Louisiana City Bans Saggy Pants

Submitted by: fancylad 4 years ago in

I, for one, am all for this law and hope the rest of America--nay, the world--adopts this law.
There are 51 comments:
Male 761
Lastly MeGrendel, lets not kid ourselves and think this is targeting white kids. I`m from Louisiana and I know the area this is happening in and I can promise you that out of all the white kids probably 4 dress like this as opposed to the black kids.

In LA and other states, these regulations that are being presented are done in predominately black neighborhoods. This would never happen with horrible white fashion trends.

Lets not dilute ourselves into a PC world that everything and everyone is equal in cultural identifications.

More importantly I`m callout any Libertarian or Constitutionalist who screams for the government to get out of their lives unless it stops stuff they don`t like.
0
Reply
Male 761
Are you kidding? The similarities are 100% comparable.

1-I wrote in an earlier thread though I`m against any new gun control laws I wish mentally challenged people would stop buying guns. Not nuts, but idiots with low IQs. Impossible, but wishful thinking.

2-Gerry said, you can`t begin taking rights away from some people because it may lead to everyone losing their rights.

3-I`m essentially calling him a hypocrite for feeling this way yet wanting the rights of people who dress, horribly mind you, taken away.

Imagine what can happen. Then people with confederate shirts on public streets will be ticketed.


It gives the impression that he`s against yet, wants to protect everyones right to own a gun. Contradiction.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
This isn`t a lib/con issue. I`m about as far left as anyone and I do NOT support this law. Laws are supposed to protect people, who is this law protecting? There is no real victim here. If someone wears their pants indecently, use the existing decency laws. If they are not, just look the other way, you cannot legislate morality.

Besides, it`s nearly impossible to run from the police while holding up your saggy pants!
0
Reply
Male 2,670
As much as I loathe and despise baggy pants and the urchins who sport them, I can`t support this law.

If people wish to dress like morons, that should be their right. Just as it is my right to laugh in their stupid faces every time I see them.
0
Reply
Male 5,094
MeGrendel: Fair enough.

Gerry1of1: If you by "ghetto" meant what MeGrendel stated then I apologize, but I can only define words as they are being defined to me.

On the other hand, you really can`t see the underlying problem with your last statement, that it`s an infringement on the freedom of expression?
0
Reply
Male 8,416
peakingo-"but feel it unabashed that anyone who can legally own a gun"

The two have nothing in common, so please refrain from trying to drum some equivalency.

peakingo-"Freedom is for everyone"

Just as laws are for everyone.

peakingo-"I guess, that`s means everyone... unless you`re a stereotypical inner city black person."

I`m sorry, I must have missed the text in the law that stated that white rural kids would be allowed to wear saggy pants in the city.

What? There isn`t any?

Then guess what: The law does not discriminate.
0
Reply
Male 761
@Gerry, I find it odd you would take this stance at eliminating the civil liberties of how someone chooses to dress, but feel it unabashed that anyone who can legally own a gun should be able to regardless of their mental capacity to understand the dangers and responsibilities involved with it.

"Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
24664 Posts Thursday, April 11, 2013 6:09:29 PM

If "some of us shouldn`t" then we don`t "all" have the right. The old slippery-slope argument - once you start taking some people off the approved list, it`s easy to add more and more people who don`t qualify.

Freedom is for everyone, even the ones we don`t like."

I guess, that`s means everyone... unless you`re a stereotypical inner city black person.
0
Reply
Male 39,533

Tiredofnicks, no my basic assumption was that if people walk around with their pants down they should get arrest or at the least ticketed. Where the fashion trend comes from is really kind of irrelevant.
0
Reply
Male 8,416
@jtrebowski

You seem to have a comprehension problem. I just stated that what is `indecent` varies depending on the one judging. You asked `who` and I provided an answer.

jtrebowski-"here in the states, we have something called `freedom of religion",

Again, the comprehension problem. The First Amendment only denies the government from enforcing a religion, or outlawing one.

What other`s believe is in no way hindered by the Bill or Rights.

jtrebowski-"and they`re not imposing it on us."

There are those that would like to. One study found that 40% of US Muslims would like to institute Islamic law in the US (and 12 percent would like Blasphemers put to death).

The point (which you avoid as you can`t argue) is that the definition of `indecent` is entirely variable and changes constantly.
0
Reply
Male 8,416
jtrebowski-"Sounds like some of you that support this law"

Actually, I didn`t state one way or another. If you must know, I think this legislation is a waste of time.

Idiots will be idiots and you can`t legislate someone out of doing stupid things.

The solution for this type of stupidity is this:

0
Reply
Male 3,369
Ah...MeGrendel refers to Muslims being offended by bare feet. Gotcha, but the thing is, here in the states, we have something called `freedom of religion", and they`re not imposing it on us.
0
Reply
Male 8,416
jtrebowski-"MeGrendel: Who?"

This guy, and millions like him:

0
Reply
Male 8,416
jtrebowski-"I know a lot of conservatives that plan to ignore any new gun laws"

Yes, because let`s equate a law against stealing another`s property to a `law` that violates the constitution of the United States.

And I wasn`t arguing what `I` think Ghetto people do, or not. I was arguing that YOU have to argue the term `Ghetto` in current usage, not what Webster`s says it is.
0
Reply
Male 8,416
Tiredofnicks-"Let`s define some terms first. Dictionary.com..."

You`re starting your argument on a logical fallacy. The dictionary definition does not necessarily the manner in which it is being used.

Popular usage of `ghetto` has nothing to do with `part of a city`. It is now used as slang as an adjective, rather than a noun. It is now used to indicate a person`s relationshipt to black culture. This slang has been embraced and propagated by the black community. And they use it in relationship with `Thug Life`, Hip-hop, criminal activity and how `bad` they can be.

THAT`s the definition you have to argue.

So, he`s not saying all ghetto kids steal, but it`s pretty much an axiom that part of being Ghetto (as opposed to being IN a ghetto) is being proud of ignoring the law.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Whether you admit it or not.....this is nanny-state legislation. Even Ronald Reagan said `Government`s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives."

Sounds like some of you that support this law are taking a hard turn to the left.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Megrendel: "that part of being Ghetto (as opposed to being IN a ghetto) is being proud of ignoring the law."
Good point, because I know a lot of conservatives that plan to ignore any new gun laws if they`re implemented. Now I know what to call them.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
MeGrendel: Who?
0
Reply
Male 8,416
Tiredofnicks-"Let`s define some terms first. Dictionary.com..."

You`re starting your argument on a logical fallacy. The dictionary definition does not necessarily the manner in which it is being used.

Popular usage of `ghetto` has nothing to do with `part of a city`. It is now used as slang as an adjective, rather than a noun. It is now used to indicate a person`s relationshipt to black culture. This slang has been embraced and propagated by the black community. And they use it in relationship with `Thug Life`, Hip-hop, criminal activity and how `bad` they can be.

THAT`s the definition you have to argue.

So, he`s not saying all ghetto kids steal, but it`s pretty much an axiom that part of being Ghetto (as opposed to being IN a ghetto) is being proud of ignoring the law.
0
Reply
Female 160
It`s not that hard to wear pants that actually fit or wear a belt. It pisses me off when I see pants sagging and there`s a belt. Belts are to keep your pants up.
I don`t want to see anyone`s undies.
0
Reply
Male 8,416
jtrebowski-"no, because that would be indecent."

What`s considered `indecent` is entirely dependent on who`s doing the considering.

By some, THIS is considered `indecent`:
0
Reply
Male 5,094
Gerry, nor should this be illegal for the same reasons.

Snappy comebacks aside, you`re assuming so much and generalizing so widely that I can`t see it to be much else.

Let`s define some terms first. Dictionary.com defines Ghetto as [quote]"a section of a city, especially a thickly populated slum area, inhabited predominantly by members of an ethnic or other minority group, often as a result of social or economic restrictions, pressures, or hardships."[/quote]
Your basic assumptions are these: All ghetto kids steal, are incompetent at it, and the sole reason that saggy pants are still being worn is that they`re easy to hide guns in.

Even if this may be true for some or even many ghetto kids, it is NOT a fact. Generalizing as widely as you did on a group of people is racist, same as saying "The suburbia kids are all buying Porsches with their daddies` credit cards and driving to the tennis court" is over-generalizing and racist.
0
Reply
Male 2,841
God forbid a government represents the interests of the people.
0
Reply
Male 39,533

@ Tiredofnnicks, Why`s it racist? It`s a ghetto fashion popularized by rap stars who wanted to look like the street kids.

Facts is facts. It`s not racist just `cause you don`t like it.
0
Reply
Male 809
Should be the same everywhere. Pull your pants up, you look like a douchebag.
0
Reply
Male 1,745
As douchey as it looks, I don`t want government deciding on our clothing. So I oppose this.
0
Reply
Male 5,094
Gerry1of1: That`s out-and-out racist right there, just as the "signaling for buttsex" one is homophobic.
0
Reply
Male 134
I don`t think sagging your pants that low is cool by any means, however, that is my personal opinion and I do not believe it should be against the law. I wasn`t aware we could start making things illegal just because we didn`t like them.

Thanks for the link peakingo, good info.. makes much more sense than the common belief.
0
Reply
Male 761
This is the same concept except it deals with a culture may of these don`t like a fashion statement they hate.

Imagine what the response would be if officers started ticketing people for wearing stupid big hats or uggs.
0
Reply
Male 761
@korahn

I recommend people actually research this because that`s just a tall tale started by religious fundamentalist who tried to use homophonic cultural stigmas in the black community to dismay their children from doing this in fear of being labeled a homosexual.

This concept is so dumb but more importantly homophobic.


The real reason of how it started:

Began in prison because they would take their belts and their pants sagged and it because an inner city cultural statement.

origin of this fad

Also, by banning this you really are opening up pandoras box, and to be honest most people who disagree with this also being a little hypocritical if they feel their rights are being taken away by liberals who want to ban guns.

This is the same concept except it deals with a culture may of these
0
Reply
Male 39,533

I`d always thought the reason for the fashion was the ghetto kids didn`t steal clothing that fit them. Baggy clothes hid weapons better than tight disco pants so the trend stayed.
0
Reply
Male 761
My home state is full on retarded. With all the problems it has and the crime rate, is this really what matters. So what, kids wear pants below their a$$. Lets waste tax payers money to make laws about it and waste limited police resources to monitor it.

This just so dumb.
0
Reply
Male 3,745
why is this such a big issue to begin with? and why do they still use the prison argument? they aren`t in prison sagging. there are bigger issues that could have been addressed and dealt with rather than this...if you don`t like people sagging then stop looking at their asses in the first place...
0
Reply
Male 1,435
“Young men who were in prison who wanted to have sex with other men would send a signal to another man with his pants below his waist,” he said."

People do need to do some research before speaking, but I`m all for this idea.
0
Reply
Male 39,533

I understand 16 year olds doing this, we were all dumb as teenagers. But when I see 30 year olds still drying to be kids it`s just irritating.
0
Reply
Male 425
so hopsin definitely can`t go there! because he sags his pants until his ass shows, he even slaps hoes; yea he`s an non-nice individual.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Tommy2x4: "What is going to be the next fashion statement, wearing them so low as to expose the bung hole?"

no, because that would be indecent. Way to miss the point, skippy.
0
Reply
Female 3,001
hell, yes!
0
Reply
Male 3,099
So, the whole `Leaders of the free world` thing is out the window, right?
0
Reply
Male 3,477
What is going to be the next fashion statement, wearing them so low as to expose the bung hole?
Wear your pants like that to a job interview. Oh wait, you don`t have to work because you live off mommy and daddy or baby mamma`s government dole. GFY`s!
0
Reply
Male 39,533

[quote]"believe it or not, it used to be pretty common for men, especially older ones to go pick up the morning paper from their driveway wearing nothing but a wife-beater and their boxers." [/quote]
Maybe in your trailer park, but not where I grew up.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Gerry10f1: believe it or not, it used to be pretty common for men, especially older ones to go pick up the morning paper from their driveway wearing nothing but a wife-beater and their boxers.
0
Reply
Female 6,381
I want to know if this includes people showing off the traditional "plumber`s crack" when they bend over. It is really gross when a tradesman or mechanic suddenly crouches or kneels and his jeans drop to reveal inches of hairy brown asscrack. Banning THAT is a bylaw I could get behind.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
What next? Wearing tweed while in Town?
0
Reply
Male 7,123
Gerry,

Don`t know how it works in the states but over here I`m pretty sure you need to have your dick out for it to be indecent exposure.

(Apparently the first indecent expsure laws were aimed at beggars exposing running sores etc.)
0
Reply
Male 5,094
Gerry1of1: That just points out the silliness of those laws as well.
0
Reply
Male 39,533

jtrebowski, "why shouldn`t they"

If I walk around with my pants around my knees I`m arrested for indecent exposure or public lewdness or some other charge. How is sagging your pants below your ass different?
0
Reply
Male 3,369
gerry1of1: " Waiting for the ACLU to step in"

Why shouldn`t they? What`s next? Visible bra straps?
0
Reply
Male 5,094
Isn`t that law fundamentally illegal? "Freedom of expression"?
0
Reply
Male 55
Yay! Now were making laws about fashion! I <3 less freedom!
0
Reply
Male 39,533

Waiting for the ACLU to step in
0
Reply
Male 20,825
Link: Louisiana City Bans Saggy Pants [Rate Link] - I, for one, am all for this law and hope the rest of America--nay, the world--adopts this law.
0
Reply