It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Louisiana debates 'Saggy pants' law after man shoots himself

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: KansasGirl
How do they determine when pants cross over from relaxed or loose into "saggy?"


Lol, seriously? Surely you can tell the difference between pants sitting at your waistline and pants that are below your butt cheeks. This isn't about loose pants.


Yeah, seriously. Where does "saggy"'start? So, "pants that are below your buttcheeks" is what you say. So are pants that sit just above, or at the butttcheeks acceptable? What part of the buttcheeks?

I know you replied "lol" and all to my question, but it's a valid question. So IS there definite wording in the law that defines when pants are "saggy?"

The point is that it's subjective, and what's to stop a bad cop from using the saggy pants thing as a reason for stopping someone who is otherwise not doing anything wrong? If there are definite guidelines for "saggy" then great, but if not, I see the potential for abuse there.




posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018



When your pants are sagging, it's very easy to detect without suspicion. He was also armed and considered dangerous.

Open carry state, yeah?
So if your gun shows 'cuz your pants sag then you are "armed and considered dangerous."



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xcalibur254

People get smacked in the head with padlocks, in certain segments of society, for wearing MAGA hats. Is that the road you would rather take for sagging pants as well?

You're really moving the goalposts here.


You're equating citizens committing crimes on other citizens to local governments making laws about how clothing is worn..... While complaining someone moved the goal posts.

I'll give you a pass for being dizzy, I am too.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

Thank you for the clarification.

I thought he was running away from the police who tried to arrest him or something because of his 'saggy pants' and they then shot him.

After reading your post and re-reading the OP I now understand, seems my comprehension skills were a bit off there.

Still, it is a very stupid law.....and a ridiculous looking style.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

In that case there is a victim. Who is victimized by someone wearing loose pants?



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: LSU2018

What makes underwear indecent?
It covers the skin doesn't it?

This is nothing but a stop and frisk in disguise
It has nothing to do with decency.

I actually gamed the system in high school by wearing gym shorts underneath my jeans. I could sag all I wanted to then.


The fact that they're underwear. Do you think people can walk around in their underwear without being indecent? Seeing the waistband of the underwear won't get you a ticket, it's when you can see the entire ass of the underwear that gets you noticed because it's obscene.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Lumenari

Like I said, public indecency is very subjective. A MAGA hat in a place like San Francisco could be considered very offensive. If the town council passed an ordinance that outlawed MAGA hats due to public indecency would you support that law?

.


Dude, you need to quit with the dumb MAGA hat example.

It doesn't compare, because hats don't cover your ass and your genitals.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Seeing just the top isn't considered sagging. You're only being ridiculous because you probably think this is just a way to target black people.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Woodcarver

Thank you for the clarification.

I thought he was running away from the police who tried to arrest him or something because of his 'saggy pants' and they then shot him.

After reading your post and re-reading the OP I now understand, seems my comprehension skills were a bit off there.

Still, it is a very stupid law.....and a ridiculous looking style.


This is where I got hung up too. As usual, I didn't think it through before commenting. Lol.

It does seem like a silly law, however, the law is really not the issue with the story, or the man's death.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Jefferton

He died because his gun went off and blasted his chest while the gun got jarred around in his loose, sagging pants as he ran from the police. So in a way, you're absolutely right.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018


Seeing the waistband of the underwear won't get you a ticket, it's when you can see the entire ass of the underwear that gets you noticed because it's obscene.


Chicks here walk around in Yoga pants, better not try and make that illegal. What's the difference between spandex glorified pantyhose and boxers?



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: KansasGirl

People are wearing saggy jeans as underwear?



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   
What if the waistband of his underwear had MAGA on it, and then he wore sagging pants in San Francisco?

We could get quite hyperbolic and come up with more outrageous examples I'm sure.

However, the fact remains this man was a known criminal, illegally brandishing a firearm, that he was not legally allowed to carry. Ad while running from police, accidentally shot himself in the chest with his own illegal firearm due to his sagging pants.

Just the latest Darwin Award nominee IMO. And his skin color is irrelevant as well.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Lumenari

Like I said, public indecency is very subjective. A MAGA hat in a place like San Francisco could be considered very offensive. If the town council passed an ordinance that outlawed MAGA hats due to public indecency would you support that law?

Can you honestly give me one good reason why the government should be able to dictate what we wear? I mean other than the fact that certain clothing (or lack thereof) might offend those people that still cling to our Puritanical roots like a life raft.


No, I wouldn't support it, just like I wouldn't support a ban on hats or clothing that say "hope and change" because it's a retarded far cry from the waistline of your pants being below the cheeks of your ass. I figured something this easy would be bipartisan but I'm not surprised in this Twilight Zone country the left have managed to create.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:36 AM
link   
There have been so many MAGA references!

Drinking game anyone?




posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jefferton
There have been so many MAGA references!


Drinking game anyone?




MAGA

MAGA

MAGA



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Jefferton
There have been so many MAGA references!


Drinking game anyone?




MAGA

MAGA

MAGA



It's a party now.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   
So let me get this straight, there would be no issue if these people weren't wearing underwear under their saggy pants as an expression of their freedom?

Would this be acceptable if a girl was wearing a thong or g-string or nothing with her jeans/shorts down to below her a$$ cheeks?

At what age would this be OK to even start?

Somehow, I think that this is easily taken to far tp push the envelope and we will give in due to feelz and the old "what about their freedom of expression!!!"... wow..just wow.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: UpIsNowDown

Did you bother reading the story, or even the title? The law doesn't state what you can "where," it states that you have to have your waistline at your waist and not below your butt cheeks. At that point, it becomes "illigal" and will get you a ticket. You only get arrested if you run from the cops, and you only get shot when your gun jiggles around in your pants and goes off (because it's cocked and loaded) and hits you in the chest.

Should we make speeding legal, too? Excessive noise? Domestic violence? Battery? Theft?



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You can't walk around in a short skirt that shows your underwear either.







 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join