Saturday, October 23, 2010

The WAR on Saggy pants still continues today

The war on Saggin Pants has been fought on a large scale since 2007 in large cities in Dallas, Texas and Atlanta Georgia, Trenton, New Jersey, Pine Lawn, Florida, New Orleans, Louisiana, Memphis, Tennessee, Flint, Michigan and New York, Virginia and Georgia has been added with nine other states still struggling with this fashion.
In Dubin, GA, the mayor stated that after having complaints for a year on the saggin pants that he had his city attorney work on researching how other localities were dealing with the problem with backsides being handled and the exposure of a person's buttocks, genital area or undergarments, it has also been concluded that this is a health concern to the wearer of this style as it causes an improper gait. The council members amended the "indecent exposure" to include baggy clothing in the same category as MASTURBATION, FORNICATION AND URINATION IN PUBLIC PLACES. This includes the prohibiting of wearing pants or skirts that expose more than 3 inches below the hips exposing the skin or undergarments, which faces fines up to $200.00 Failure to use a belt to secure one's clothing in Dublin will result with the violator being issued a citation and penalties that could include a $25.00 on the first offense and $200.00 for each subsequent offense as well as court-ordered community service as it is according to this new law. In Fort Pierce, Florida, Commissioner Reggie Sessions, wants to make history with the ordinance by cleaning up disrespectful and indecent clothing styles.
Atlanta City's Councilman C.T. Martin, stated that he proposed a saggy pants law because " he is tired of seeing kids and young black men wearing their pants down around their knees."
Jasper County, SC, the Jasper County council passed an ordinance that prohibits anyone wearing pants more than 3 inches below the hips exposing the skin or undergarments. This will be enforced by Jasper County Sheriff's office, municipal police officers and the Jasper County administrator.
Nashville, Tennessee is the first state to that will issue a fine of $250.00 and 160 hours of community service for wearing pants below the person's waistline that exposes the person's undergarments or bare buttocks. Flint, Michigan, where the former Chief of Police David Dicks, crusaded bravely against droopy pants at a time when Flint had the third-highest homicide rate in the nation. In Riviera Beach, Fla, a judge found the ordinance there unconstitutional after a teenager spent a night in jail when he was arrested for exposing to much of his undergarments.
In all that is happening with forecloses, high-rate of unemployment and homelessness and children and adults going to bed hungry and of course one of the biggest things is that we owe China several trillion dollars, it is nice to know that our law-makers have the time to concentrate on taking freedom of expression away from our youth in their choice of their clothing and forgetting how it was in the 60's and 70's with our freedom of expression in our clothing. And I would like to show that appreciation on each and every election date for youth's to be reminded of their freedom to express themselves being taken away and I do not like the baggy pants hanging off of their behinds, but I do however understand their frustrations and we all kids since the beginning of time have demonstrated it through their music, clothing and hair styles and lack of making good choices in life during that time period of rebellion.
I am confused however how this is so unacceptable
And this has been acceptable for over 40 years or more.
Isn't it time that we decide how we should dress, and if we are going to fine the youth for their manner of attire to pay for schools and books, should not the same fines be imposed on the blue collar worker whose butt is exposed while working to help balance the books in these bankrupt states? More and more we are finding that history has been hid from all of us and that we are all still slaves and have no rights under the constitution not even in the manner of our dress.