behaves, they're welcome in my book... but too many people don't raise their kids anymore, they just give their kids whatever they want in early development, teaching the kid that tantrums get them their desired results.
I say boot failed parents and their squalling brats to the curb, let 'em take their noise pollution on home... but banning all kids isn't the answer.

This. Not every child is a spoiled little sh*t you know. And I especially disagree with the argument that they shouldn't be allowed on planes. What, are they expected to swim to their holiday? Or are they just meant to stay at home while their parents have fun?

 

[Fishyash]

I find this rule somehow convenient for some places but quite discriminatory for others.

It's not easy to deal with certain children. Sure some are little saints, but others are hyperactive and disruptive because that's just how they are. You cannot keep a young child under control 100%. They are not minature robots and I find it VERY vexing (I am not a parent btw) that people expect parents (especially ones who are trying) to keep their child under control in public constantly. I don't find that possible for certain children.

I think recreational places like restaurants and cinemas, sure, give adults the choice of having some child-free cinemas. But necessities like supermarkets and airplanes? I guess there's the choice still, but honestly, it becomes more than just 'banning the kid', and turns into inconveniencing entire families (a rather pointless one IMO). Is it really necessary just because there are intolerable adults out there?

Honestly, if there is a crying child the parents should take measures not only to stop the baby but at least mitigate the stress it causes to everyone else. Also, if it really bugs you THAT much, you might as well just deal with it and bring some headphones to drown out the noise for your flight or something.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Dear god yes. If it is a kids movie then fine the kids can be there but the more adult-geared movies no. There is actually a theater in Texas that would kick you out if your kid was disrupting the movie. Or if you are talking. Or texting. link: http://cf.drafthouse.com/she_texted_we_kicked_her_out2.html

If it is a family geared restaurant sure kids can be there but places like Olive Garden? No. I fully support being able to say we don't want kids around. However. I do think that the parents should be able to prove that their kids are well behaved enough to be out. I have no problem with that. My parents put the fear of god in me and my little brother as children. as such we were very well behaved out in public. As long as the child is well behaved I have no problem. But I put that fault now a days on the parents for not raising their kids...

 

[Womplord]

It's easy to attack the parenting of others like I'm seeing a lot of here, but have you ever tried to raise a child?

 

[BringBackBuck]

Recently I went to see a movie and I sat in front of 3 elderly Greek women. They talked incessantly. There was a constant "who's that?" What's he doing now?" "Can someone please recap the plot because I am unable to remember what happened 3 minutes ago" Well at least that's what I assume they were saying since it was all in Greek. And very loud. They ignored my pleas for silence, no amount of polite shushing, or impolite "would you alzheimer riddled old crones please shut the fuck up" made any difference.

Should we have a no person over 60 rule?

Previously I went to an outdoor cinema which was showing the movie Spanish Apartment (good film by the way). These outdoor cinemas are really cool, they only run it for a few weeks during summer in the botanical gardens and tend to replay older cool movies, and are definitely a no kids thing - alcohol is served, most people will have a picnic or something before hand and drink wine, it's all very civilised. Anyway it was a sold out session - as they always are, and we were about a third of the way through the film when the guy next to my missus lent over and spewed and big red wine vomit. She got some splashback on her. It was most unpleasant, and we had to leave. This bloke would have been in his mid thirties probably.

Should we have a no person between 30-40 rule?

My point is children are people, and most people are dicks. To rule out an entire group of people based on the action of some people just because you find them annoying is ridiculously intolerant.

TL,DR: Intolerance is bad, and I don't like old people.

 

[Kristoff Chester]

until people can learn to raise their own child, keep them (child and adult ) far away from me. or give me something heavy and blunt for which to beat the stupid out of them.

 

[holy_secret]

Yes damn it. It was as close as yesterday when a brat was crying it's eyes out. My friends and I were getting so damn pissed off, until they turned around and saw that the kid was "cute". Damn women...
But the cuteness only saved the brat for so long. After a while, everyone were pissed off again.

I would be so happy if this could be realized in my country too. Why should people be allowed to disturb literally EVERYONE just because they decided to squeeze out a baby? If they can't help but to disturb others, maybe they shouldn't be outside with other people.

Source: I hate children yahtzee style.

 

[BlackStar42]

As long as the kid's well behaved and old enough to know not to piss people off, I've got no problem. It's the little shits that piss me off. I HATE screaming children.

 

[xmbts]

That sounds like an awful idea, if you can't put up with a kid then maybe you should be the one to leave.

Yeah I'm not going to walk out of a movie or restaurant I paid for because someone else's worm is making a little shit out of themselves, don't be absurd.

Responsibility ultimately lies with the parents. They should know the deal when they have a kid - that your life isn't yours anymore, that parenting is a full-time job and if you want a break, you pay for a sitter.

My sister is just now learning this with her first son, but she's adapting well.

A lot of parents say they can't afford a sitter. To this, I reply:

"If you can afford a $10-20 movie and/or $40 - $80 meal, you can sure as hell afford a sitter."

I do find it kind of funny that you imply selfishness on the part of the parents when you're perfectly willing to force them to pay for a sitter (Not cheap) just to make yourself more comfortable.

This whole thread reeks of hypocrisy.

If you can afford to eat out, you can afford a sitter. There's really no excuse for it.

You think I'm being selfish? You'd willingly take your squealing piggies out to an enclosed, public environment where people have paid to be and enjoy themselves, and force them to have their evening ruined by noise because you can't control your little mistakes?

On what planet do you spend the majority of your time?

Inconveniencing others for the benefit of yourself, yes that's what I'm saying. If you can afford to eat out and you don't have children I think you can afford to walk out.

Not a fan of that idea then why don't you tough it out and deal with it just like the parents have to every waking minute of their lives.

The quiet people who had the foresight to either wear a condom or leave their kids at home with a responsible baby sitter should not be punished for the actions of a few jerkish asshats. If someone talks on their phone in the middle of the movie theater the management can tell them to piss off and if a kid is screaming and making life uncomfortable for the fifty people in the restaurant trying to be respectful then the manager can tell the family of three to piss off for hurting his business. When the majority is being quiet and respecting the atmosphere then they should not be punished because a couple of idiots cant think ahead to control their kids. The needs of the many trump the wants of the few in this case.

News flash: Parenting is kind of difficult, before you go on complaining about how some noisy brat ruined your evening think about having to tend to that kid 24/7 and cut them some slack. You didn't choose to be a parent and that's your business but you can't just make people do something just because you don't feel comfortable with them.