Why are they so concerned about what other people are wearing? And how can it be a "major concern" as the sponsor of the law says? Aren't there more important things to do, which really need some solutions? If we have laws like this, then we don't have the right to say anything about women being forced to wear burkas.

The poll at http://www.cbs46.com/news/13955560/detail.html is probably as scientific as the recent poll at cnn.com about religion/atheism, but the results show a majority in favour of such a law.
57% Yes
27% No
16% Who cares?

Answer to the problem:  Go Commando

 

These people are self-selecting themselves out of existence.  I cannot imagine who would employ them.  So, let them wear their saggy pants.   Perhaps,  a bus will hit them for crossing too slowly.

Today my city newspaper headline is:

Shreveport City Council to consider saggy pants ban

With low-hanging shorts hiding under a long shirt, Earnest Wright talks about what could be called trouble brewing.

"It's just a reason for the law to mess with us," said Wright, 24. "It's made specifically for us. As soon as they see you sagging, they'll run your name. ... There's going to be a lot of trouble."

Walking inside the downtown city bus station, Wright couldn't stop talking about the proposed rule banning sagging pants that goes before Shreveport City Council today as other young black men chimed in on what they called a ridiculous proposal.
But others used similar words to describe sagging, the fashion of wearing pants low off the hips, and thongs peeking from pants. The law would apply to men and women.

"That looks nasty," said 15-year-old Nicole Nash, adding that it isn't trendy anymore. "I wouldn't wear my drawers like that."

The rule, proposed by Councilman Calvin Lester, would make it unlawful for any person to appear in public wearing pants below the waist that expose skin or undergarments.

Some people think such a rule is long overdue as youngsters sporting the trend flash their underwear from low-rise jeans and sagging pants. Yet others think the proposal unfairly targets a certain group of people for their clothing choice and allows the government to tread into territory in which it has no place.

Others say Shreveport police, the ones who'd enforce the law, have more important issues to address.

"The goal of the ordinance is to correct a behavior of young people in general, to correct a behavior that has gotten out of control," Lester said, adding he has gotten support from across ethnic lines. "As a legislator you help correct a problem wherever it exists.

"I'm concerned that if certain patterns of behavior go unchecked, it leads to negative consequences," he said. "I think we've constructed an ordinance that deals with the issue and does not violate free speech."

If council members green light the proposed rule, anyone convicted of violations could face on first offense a fine of up to $25, or up to $100 if an amendment gets the OK, and up to one eight-hour day picking up trash or other court-appointed community service activities.

Repeated violations could result in a fine of up to $250 and up to four eight-hour days of community service.

"If that ... happens, we all (messed) up," Wright said, adding he doesn't have the money to pay fines. "I'm sagging, but you can't see my boxers."

Lake Charles gave the thumbs up earlier this month to an ordinance that mandates "pants worn by any person, regardless of age, be size appropriate and secured at the waist to prevent the pants from falling below the hips and causing any indecent exposure of his or her person or undergarments."

Parents get hit with a fine of $25 to $250 if a juvenile violates the ordinance, and both parents and the children could end up with community service.

But the city hasn't started enforcing it yet, said Lake Charles Police Chief Donald Dixon, who voiced concerns about enforcement before the ordinance was passed by council members.

Violating the law is a civil offense, but police could be forced to arrest someone if they refuse to sign a ticket, Dixon said. If someone failed to show up in court, would a bench warrant be issued for their arrest? Will police be required to go to court to testify, take photos to back their case and file offense reports?

"No one has answered those questions yet," he said. "We're kind of in a stand-by-and-wait attitude. "» I'll need some clarity from the city prosecutor."

If police are required to go to court, Dixon said he didn't foresee a whole lot of tickets being given.

Lafourche Parish has a similar law that took effect Aug. 10. However, no citations had been issued for violating that law as of Friday as the district attorney reviews the ordinance to determine if it's constitutionally sound, said Larry Weidel, a spokesman for the Lafourche Parish sheriff's office.

As the Lafourche Parish law is written, a woman could end up with a fine or community service if her bra strap is visible.

The ordinance makes it unlawful for any person to be nude, or partially nude, or in dress not becoming to his or her sex, or in any indecent exposure of his or her person or undergarments, in public.

First-time offenders face a fine of up to $50. The second offense results in a $100 fine with subsequent offenses being punishable by a $100 fine plus 16 hours of community service.

"It's going to be so difficult to enforce," Weidel said. "We worry about our plumbers, bathing beauties. ... We're concerned about how far this can go."

Enforcement of that law is being withheld until better definitions are given, he said, noting other existing laws on the books are being used.

Obscenity laws already exist in Louisiana. That's one reason the American Civil Liberties Union questions the need for anti-sagging laws.

"We haven't litigated this because it's brand new. We haven't seen this enforced anywhere," said Katie Schwartzmann, staff attorney for ACLU's state office.

But the nonprofit organization, known for stepping in to guard Americans' freedoms, has opinions on what Schwartzmann called a ridiculous ordinance.

"We live in a country where we operate from the basic premise that people are free to live their lives as they want," Schwartzmann said. "That's what we pride ourselves on as Americans. ... This is really a quintessential example of government overreaching into an area in which they have no business."

She wondered what would come next — a ban on the color black, the color of hairstyles. Others questioned whether cleavage and exposed stomachs would come next.

If the Shreveport rule gets approval, violators would land in city court.

Caddo Parish District Attorney Paul Carmouche likes the idea of the proposed rule, but he assumed there would be a number of attacks claiming the rule may be unconstitutional or vague, he said.

"What causes the violation? How low do the pants have to be — those sorts of things," he said. "It's going to be a difficult law to enforce as far as legal challenges brought up in court."

Julie Glass, assistant city attorney for Shreveport, said she has looked into the legality of the proposed rule. People might try to challenge such an ordinance on vagueness, but "this one is very succinct," she said. "I don't really think that will be a problem."

If Ruby Hensley's teenage son ever got caught wearing sagging pants that show his underwear, he would be paying the fine, not her, she said.

"It's inappropriate," she said.

But her son, 19-year-old Jonathan Hensley, said he doesn't really sag. "I'm classy. I don't sag mine."

Darrell Keaton, 17, who wears sagging pants, said: "It's a free country. You should be able to wear your clothes the way you want ... as long as no one sees your buttocks."

But, LaWarren Brown, a Shreveport parent, asked, "Who in their right mind wants to walk around showing their underwear?"

It shows your character, and those who do it are stereotyped by some, he added. "I think it should become a law if it gets to a point where it becomes indecent exposure."

Lester couldn't recall an issue that has sparked so much conversation in the public lately.

"All of this has spawned conversation and I think it's good. ... Our youth are very important, and the way they develop is something we all have interest in."

 

 

 

 

 

http://tinyurl.com/33nzal

 

 

Win. 

Gauche, I'm absolutely crushed. 

While I loathe staring at a piece of string wedged up some chick's butt, my real complaint is the 'muffin top', or the fat roll that spills over the top of the jeans and often hangs out from under midriff tops.  

Regardless, while I might be muttering off color things about these people under my breath, I will still defend their right to dress like total fucking twatwaffles.  

I always thought that baggy pants showed a load of shit in them!

I wonder if they'll go after the young girls when they're sunbathing.

Or men in Speedos.

If I lived in one of those communities, I'd be pretty upset if I called 9-1-1 because someone was breaking into my house and the police couldn't come because they were busy arresting someone for a Fashion Felony.