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: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 06:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
I am amazed that there are people who support the idea of government being able to tell you what to wear!

All because people are offended... lol... must be tiring to be so offended all the time.


I for one am really offended.

I'm offended that I can see the backs of women's knees and elbows, also their wrists and hair. I think someone in the government should mandate that they wear some sort of covering that masks all these exposed parts so the sexual energy they release doesn't make me go all loopy and off the reservation. I wish there was something out there that someone invented that would do the trick because I'm an offended puritan.




posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 06:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: CriticalStinker

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


Ok, now my instincts of maleness say who are you buddy...


The fact now is swim suit level exposure of men and women is acceptable anywhere in most places.

Office standards at work standards of leisure everywhere else in public spaces.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 06:30 AM
link   
Personally? I blame David "Stringbean" Akeman for starting this whole thing.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: KansasGirl

The Saggy Pants Law is an ordinance making it illegal for any person to appear in a public place wearing pants below the waist and exposing the skin or undergarments.

It's only a $50.00 fine for a first offense and $100.00 fine for the second offense and every subsequent offense thereafter.


Ok, I think being a middle of the road person that I am I can see both sides.

LESS GOV answer is what the lefty's want this time.

Logic says we are at the slippery slope on this one and will be giving a MORE gov answer to a 'problem'.

I vote LESS Gov rule over my life and LSU, you do too. I see it in the posts you make.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 06:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: BoscoMoney
Personally? I blame David "Stringbean" Akeman for starting this whole thing.


That goes way back on Mr Peabody's Wayback Machine!

He and Mr Green Jeans are both fond memories of childhood. Stringbean on Hee Haw that my mom watched and I suffered but for Stringbean and a few other comedians.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

I haven't touched on the part of the discussion that relates to the man that allegedly caused this discussion, but since probed, I'll be honest.

As someone who enters a different mindset when handling firearms in any way, this guy (assuming he shot himself) was an utter dumbass, and the only thing he deserves is a Darwin award.

That said, I can see the law for what it is, and I think you and I are in agreement on that.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: LSU2018

Obscene?..get f'ing real, dumb..yes!


Obscene - disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency.

You might find that wearing your pants below your ass is an accepted standard of morality or decency, but many people do not.


It does come off as overbearing for public even if it looks bad for them. It looks like what happens in Turkey or Afghanistan to those without their submissive slave headdress on properly.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
I am amazed that there are people who support the idea of government being able to tell you what to wear!

All because people are offended... lol... must be tiring to be so offended all the time.


I for one am really offended.

I'm offended that I can see the backs of women's knees and elbows, also their wrists and hair. I think someone in the government should mandate that they wear some sort of covering that masks all these exposed parts so the sexual energy they release doesn't make me go all loopy and off the reservation. I wish there was something out there that someone invented that would do the trick because I'm an offended puritan.


I too am tired of being in a constant state of "hot and bothered".

I think what you speak of would help the crime rate too, along with stoning those who do not comply.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Why do you think this law should exist in the first place? What gives any government the right to dictate what their citizens wear?


Generally speaking i agree with you, i think that we should have the minimum of laws that we can get away with and still function as a society.

BUT i also think that we need to maintain public decency. imagine if you had - as many of us here do - young daughters.

I personally dont want any child of mine to be exposed to young men with their pants slung 2/3s down their backside.

some basic standards need to be set.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Why do you think this law should exist in the first place? What gives any government the right to dictate what their citizens wear?


Generally speaking i agree with you, i think that we should have the minimum of laws that we can get away with and still function as a society.

BUT i also think that we need to maintain public decency. imagine if you had - as many of us here do - young daughters.

I personally dont want any child of mine to be exposed to young men with their pants slung 2/3s down their backside.

some basic standards need to be set.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
I too am tired of being in a constant state of "hot and bothered".

I think what you speak of would help the crime rate too, along with stoning those who do not comply.


This thread has everything someone who appreciates irony could ever enjoy, particularly the triggered marys asking the government to save them in the name of the most overused trope of all time: thinking of the children.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

i think that maybe were debating the wrong question.

a better question would be why do the police feel the need to shoot a fleeing suspect? Wouldnt a better solution be to let him run, and then to pick him up at his home or one of his usual hangouts when there is less danger of a bystander being injured

Or simply to chase him down until he runs out of breath and can be easily arrested, shootinng at him in public place seems overkill.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: AaarghZombies

But where do you draw the line? Should women be required to start wearing non-form fitting clothing or clothing that doesn't show off any cleavage because it might get the young men all excited? Do we need to start banning two-piece bathing suits for women, while men need to start wearing the singlets of the past?

There's plenty of other clothes out there that leave way less to the imagination. Where's the outrage over all of them? While I can't make any claim one way or another to the rationale behind this law, it does seem like it targets a specific subset of the population.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254


I think we should all just dress like the Amish.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: AaarghZombies

I agree... no genitals in public! We need to define some standards.

So my level of acceptable public exposure is a minimum of a c-string and nipple tassels for a woman (though I'm not 100% on the need for tassels, as I don't think nipples fall under the genital category, and men can show their nipples... so...) and to keep consistent nipple policy, a man-kini for a man.

Agreed?

I would much rather my children learn not to be ashamed of nudity, be confident within themselves and see more public expressions of nudity within media in general, than the constant bombardment of violence and doom that the media currently delivers to us.
edit on 13-6-2019 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: LSU2018

i think that maybe were debating the wrong question.

a better question would be why do the police feel the need to shoot a fleeing suspect? Wouldnt a better solution be to let him run, and then to pick him up at his home or one of his usual hangouts when there is less danger of a bystander being injured

Or simply to chase him down until he runs out of breath and can be easily arrested, shootinng at him in public place seems overkill.


HE SHOT HIMSELF... Darwin award according to CriticalS and me too.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Thats funny! Only because it is indecent huh? I guess thats why women are allowed to exercise their sexuality by wearing nothing but pasties or paint over there genitalia, because of this societal double standard I would agree that this law is just a gateway to arrest more of the black community.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Going to the beach must be a horrifying experience for the OP, and the poor children



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

huh. I'm just as mystified as you. Maybe I was trying to reply to someone else? I don't know, I was pretty hammered last night.

Oh, yeah, the answer to your question is that they don't. They're constantly having to pull them back up.



posted on Jun, 13 2019 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: CriticalStinker

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


Ok, now my instincts of maleness say who are you buddy...


The fact now is swim suit level exposure of men and women is acceptable anywhere in most places.

Office standards at work standards of leisure everywhere else in public spaces.


Hey I don't make the rules.







 
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join