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.

 

Judge: Riviera Beach 'saggy pants' ban unconstitutional

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Judge: Riviera Beach 'saggy pants' ban unconstitutional


www.palmbeachpost.com

A judge says Riviera Beach's "saggy pants" law is unconstitutional in the case of a 17-year-old who spent a night in jail for having his underwear showing.

And a public defender said her office wants to get the law tossed altogether.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Ohhh thank God some sanity has finally been restored, however briefly. It appears that there are still judges that actually recognise the constitution. Let's all hope this becomes a trend... giving us back our civil liberties.........nahhhh.

www.palmbeachpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Haha, that is a crazy law, kind of like the 'male crotch scratching ban' in Rome. Glad to see that some of the Judges in the US still have some common sense.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Not an issue unless there is indecent exposure involved....

I personally like saggy pants.....you can see if they have a gun.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Guess which guy is going to jail?






This is getting a little rediculous.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by cbass]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I cringe when I see people with saggy pants....

I'm waiting for this fad to die a long over due and sad death.

Police objected to the law because they said it helped them catch and tackle the people that they were after....



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
The pigs love stupid laws like this; it gives them the chance to make easy busts for no risk, harrassing kids. The elitists that live there, the rich phonies, hate anything that interferes with the country club atmosphere they live with...sick. The voters are jerks.

The pigs are delighted to harrass kids, and the filthy prosecutors are glad to bother people with UN Constitutional crap like this. They KNEW before it was ever voted on that it was illegal...a bad law. But of course the victims like the kid have to go thru the system before it gets tossed.

The pig that arrested the kid is a scumbag and should be shamed..but cops have no shame. The politicians kissing the rich peoples rear ends should be asahmed, but politicians have no shame. The prosecutors should be ashamed, but of course prosecutors have ZERO shame about hasslinmg anyone that the pigs arest...they are in lock step. Makes one want to puke...injustice.

If one had enough money wouldn't it be fun to go around getting bad laws thrown out and the people responsible shamed in public and ruined by publicity? This is a typical case of rich people getting their way, even tho it is UNConstitutional..and all the money spent and nonsense...all for a bad law..what a shame.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Hurrah.. No more fashion Police *pulls crotch of pants down to knee level*



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
who'da thought the land of the free would have such a strict dress code!

fashion police, literally!



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Don't get me wrong, I think that people who wear their pants that way look rediculous and are probly in need of a good @$$whoppin but, we don't need to get the police/criminal justice system involved.

As was posted earlier, We literally have fashion police now!!!
One has to ask ones self, If it were legitimate shorts being worn underneath those pants, would you still get arrested?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Just to defend the odd one or two of us here that arn't old farts.... lol have you ever tried skateboarding in tight pants ???? Dosn't quite work my old bean.....


So there is a reason for a few of us to do it....... lol the other's are just straight up bell-ends that wish they were black americans.......



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:08 PM
link   
i personally think they should fine them.
not lock them up.

my 6 year old should not have to ask why is that guy showing me his underwear!!!


[edit on 16-9-2008 by beforetime]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by beforetime
i personally think they should fine them.
my 6 year old should not have to ask why is that guy showing me his underwear!!!

Wow. Hypocritical.

So what are you going to do when your 6 year old asks why people are in their underware at a beach or at a swimming pool or anywhere near the coast on a warm day? Are you going to fine every one of them?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by beforetime
 


YOu should not have to aswer your six year old when they ask "Mommy/Daddy why does that girl have purple hair?"
But you do have to answer> It is called being a parent. Or should we lock up people who dye thier ha.......ohhhh God help us all, that's where this is going isn't it? We are going to start locking up anyone who refuses to play their proper roles in society. It will be the good ol 1950's all over again.
Everyone will look,act,speak,and believe the same or elese.......



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Someone explain to me how this law is unconstitutional.

It's just a city ordinance, and the state, county, and city have the right under the constitution of the United States (and State constitution), Article 10, to enact and enforce their own laws as long as those laws are not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited by the constitution. They are "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

It was left up to a vote, and the people of the city "approved the law in March by a 72 percent tally." The people wanted it.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 07:28 AM
link   
sorry
if you allow people to walk around showing there underwer...not here swimming trunk's.
big difference

we might as well say it's ok to go in public with nothing but our tidy whitey's on.

it's no different.

and yes i shouldn't have to explain to my 6 year old why it's ok to go around showing people your underwear.

instead i explain it's wrong to go in public to offend other's in any way shape or form.
be respectful .
and showing little kid's you underwear IS NOT respectful



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I`m sorry, but why is this judge using the constitution as a way of putting this down? Why is it, our government lets the Federal Reserve exist, when in itself is unconstitutional? But like the gun law issue, they use it to ok guns, which in my view, we should. Why are they using it only in certain cases? Do they do this as a way to make us feel that they still support and defend it? I`m sorry, I don`t buy this at all. If they are going to use it, be consistant, not just when it supports their whims.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by FiatLux]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Everybody loves the Constitution. I have to laugh at all the ass clowns in the baggy pants though. I saw a kid riding a bike the other day with his pants at the bottom of his ass cheeks. I give a million to one odds he will not be gainfully employed when he is thirty years old.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Want to stop young males from wearing baggy pants? Explain to them where that "fad" came from.

The "trend" of wearing pants where your underwear is exposed comes from the California Penal System. It was started by guys to let other guys know they were sexually available in the prison system.

I usually put it to the young males in very crude terms (which would violate the T&C here) so I shall rephrase it.

"Baggy pants were started so that guys in prison could let other guys know they wanted to be (blanked) up the (blank)."

Haven't yet had a kid that didn't immediately pull up his pants.


That having been said, it was Jefferson who said ""In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by beforetime
 

" my 6 year old should not have to ask why is that guy showing me his underwear!!! "

OR.....................................

my 6 year old should not have to ask why is that.......girl kissing that girl

my 6 year old should not have to ask why is that......man holding hands with that man

my 6 year old should not have to ask why is ....... smoke coming out of that persons mouth.

No offence but you can take offence at everything if you are so inclined.

6 year olds ask questions .........get over it .

Consider it an opportunity to inform them of the world they live in , and perhaps, heaven forbid ......that we are not all the same.


edit;add a word/

[edit on 17-9-2008 by UmbraSumus]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by UmbraSumus]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join