“In the south Chicago suburb of Lynwood, village leaders have passed an ordinance that would levy $25 fines against anyone showing three inches or more of their underwear in public. [In Jasper South Carolina, a "proposed ordinance ... carries a maximum penalty of $500 and 30 days in jail."]
“In Flint, Michigan, the city’s police chief has directed his officers to arrest people wearing pants or shorts below their waists or buttocks, and issue misdemeanours, citing the city’s disorderly conduct and indecent exposure laws.”
“And in Riviera Beach, Florida, local police are now able to act on the so-called ’saggy pants (trousers)’ law, that was put on the books in March. ”It’s going to be a new day, a great day,” Riviera Beach Mayor Thomas Masters told WPTV-Ch 5.” (Source.)
Lynwood police may have little to do, as the town has only had three murders since 1999. Sure, go check some pants. The overall crime rate in Riviera Beach, Florida, however, is 2.7 times the national average. In Flint, the rate of violent crime is twice the national average; the murder rate is three times higher. Flint and Riviera Beach cops are likely too busy to play fashion police.
At least the three-inch test is easy to conduct, if a waste of time. In the 1950s, to combat the dreaded Teddy-Boy menace, the Oxford (UK) city council debated banning “persons wearing exaggerated Edwardian styles of dress” from dances. That would have been trickier to enforce, I imagine.
In my neighborhood, Washington Heights (Manhattan), my young male neighbors would not pass the three-inch test. They look like this. No one seems offended. Indeed, the girls seem to think its kinda hot.
For another perspective, see Dooney Da’ Priest, “Pull Your Pants Up.”
that is totally rediculus… i remember this, i feel as though if woman can walk around with see through shirts revealing their bras then why cant a guy reveal his boxer/briefs. it is an attempt to take away individual expression. its their prerogative!
Comment by Desiree Granby — March 21, 2009 @ 10:30 am |