Ban under 18's from owning a mobile phone unless given a license
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Salt.
Crime was no where near as rampant, the country was more community-orientated. The youth are not largely unmotivated because of smart-phones, they have absolutely nothing to do with that. Banning smart phones will achieve nothing.
If anything, the youth are unmotivated because of a lack of employment prospects, going to university is no where near as rewarding as it used to be and simply blaming smart-phones for these endemic issues actually makes you sound more ignorant than you may realise.
if you think that banning smart phones is going to change everything and improve this country then I'm afraid you may be slightly deluded.
If anything, the youth are unmotivated because of a lack of employment prospects, going to university is no where near as rewarding as it used to be and simply blaming smart-phones for these endemic issues actually makes you sound more ignorant than you may realise.
if you think that banning smart phones is going to change everything and improve this country then I'm afraid you may be slightly deluded.
It is a start. Smartphones and globalisation and capitalism in many ways is to blame.
I would like to also propose the youth are assigned a job as their first job, and if they are qualified, they can choose or study for it later. National service perhaps too. It's nearly 100 years since WW1 ended. In both those wars, people the same age as most people on this site and even younger enlisted to fight for their country. If a similar threat to our country happened today, do you think many young people would want to fight? They would be snapchatting and videoing everything. We are raising a generation of unmotivated, intellectually challenged teens who have no ambitiion
Are you serious? This is so stupid. Who's paying for these licenses? What about 16-18 year olds who need to get a job?
My little brother (11 years old) has to get to and from school one day a week on his own (I'm at uni and mum at work) and it's 15 mins on the bus plus a 20 minute walk and if he didn't text us "going in" and "arrived home" we just wouldn't know where he was all day.
If anything, it would make kids less social.
Plus, I would be amiss if I didn't mention that the entire argument about "textese" ruining grammar forgets that in order for kids to drop letters when texting they need to know there are letters to drop.
My little brother (11 years old) has to get to and from school one day a week on his own (I'm at uni and mum at work) and it's 15 mins on the bus plus a 20 minute walk and if he didn't text us "going in" and "arrived home" we just wouldn't know where he was all day.
If anything, it would make kids less social.
Plus, I would be amiss if I didn't mention that the entire argument about "textese" ruining grammar forgets that in order for kids to drop letters when texting they need to know there are letters to drop.
I disagree:
Firstly, most issues you mention (cyberbullying, radicalisation... etc) won't be stopped just by banning phones. It will just move onto computers. Banning mobile phones isn't a solution to those issues. And then what? Ban computers? In countries that aren't run by repressive dictatorships or 1984-esque; that simply won't go down well. People in the UK are used to certain luxuries like internet, tv, mobiles etc, if someone suddenly initiates a national ban on under 18 possession there'll be a riot somewhere. Even if you ban computer use for under 18's, how do you realistically enforce that? Unless you run a tight surveillance state on the same level as North Korea, then there are so many ways under 18's could access computers. Simply put, banning technology will not solve the issues you present.
Secondly, mobile phones are incredibly handy. The need to contact people so easily is ridiculously useful. Unlike phone boxes, mobile phones can be on your person. No matter where you are, you have an instant way of contacting some one. In a remote location and need emergency assistance? Just dial 999, you don't need to go looking for people or a phone box to get help.
Thirdly, just because we use a phone doesn't mean we are socially screwed. With phones, we can socialise to people from any point on the globe. In the train? Well, you can still chat to friends and family and etc... But with everything, mobile phones comes with advantages and disadvantages, one disadvantage is that face to face socialisation may decrease. Plus, you shouldn't generalise a whole generation. For example, there are stories of people on dates or social gatherings where they pay more attentions to their phones than the people they're with, but that isn't everyone. People in that same age demographic call it out and talk about how much they loathe that kind of behaviour, there are some that simply do not participate in that behaviour.
In general, we the subject of cyberbullying is bought up, the first thought is literally how it happens at home on a facebook on a computer. In schools, whenever teachers talk about it almost always is about how it happens on social media. Social media is not restricted to a phone. Yes if you ban mobiles for under 18's, cyberbullying via snapchat and apps that don't really work on computers may stop... but so will those social media apps. The snapchat users will move to facebook or something and the cyberullying continues.
Firstly, most issues you mention (cyberbullying, radicalisation... etc) won't be stopped just by banning phones. It will just move onto computers. Banning mobile phones isn't a solution to those issues. And then what? Ban computers? In countries that aren't run by repressive dictatorships or 1984-esque; that simply won't go down well. People in the UK are used to certain luxuries like internet, tv, mobiles etc, if someone suddenly initiates a national ban on under 18 possession there'll be a riot somewhere. Even if you ban computer use for under 18's, how do you realistically enforce that? Unless you run a tight surveillance state on the same level as North Korea, then there are so many ways under 18's could access computers. Simply put, banning technology will not solve the issues you present.
Secondly, mobile phones are incredibly handy. The need to contact people so easily is ridiculously useful. Unlike phone boxes, mobile phones can be on your person. No matter where you are, you have an instant way of contacting some one. In a remote location and need emergency assistance? Just dial 999, you don't need to go looking for people or a phone box to get help.
Thirdly, just because we use a phone doesn't mean we are socially screwed. With phones, we can socialise to people from any point on the globe. In the train? Well, you can still chat to friends and family and etc... But with everything, mobile phones comes with advantages and disadvantages, one disadvantage is that face to face socialisation may decrease. Plus, you shouldn't generalise a whole generation. For example, there are stories of people on dates or social gatherings where they pay more attentions to their phones than the people they're with, but that isn't everyone. People in that same age demographic call it out and talk about how much they loathe that kind of behaviour, there are some that simply do not participate in that behaviour.
In general, we the subject of cyberbullying is bought up, the first thought is literally how it happens at home on a facebook on a computer. In schools, whenever teachers talk about it almost always is about how it happens on social media. Social media is not restricted to a phone. Yes if you ban mobiles for under 18's, cyberbullying via snapchat and apps that don't really work on computers may stop... but so will those social media apps. The snapchat users will move to facebook or something and the cyberullying continues.
Original post by BlueSakura
I disagree:
Firstly, most issues you mention (cyberbullying, radicalisation... etc) won't be stopped just by banning phones. It will just move onto computers. Banning mobile phones isn't a solution to those issues. And then what? Ban computers? In countries that aren't run by repressive dictatorships or 1984-esque; that simply won't go down well. People in the UK are used to certain luxuries like internet, tv, mobiles etc, if someone suddenly initiates a national ban on under 18 possession there'll be a riot somewhere. Even if you ban computer use for under 18's, how do you realistically enforce that? Unless you run a tight surveillance state on the same level as North Korea, then there are so many ways under 18's could access computers. Simply put, banning technology will not solve the issues you present.
Secondly, mobile phones are incredibly handy. The need to contact people so easily is ridiculously useful. Unlike phone boxes, mobile phones can be on your person. No matter where you are, you have an instant way of contacting some one. In a remote location and need emergency assistance? Just dial 999, you don't need to go looking for people or a phone box to get help.
Thirdly, just because we use a phone doesn't mean we are socially screwed. With phones, we can socialise to people from any point on the globe. In the train? Well, you can still chat to friends and family and etc... But with everything, mobile phones comes with advantages and disadvantages, one disadvantage is that face to face socialisation may decrease. Plus, you shouldn't generalise a whole generation. For example, there are stories of people on dates or social gatherings where they pay more attentions to their phones than the people they're with, but that isn't everyone. People in that same age demographic call it out and talk about how much they loathe that kind of behaviour, there are some that simply do not participate in that behaviour.
In general, we the subject of cyberbullying is bought up, the first thought is literally how it happens at home on a facebook on a computer. In schools, whenever teachers talk about it almost always is about how it happens on social media. Social media is not restricted to a phone. Yes if you ban mobiles for under 18's, cyberbullying via snapchat and apps that don't really work on computers may stop... but so will those social media apps. The snapchat users will move to facebook or something and the cyberullying continues.
Firstly, most issues you mention (cyberbullying, radicalisation... etc) won't be stopped just by banning phones. It will just move onto computers. Banning mobile phones isn't a solution to those issues. And then what? Ban computers? In countries that aren't run by repressive dictatorships or 1984-esque; that simply won't go down well. People in the UK are used to certain luxuries like internet, tv, mobiles etc, if someone suddenly initiates a national ban on under 18 possession there'll be a riot somewhere. Even if you ban computer use for under 18's, how do you realistically enforce that? Unless you run a tight surveillance state on the same level as North Korea, then there are so many ways under 18's could access computers. Simply put, banning technology will not solve the issues you present.
Secondly, mobile phones are incredibly handy. The need to contact people so easily is ridiculously useful. Unlike phone boxes, mobile phones can be on your person. No matter where you are, you have an instant way of contacting some one. In a remote location and need emergency assistance? Just dial 999, you don't need to go looking for people or a phone box to get help.
Thirdly, just because we use a phone doesn't mean we are socially screwed. With phones, we can socialise to people from any point on the globe. In the train? Well, you can still chat to friends and family and etc... But with everything, mobile phones comes with advantages and disadvantages, one disadvantage is that face to face socialisation may decrease. Plus, you shouldn't generalise a whole generation. For example, there are stories of people on dates or social gatherings where they pay more attentions to their phones than the people they're with, but that isn't everyone. People in that same age demographic call it out and talk about how much they loathe that kind of behaviour, there are some that simply do not participate in that behaviour.
In general, we the subject of cyberbullying is bought up, the first thought is literally how it happens at home on a facebook on a computer. In schools, whenever teachers talk about it almost always is about how it happens on social media. Social media is not restricted to a phone. Yes if you ban mobiles for under 18's, cyberbullying via snapchat and apps that don't really work on computers may stop... but so will those social media apps. The snapchat users will move to facebook or something and the cyberullying continues.
I don't want to ban computers, just social medai. Easy access to tools that facilitate bullying, crime.
Original post by qwertyK
It is a start. Smartphones and globalisation and capitalism in many ways is to blame.
I would like to also propose the youth are assigned a job as their first job, and if they are qualified, they can choose or study for it later. National service perhaps too. It's nearly 100 years since WW1 ended. In both those wars, people the same age as most people on this site and even younger enlisted to fight for their country. If a similar threat to our country happened today, do you think many young people would want to fight? They would be snapchatting and videoing everything. We are raising a generation of unmotivated, intellectually challenged teens who have no ambitiion
I would like to also propose the youth are assigned a job as their first job, and if they are qualified, they can choose or study for it later. National service perhaps too. It's nearly 100 years since WW1 ended. In both those wars, people the same age as most people on this site and even younger enlisted to fight for their country. If a similar threat to our country happened today, do you think many young people would want to fight? They would be snapchatting and videoing everything. We are raising a generation of unmotivated, intellectually challenged teens who have no ambitiion
Smartphones have nothing to do with it, globalisation? Sure, capitalism? Debatable, but Smartphones? No. The ones that sit on social media all day have been lost not because of the existence of smartphones but because of the services they provide, for example, Face Book. To say that the majority of the Youth are uneducated, and unmotivated because of the existence of smartphones is just nonsense.
As I said previously, there are serious reasons as to why Youth Rebellion is up, mental health and expectation is another one. You can't blame the issue with the Youth on the intervention and implementation of telecommunication services and the mobile phone. On the contrary, they have provided employment means for young people in their production and development, and provide an excellent service which is intrinsically linked to our daily lives. You can't rob the youth of that privilege.
As for your proposal to bring back military conscription/mandatory service all you'd do is create a huge amount of opposition and rebellion from within. The young are very anti-war and it's better to have a small, disciplined and trained army than one that is undisciplined and filled with discontent.
Let's ban those under 18 from talking to eachother as it has lead to bullying.
from a person without a smartphone
no
it's an interesting proposition but I don't think this would have positive consequences
times have changed
no one's going to look out for me unlike the nineties and in a modern day society like ours you cannot possibly expect all kids/teens to drop their technology
if you ban smartphones i honestly expect a revolution
our youth are largely uneducated and unmotivated? literally everyone i know is doing medicine.
so many people are struggling to cope with their hectic lives it's not easy at all - i.e my friend holly works a 6am-2pm shift every saturday while struggling to get through further maths a level.
social media is fun
it allows the youth to connect with each other and communicate with their primary school friends. people get to make online friends from across the planet. you can look at events that are coming up. you can make study groups for revision. i'm sure these 'apps' have actually stopped crime. on instagram you can keep up with celebrities, make money and it expands our circles for future opportunities
no
it's an interesting proposition but I don't think this would have positive consequences
times have changed
no one's going to look out for me unlike the nineties and in a modern day society like ours you cannot possibly expect all kids/teens to drop their technology
if you ban smartphones i honestly expect a revolution
our youth are largely uneducated and unmotivated? literally everyone i know is doing medicine.
so many people are struggling to cope with their hectic lives it's not easy at all - i.e my friend holly works a 6am-2pm shift every saturday while struggling to get through further maths a level.
social media is fun
it allows the youth to connect with each other and communicate with their primary school friends. people get to make online friends from across the planet. you can look at events that are coming up. you can make study groups for revision. i'm sure these 'apps' have actually stopped crime. on instagram you can keep up with celebrities, make money and it expands our circles for future opportunities
Original post by qwertyK
I don't want to ban computers, just social medai. Easy access to tools that facilitate bullying, crime.
My point referred to the original post of banning mobiles for under 18's, the point was that if you start banning mobiles for the reasons you listed, then you start going onto a slippery slope, because where does the banning end in pursuit of those reasons?
Most social media's have age restrictions like you have to be over 13.... but even by the time I started year 7, the majority of people had facebook and they definitely weren't 13 yet. People can still lie. For example, people under 18 can still get 18+ and mature video games, access to porn etc... Lying about your age on the internet is easy. The age restriction of 18+ for social media will deter more rule abiding teens, but the majority won't, not when social media is at play. And even if it's not social media, chatrooms and forums would be more popular due to the age restriction.
Original post by rainclouds-
from a person without a smartphone
no
it's an interesting proposition but I don't think this would have positive consequences
times have changed
no one's going to look out for me unlike the nineties and in a modern day society like ours you cannot possibly expect all kids/teens to drop their technology
if you ban smartphones i honestly expect a revolution
our youth are largely uneducated and unmotivated? literally everyone i know is doing medicine.
so many people are struggling to cope with their hectic lives it's not easy at all - i.e my friend holly works a 6am-2pm shift every saturday while struggling to get through further maths a level.
social media is fun
it allows the youth to connect with each other and communicate with their primary school friends. people get to make online friends from across the planet. you can look at events that are coming up. you can make study groups for revision. i'm sure these 'apps' have actually stopped crime. on instagram you can keep up with celebrities, make money and it expands our circles for future opportunities
no
it's an interesting proposition but I don't think this would have positive consequences
times have changed
no one's going to look out for me unlike the nineties and in a modern day society like ours you cannot possibly expect all kids/teens to drop their technology
if you ban smartphones i honestly expect a revolution
our youth are largely uneducated and unmotivated? literally everyone i know is doing medicine.
so many people are struggling to cope with their hectic lives it's not easy at all - i.e my friend holly works a 6am-2pm shift every saturday while struggling to get through further maths a level.
social media is fun
it allows the youth to connect with each other and communicate with their primary school friends. people get to make online friends from across the planet. you can look at events that are coming up. you can make study groups for revision. i'm sure these 'apps' have actually stopped crime. on instagram you can keep up with celebrities, make money and it expands our circles for future opportunities
Social Media makes people dumber. I like Twitter, and that's about it.
Original post by Salt.
Smartphones have nothing to do with it, globalisation? Sure, capitalism? Debatable, but Smartphones? No. The ones that sit on social media all day have been lost not because of the existence of smartphones but because of the services they provide, for example, Face Book. To say that the majority of the Youth are uneducated, and unmotivated because of the existence of smartphones is just nonsense.
As I said previously, there are serious reasons as to why Youth Rebellion is up, mental health and expectation is another one. You can't blame the issue with the Youth on the intervention and implementation of telecommunication services and the mobile phone. On the contrary, they have provided employment means for young people in their production and development, and provide an excellent service which is intrinsically linked to our daily lives. You can't rob the youth of that privilege.
As for your proposal to bring back military conscription/mandatory service all you'd do is create a huge amount of opposition and rebellion from within. The young are very anti-war and it's better to have a small, disciplined and trained army than one that is undisciplined and filled with discontent.
As I said previously, there are serious reasons as to why Youth Rebellion is up, mental health and expectation is another one. You can't blame the issue with the Youth on the intervention and implementation of telecommunication services and the mobile phone. On the contrary, they have provided employment means for young people in their production and development, and provide an excellent service which is intrinsically linked to our daily lives. You can't rob the youth of that privilege.
As for your proposal to bring back military conscription/mandatory service all you'd do is create a huge amount of opposition and rebellion from within. The young are very anti-war and it's better to have a small, disciplined and trained army than one that is undisciplined and filled with discontent.
Who said they were going to war? France is introducing a system where citizens just train for a month or something like that. I am anti war. But we need our youth to have a place. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we all knew we had a role in society to play, we are important! We shoud all be part of wider society and help our country and more importantly each other
What do you think?
Well...
Smartphones for young people have led to cyberbullying,
Right... Because it's not like people can't do it on literally any other computer, like, oh I don't know, how about the most obvious one? An actual desktop/laptop computer? Tablets? Smart devices that aren't phones like the iPod touch? I'm sure some smartwatches even have this functionality.
radicilisation of Muslims,
And this is the fault of smartphones? Islamic terrorism, much like every other form of terrorism, has existed LONG before the smartphone, which really didn't take off until? What? 2009 +/- 2 years?
spreading crime related content, Drill videos, gang incidents being distributed, helping recruit gang/drug users and sellers
And I can't do that on literally any other device?
and cause improper use of the English language
Right... Smartphones caused that... Not the spell checkers you have built into your word processors, or the ones built into your browser, not the predictive text when you're searching the net, not the predictive text that has been around on phones for god knows how long, just smartphones.
as well as being detrimental to health.
Any sources on that based on regular use, not extreme examples that don't apply to 99% of the population?
I would propose a system where there Instagram and Snapchat are banned for under 18s.
Sure.
I have ackowledged right now there is no support for mass confiscation, so I think a more reasonable option would be to ban social media for under 18s.
Can't stand behind this unfortunately, the term social media is far too vague and would cause untold amounts of collateral damage. For reference, social media is defined as: "websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking."
When people think of social media, they think of Facebook, Snapchat, etc... What people don't seem to realise is that other websites, like Youtube, and even this very forum (just like every other internet forum on the web), falls under the definition of social media.
Likewise, where is the line drawn? Realistically, what's the difference between Facebook messenger and just simply texting? Should we stop under 18's from texting as well?
It would be done like this:
BT would be nationalised and take control over all phone contract companies. It would lock the phone and make it unusuable until the user submits their birth certificate to them. Once that is done, it is unlocked
Good luck with that, cause there's no way in hell that would happen, and if it did, the idea would be scrapped before the week was out to avoid what would probably be one of the biggest class action lawsuits in history. If every smartphone owner was allowed to claim money for compensation, you're talking hundreds of millions of pounds, if not billions, depending on the payout per person. Hell, estimates in 2017 put smartphone ownership at 85% of the population... That's 56 million people, imagine if just 1% were awarded £100 in compensation, that's 560M... Now imagine if anyone who owned a smartphone could submit a claim and be compensated with that £100. You're potentially looking at £5.6B in compensation. Let us know how that idea works out...
Also, think of the practical issues. All those certificates are going to have to checked and authenticated. What about people who have lost their birth certificate? The backlog when this would come into effect could mean waiting months just to 'unlock' your phone... That's a lot of compensation money waiting to be dished out by the courts considering some people use their phones for work... You could be talking about economy crippling amounts of money, and considering the uncertainty surrounding our economic future with Brexit on the horizon, it's probably not the greatest idea.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by BlueSakura
My point referred to the original post of banning mobiles for under 18's, the point was that if you start banning mobiles for the reasons you listed, then you start going onto a slippery slope, because where does the banning end in pursuit of those reasons?
Most social media's have age restrictions like you have to be over 13.... but even by the time I started year 7, the majority of people had facebook and they definitely weren't 13 yet. People can still lie. For example, people under 18 can still get 18+ and mature video games, access to porn etc... Lying about your age on the internet is easy. The age restriction of 18+ for social media will deter more rule abiding teens, but the majority won't, not when social media is at play. And even if it's not social media, chatrooms and forums would be more popular due to the age restriction.
Most social media's have age restrictions like you have to be over 13.... but even by the time I started year 7, the majority of people had facebook and they definitely weren't 13 yet. People can still lie. For example, people under 18 can still get 18+ and mature video games, access to porn etc... Lying about your age on the internet is easy. The age restriction of 18+ for social media will deter more rule abiding teens, but the majority won't, not when social media is at play. And even if it's not social media, chatrooms and forums would be more popular due to the age restriction.
That's why I said there has to be some kind of proof system.
Original post by qwertyK
France is introducing a system where citizens just train for a month or something like that.
About that... what you're referring is less of the national service you're thinking of; from what I can gather it won't be training as much as giving adolescents the option of either learning more about france and history for two weeks or doing things to help benefit the community for a few weeks.
"The first part of the programme would be a one-month placement focussed on civic culture, including voluntary work, teaching support or time with the police, fire service or army. The second phase would be a voluntary stint of three months to a year in "in an area linked to defence and security," or in options including community service." <-- from the world economic forum, link here: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/france-is-bringing-back-national-service/
Original post by qwertyK
BT would be nationalised and take control over all phone contract companies. It would lock the phone and make it unusuable until the user submits their birth certificate to them. Once that is done, it is unlocked
BT would be nationalised and take control over all phone contract companies. It would lock the phone and make it unusuable until the user submits their birth certificate to them. Once that is done, it is unlocked
Even if the idea had merit, there's literally dozen of reasons why your solution is completely unworkable.
Original post by qwertyK
Social Media makes people dumber. I like Twitter, and that's about it.
same - I've had twitter since I was 10 and it's really great. have you tried using instagram and snapchat before? try to be a little more open minded. i know where you're coming from and possibly it could stop a lot of issues however it's flawed and impractical as many users above have pointed out. i imagine in the future instagram and snapchat will lose its popularity as trends change dramatically over time too.
Original post by qwertyK
That's why I said there has to be some kind of proof system.
For example? In the UK, not everyone has a passport, you're only given a national insurance number at 16 (and I don't think that would be the best thing to serve as proof of identity), unlike EU memeber states, you don't have identity cards, railcards would be a bit weak, provisional licenses are for 17+... it might be difficult to implement proof of identity in the UK
BTW, by proof of identity may be hard to implement- I mostly mean for under 17 year olds. Apart from making possession of a passport manadatory.
Ridiculous. Not all under 18s do such despicable stuff. I shouldn't have to be restricted from the ownership of a phone or access to social media just because certain under 18s misuse it. A majority of the young community don't misuse phones anyway.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
