The ID plan is a good idea to cap the entrance of a much younger patron who is between 12 and 14, but is not reasonable for the older high school students.

The decision Mayfair Mall made to require shoppers under the age of 18 to be accompanied with a parent or an adult 21 or older after 2 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays not only takes the rights away from those younger shoppers who can legally drive, but also takes away potential commerce from the shops inside.

It is understandable that the mall is concerned about their security, but there are other ways to make the mall more secure without discriminating against teenagers by restricting their admittance. The answer is beefing up the security in the mall.

The complex is already forced to hire more security to enforce the new age restriction“ why not use these men and women to patrol and chaperone the patrons? Even high school students should have access to the mall.

The administration at Mayfair Mall believes that their decision will make the mall more of a family-orientated environment. But if you have ever shopped with your family, you know that it is possible to get separated while you are there with them. Whether it is by mistake or need to complete a series of tasks in a timely manner, this is a situation that is unavoidable.

Think about the mess during Christmas: There are so many lines and so much to do that a high school student accompanied by a parent would almost have to separate from their family to get things done.

Does this mean mom or dads Christmas present will not be a secret anymore because of the new rule created by the mall? It does if you have to bring them along. Mayfair Mall needs to rethink their new rule because they probably did not consider this.

Things wont get as out of hand with a greater force of security. The ID plan is a good idea to cap the entrance of a much younger patron who is between 12 and 14, but is not reasonable for the older high school students.

The younger age groups are the trouble makers. They walk around, scream, sing, laugh uncontrollably and even steal. While banning these kids wouldnt solve what the mall is trying to accomplish, it would be more sensible than banning unaccompanied high school students. The mall is trying to avoid shoplifting, violence and other unnecessary behavior. While some of these problems are caused by high school students, more problems are caused by people between the ages of 18 and 26. The mall faces problems such as shoplifting, robberies and car break-ins from this group; they cause more trouble than the high school students.

Fights in the mall could be reduced without banning the high school students as well. The larger percentages of that age group are there to shop and socialize with peers. This provides revenue for the shops that occupy the mall. Many shops cater to the high school age group like Viktor Viktoria, Spencers and Hot Topic. All of these shops rely on these younger patrons.

Having restrictions will bring less patrons of that age group to the mall. The decision to prohibit patrons under the age of 18 without a chaperone is a complete U-turn for the complex who has worked years to attract a large number of patrons that shop there daily. The shops that cater to high school students may disappear as business declines from a result of the new rules.

The mall needs to rethink the adoption of this new rule and to allow high school students access. They can keep their heightened security levels, but for the issue of supervision, they shouldnt enforce the age restriction.

This restriction is completely unnecessary considering that more crime is caused by older age groups. Adapting a greater control of the mall will make it more of a family environment, not banning high school students.

> Comments