Should Mecklenburg County ban "saggy pants"?

[atlrvr 3269]

http://www.charlotte.com/109/story/285415.html

In today's Charlotte observer, there is an article about a preacher that asked the County Commissioners this week to ban the wearing of pants sagging, which I assumed is defined as showing off underwear or skin in the absence of underwear.

Bill James loved the idea and said he considered making the suggestion himself, Jennifer Roberts thought it sounded difficult to enforce and unnecessary.

The premise is if people dressed more sensibly, then they'll have greater self-respect. I guess something along the lines for school uniforms or work dress codes.

So while I doubt this would ever pass, what does everyone think?

For the record, there is a poll in the Observer that already has 850 votes, and 67% think saggy pants SHOULD be banned.

[Kenneth Disraili-Jean 41]

This is interesting Atlrvr, because the Atlanta City Council,(with all the members banning together in taking the anit-saggy pants stand) is trying right now to make it a law that saggy pants are banned in the city of Atlanta.

Now with the movement showing so much success as it moves through the legal system, Atlanta's suburb of Alpharetta is also trying to pass a law in their city banning saggy pants. I see after I voted that the forumers on Urban Planet don't seem to like saggy pants either.

[dxartist 297]

Yep, that's the last thing I want see is someone's buttcrack or the color or his/her underwear. We get enough of that from plumbers name Floyd

[swh1972 176]

I think they look ridiculous, but passing a law to ban them? That's pretty ridiculous also.

[1979Heel 0]

^^^

Agreed. Time and money would be better sent steering kids away from behavior and role models that result in the wearing of saggy pants. Adults telling kids they look ridiculous by passing laws, no less, just provides incentives for kids to continue looking ridiculous.

[Raintree21 2]

I recall when reading about the article about Atlanta's attempts, they mentioned that in order to not appear to discriminate just against young blacks, that they would also ban any sort of exposure of clothing that could be considered underwear. This would include women wearing sports bras when they go running.

[Neo 199]

I absolutely despise seeing low riding baggy pants, I really wonder how folks keep pants like this from falling down. It is really stupid looking to see someone having to waddle in hopes they won't fall down. As much as I hate them a ban would never happen. This is a free country and when we start limiting what you can or can't wear it goes too far. What I wold like to see is a ban on improper dress in public such as pants that ride so far down that you can see underwear almost in full (this is what I find most ridiculous).

What's the point in wearing clothes like this anyway. Do folks feel their cool because they show their underwear?

[stadtguy 0]

This is a dangerous trend. If we don't like something, ban it. A few precincts in Louisville just voted by referendum to ban liquor and beer sales. The tyranny of the majority is a real concern. In this case (baggy pants), it is a case of fashion determinism. If we just get those kids out of baggy pants, they'll grow up to be investment bankers and doctors. Let's ban rap music, fast food, tube tops and anything with "get'r dun" on it while we're cleaning up society. Burkha anyone?

[Miesian Corners 1464]

Well, if we ban baggy pants to put a check on Charlotte's crack problem, low-rise jeans would be next. There's a guy in my tech writing class whose pubic area shows because the waist of his pants are so low, but they're tight, not baggy. While I personally hate the baggy pants look, the idea of banning them reeks of racism.

[Neo 199]

Doesn't current indecent exposure laws prohibit the wearing of just underwear? If you were to go out in public in just panties and a bra is it illegal to do so? If it is then I also believe sagging pants so much as to the point where your entire underwear is showing should be against the law and considered indecent exposure. It may not be indecent exposure to those doing it, but I certainly believe it is to those who have to witness it. It may not be indecent exposure to wear simply underwear in public, it isn't often that I see that being done so I just assume. Afterall, bikinis aren't much more than simple underwear and that is obviously allowed, but even that isn't something you see when you go to the mall.

[Neo 199]

While I personally hate the baggy pants look, the idea of banning them reeks of racism.

I'm not so sure as it seems pretty equal in my findings. I've seen many latinos, whites, and blacks presenting the entire breadth of their underwear to the public. It may be perceived as racism to some, but it is an issue amongst all races from what I've seen.

[elvigy 0]

I agree with the people saying that banning this is going too far. I think it looks stupid and in my head when I see kids wearing this, I cringe. Sometimes I'll even mumble "pull your pants up for crap's sake". But not too loud, of course.

Anyway, there are always fashion trends that make older (often white) people nervous. Leather jackets in the 50s weren't looked on as the fashion accessory for college bound students. You were trouble, a rebel, maybe a biker, etc.

This knee-jerk impulse to ban things that make us uncomfortable is crazy.

[Kenneth Disraili-Jean 41]

Well it appears that is why Atlanta's government is having so much success right now at getting the saggy pants law passed because they are in fact placing this new ordinance under Atlanta's Indecent Exposure Law.

[atlrvr 3269]

First of all, my opinion is that the dress style itself isn't the cause of any problems, rather the result of problems. If people took pride in themselves, then they wouldn't try to dress in a way that has become synonomous with thug culture (or nerdy suburban kid trying desperately hard to impress people in a shopping mall culture). So what if we banned, them, that doesn't fix the problems, and the people with baggy pants will find a different way to defy accepted decency....perhaps they'll walk around with a cucumber stuffed into really tight jeans.

Besides, for as annoying of a trend as this is, is it much worse than the guy that wears a really low-cut wife beater with an angry bush of chest hair trying to make its escape over the neck hole? Is it much worse than the person that drenches their body is the cheapest most pungent perfume or cologne known to man? Is it worse that some 14 year old girl wearing some slutty innuendo baby-t that says something like "If you're looking for your boyfriend, you should check my bedroom".

There's a lot of offensive things that I don't ever wish to see (maybe I'm sensative), but we can't just go around banning things, because that doesn't cure the problems, and the likely consequence is to make their wearers find a different way "to be noticed".

[elvigy 0]

Then they need to ban tube tops on, how to say this nicely, larger-than-life-size women, and ban wife-beater tank tops on large, pale flabby white guys, etc. I find that just as offensive.

Edit-Haha, just noticed that at the same time I was writing about wife beaters, atlrvr was as well. Maybe we should start a petition? lol

[Raintree21 2]

Doesn't current indecent exposure laws prohibit the wearing of just underwear? If you were to go out in public in just panties and a bra is it illegal to do so? If it is then I also believe sagging pants so much as to the point where your entire underwear is showing should be against the law and considered indecent exposure. It may not be indecent exposure to those doing it, but I certainly believe it is to those who have to witness it. It may not be indecent exposure to wear simply underwear in public, it isn't often that I see that being done so I just assume. Afterall, bikinis aren't much more than simple underwear and that is obviously allowed, but even that isn't something you see when you go to the mall.

[Charlotte_native 0]

My perspective, other than simple freedom that we shouldn't tell people what to wear (I'd like to ban shirts that are too tight on meat-heads), comes from an incident downtown last Spring. Some idiot kids were vandalizing the Holiday Inn and almost got caught onsite. We watched them leave the hotel and the cops arrive just after. Some people on the street pointed the kids out (they were white by the way) and the police started running up 6th (or is it 5th?) to chase them. Two of them didn't really run but one did. He rounded onto Tryon Street and a fairly old policeman jogged to him because the idiot couldn't run -- his pants were to baggy and he had to hold them up. He was running so slow a crowd basically gathered and watched him get arrested. The crowd actually cheered and jeered at his arrest. Good thing we was dressed like he was otherwise he likely would have gotten away. I can only imagine what was going through his head...lose the pants and run in his undies (not looking too cool) or hold on and hope for the best.

[Raintree21 2]

I was thinking of mentioning that. I'd say half the arrests I've seen whether it be in person in Charlotte or on Cops on TV were because the guys pants were falling down and they couldn't run. Baggy pants are helping our police force make arrests! Could they be used instead of house arrest ankle bracelets? I sentence you to wear baggy pants, that way if you do commit a crime, we know you won't get very far.

[Charlotte_native 0]

I think it is funny, as well though probably disturbing to parents, how many preppy kids I see wearing their Abercrombie shorts and pants baggy. Strange and interesting look.

[Neo 199]

Some idiot kids were vandalizing the Holiday Inn and almost got caught onsite. We watched them leave the hotel and the cops arrive just after. Some people on the street pointed the kids out (they were white by the way) and the police started running up 6th (or is it 5th?) to chase them. Two of them didn't really run but one did. He rounded onto Tryon Street and a fairly old policeman jogged to him because the idiot couldn't run -- his pants were to baggy and he had to hold them up. He was running so slow a crowd basically gathered and watched him get arrested. The crowd actually cheered and jeered at his arrest. Good thing we was dressed like he was otherwise he likely would have gotten away. I can only imagine what was going through his head...lose the pants and run in his undies (not looking too cool) or hold on and hope for the best.

Maybe good can come out of allowing this. I'm not for a ban of simply sagging pants, but I am against the indecent exposure it may bring. Some take it to more extremes than others and those are the ones I'm so concerned about. When your pants are literally at your knees then something is wrong, but as I said previously, this is a free country.

[Batou 0]

I think it's stupid to try to dictate what people wear.

[Neo 199]

I think it's stupid to try to dictate what people wear.

There are instances where this is not so stupid. In public schools for example, as far as I know it is indecent to wear saggy pants, Big Johnson shirts, etc. and in this case it should be indecent as it is counter-intuitive to the environment and causes distraction from learning overall.

[PlazaMidwoodGuy 0]

I am 100% for uniforms in public schools (one of my definite conservative streaks) and, believe me, I DETEST the baggy pants look. However, placing a ban on low-slung baggy pants in public will only make it even more tempting for these youngsters to do just that. If there's one sure way to get a teenager to do something, it's to tell him he CAN'T do it.

[Batou 0]

Nah uniforms wont work, heck I remember in jr high they tried in the middle of a year add a new rule to tuck your shirt in which since so many ppl got in trouble because we refused they kinda quit that idea after like a day.

[voyager12 1]

A total waste of time. People are going to wear whatever they want regardless.