Gestalt Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Ban on sagging pants...but is it more than that? Local Leaders in my community have decided to issue an ordinance that prohibits wearing pants more than 3 inches off the hip... any violation is punished by a $50 dollar fine-- effective immediately. Wait, wait, WATE, they can do that? Public officials can tell me how to wear my clothes? I thought dress codes were for shcool NOT an entire city. I guess what they're getting at is that members of gangs usually sag their pants BUT what if gang members start wearing bright orange T-shirts does that mean my town will start banning bright orange Tees? It seems like too much power to me... This also raises several sterotyping issues about judging people off of how they were their clothes; And who excatly is the authorty that issues the fine and whether or not they would fine their enemies but not their friends. What do you think about goverment telling you how NOT to dress? UPDATE: the fine is doubled for every offense (ex. first=$50; second=$100; third=$200...and so on) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarita Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 They already do that. There's an ordinance in my city that you can't wear stilettos on Airport Blvd. There's a good reason for it, because there are metal grates around the trees, and you might get stuck, fall, then sue the city. More often than not there's usually a "cover our asses" reason cities make these kinds of rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arashikage Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 But what's the purpose for banning low sagging pants? Would someone really be able to sue the city for tripping on their pant leg? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavemonkynick Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Personally I think its more about people covering up their asses when in public. Plus the thing about the sagging pants thing is it started in prisons as a way for inmates to covertly tell other inmates that they were intrested in "intercorse". Its no wonder the city wants to keepthat stuff off the streats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Personally I think its more about people covering up their asses when in public. Plus the thing about the sagging pants thing is it started in prisons as a way for inmates to covertly tell other inmates that they were intrested in "intercorse". Its no wonder the city wants to keepthat stuff off the streats. That's an urban myth. It originated in prisons, yes, but because belts weren't allowed due to the fact that inmates were using them to kill themselves or hurt others. It had nothing to do with sex. Read this. Sagging looks dumb as hell, but so do painted wolf t-shirts, these onesie things that were apparently all the rage in Norway, and everything that ever existed in the 80's. There were no bans against these and there shouldn't be. Blaming clothes for gang activity or basically any other bad behaviour is an idiotic sentiment I thought only existed in the minds of the fine gentlemen behind films like Mazes & Monsters. And hey, this is all starting to sound kind of familiar. The only form of clothing related law I can sort of agree with is saying, like, it's illegal to drive a car while wearing a mask or something, because it reduces visibility. This goes for any occupation-related dress code too, where it's a matter of practicality and not sensationalism over the stupid way a dude wears his pants that probably will be out of fashion in another five years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 My answer was going to be PSSHH! Pants! Who needs them? But now that I see the actual topic poll, I almost agree with your community leaders, at least as far as baggy pants goes. Don't need to see some guy's ass hanging out of his pants (and all five pears of boxers that they seem to wear). That is, unless this image is correct. But then, as far as a community dress code? Nah. I think that people should be able to wear what they want, within reason. There was actually a thread a while ago where we were discussing whether or not women should be allowed to go topless, which I supported. I think dras actually headed that one up. I wonder if females find guy's asses hanging out of their pants sexy or something? That's pretty much the only valid reason to wear your pants like that. On a side note, have any of you seen the guys who buy shorts like 12 sizes too big, so they end up being huge pants down to a guy's ankles? Every time I see that, I just wonder what the fuh they're doing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I wonder if females find guy's asses hanging out of their pants sexy or something? That's pretty much the only valid reason to wear your pants like that. Hell, son, with the parachutes these boys call "boxers" there isn't even any ass to be seen. Also, (and all five pears of boxers that they seem to wear) :trollface: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 (and all five pears of boxers that they seem to wear) Pears Pears PEARS FUCK /grammar nazi seppuku Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vy'drach Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Don't like the government trying to do shit like this, but I also wouldn't lament seeing less wanna-be gang bangers with their pants at half mast. I'm with Foxworthy with what he says at 5:45 in this video. Though I do believe there is the matter of hygiene in this situation, as well. I'd rather not sit somewhere that someone else was sitting with only boxers at best between the seat and their ass crack. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Hygiene is kind of bizarre reasoning. Would you sit next to a girl wearing a skirt? Would you shake hands with someone? A part of your body (hopefully) thoroughly cleaned every time it's, ah, used, is probably no more unhygienic than your fingers, which are in contact with who-knows-what throughout the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thu'um Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 idk, there is a certain point were how you dress should be moderated. For But baggy pants? Well i see no harm in less some serious crack is exposed LOL. it doesn't look and i wouldn't do it but banning baggy pants :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vy'drach Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Hygiene is kind of bizarre reasoning. Would you sit next to a girl wearing a skirt? Would you shake hands with someone? A part of your body (hopefully) thoroughly cleaned every time it's, ah, used, is probably no more unhygienic than your fingers, which are in contact with who-knows-what throughout the day. Long skirt, no problem. Mini-skirt, no problem to sit next to, but like the pants pulled down on guys, preferrably not sit in the same place. With the handshake thing, there is the tradition of the handshake being a form of greeting or a way to mark an agreement coming to a close with a deal. The tradition of the low-hung pants is "hurr durr, i iz rapper, fear me!" And even with the handshake, I wash my hands, as there is mystery as to what the hands have done. With one's posterior, however, there is an unescapable voodoo that they do, which is enough. Anything beyond that is just more incentive to not want to sit in the same place. Also, the hygiene matter wasn't my creation, it just tends to be the most common complaint I hear of the style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I dunno, the most common complaint *I* hear is that it's dumb-looking, which definitely seems to be your primary reasoning with how you keep going back to it. "Hygiene" is grasping at straws. Even if you can see the guy's boxers there's no reason for the outside cloth to be dirtier than the parts actually in contact with any naughty bits. I'm also a little skeptical that you wash your hands every time you shake hands with someone, and the fact that it's a common greeting doesn't magically make it more hygienic, and there are plenty of disgustingly filthy-looking people who are fully clothed head-to-toe. City transit ftw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmony Descent Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlow Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Well, even though I think a ban out fo a work place it's a bit absurd... There's gotta be some use of logic of what looks good on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticQuery Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Baggy pants, when low enough, can pose a serious safety-hazard IMO. Just yesterday I was walking through the local 7-11 and I saw someone sagging their pants, with a belt on, slightly below their knees. If that person ever had to get anywhere quickly, in the event of a fire for example, they would be at a disadvantage compared to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9Beast Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 i have no idea why your local government would tell you what clothes you cannot wear. they should be removed from office and be replaced with people who spend more time on issues that matter rather than finding stupid ways to limit your freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 conveniently ignores the post where this is proven to be an urban legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vy'drach Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I dunno, the most common complaint *I* hear is that it's dumb-looking, which definitely seems to be your primary reasoning with how you keep going back to it. "Hygiene" is grasping at straws. Even if you can see the guy's boxers there's no reason for the outside cloth to be dirtier than the parts actually in contact with any naughty bits. I'm also a little skeptical that you wash your hands every time you shake hands with someone, and the fact that it's a common greeting doesn't magically make it more hygienic, and there are plenty of disgustingly filthy-looking people who are fully clothed head-to-toe. City transit ftw. Of course I think it's dumb looking. Doesn't mean it also isn't hygienic or that it isn't complained about for being so. Also, if I don't wash my hands with soap and water, I use the disinfectant type stuff. Also, my point wasn't that handshaking is more hygienic, but it actually has a point to it, where as having your pants down does not other than an idiotic fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Yeah but you are more likely to touch your very unhygienic hands to your face than have some gangsta shimmy up to you and rub his boxers over your noggin. The only place that you could concievably share contact somehow is by, to use your example, sitting in the same place, in which case you are also wearing pants so unless the guy had shit himself there really isn't much of a reason to get worked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmony Descent Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 conveniently ignores the post where this is proven to be an urban legend Well, if you don't like it, then you can have someone delete it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Um, pardon? That's not how it works. You posted an image macro with false information in a debate topic...it isn't a matter of "don't like it delete it bloo bloo bloo". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarita Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 But what's the purpose for banning low sagging pants? Would someone really be able to sue the city for tripping on their pant leg? Baggy pants, when low enough, can pose a serious safety-hazard IMO. Just yesterday I was walking through the local 7-11 and I saw someone sagging their pants, with a belt on, slightly below their knees. If that person ever had to get anywhere quickly, in the event of a fire for example, they would be at a disadvantage compared to others. That was the point I was trying to make. It's a safety hazard. Or hell if I know, take your pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psygonis Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 As long as there is something under the pants, I guess it's just about looking dumb and being unable to run (something even more silly in a country where looking like a gangsta is enough to be repeatedly approached by the police! ). Maybe they were too many false positives between the police and locals wearing pants that way so now, they just ban it. ^_^ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlow Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 As long as there is something under the pants, I guess it's just about looking dumb and being unable to run (something even more silly in a country where looking like a gangsta is enough to be repeatedly approached by the police! ). Maybe they were too many false positives between the police and locals wearing pants that way so now, they just ban it. Well, I heard that in France and Belgium, clothes that cover your full face have been recently banned (Not only the muslim-type) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts