Baggy Pants = Jail
- Thread starter Tornado
- 51 comments
- 2,308 views
McLaren
Premium
- 45,637
- Texas
It's not what they're wearing. It's how.
Um, no. I'm pretty sure I could get a lot of signatures and agreements from folks here in Plano who don't want to see it as much as the lawmakers don't.
Skin tight clothing doesn't show off your underwear. It shows off your body, but not anything more. And walking along with no shirts only portrays to men. You'll still see women with most likely, a sports bra on.
Blake
Premium
- 10,976
- NSW, Australia
- haswell00
Wait, so there is someone who actually agrees with this? WTF?
Why does it matter what or how someone wears there clothing? It’s a fashion statement. Yeah, it looks bad, but so does 90% of what people wear. If we removed everything that was offensive to the eye we’d have nothing left in this world.
Why does it matter what or how someone wears there clothing? It’s a fashion statement. Yeah, it looks bad, but so does 90% of what people wear. If we removed everything that was offensive to the eye we’d have nothing left in this world.
- 24,016
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
- 1,202
Show people your dirty underwear.... spend 5 months in the clink.... ruin your chances of getting a good job but at least you learn how to boost cars. I must say 5 months jail (or any jail time) sounds a bit harsh to me for this particular crime.
Personally, I also think the ban itself sounds silly on the face of it, but since there are already laws in place in most countries governing what bits of our bodies can or can't be exposed in public, I don't see this as much more than an alteration to an existing premise. Unless the sentence is very different.
Still, if such a proposal was suggested here, I'd be against it. While I might find the sight of someone's undies particularly unpleasant, I don't think it validates a call to ban the practice. Otherwise, I'd be campaigning to ban people from wearing Liverpool FC shirts
Personally, I also think the ban itself sounds silly on the face of it, but since there are already laws in place in most countries governing what bits of our bodies can or can't be exposed in public, I don't see this as much more than an alteration to an existing premise. Unless the sentence is very different.
Still, if such a proposal was suggested here, I'd be against it. While I might find the sight of someone's undies particularly unpleasant, I don't think it validates a call to ban the practice. Otherwise, I'd be campaigning to ban people from wearing Liverpool FC shirts
- 87,629
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
What was I thinking? You're clearly right - while we're at it we need to ban hooded tops worn with the hood down, baseball caps worn any way except peak forward, sandals worn with socks* and the wearing of any style of shorts which incorporate clearly-defined pleats.
Seriously, man. Read your words back to yourself. We need to spend taxpayers' money to create a law to prevent people wearing certain clothing in a certain way... why?
Does it really boil down to "Because I don't like the way it looks?"
I don't like seeing fat/pregnant girls showing off their gunts (please don't look this word up). I don't like seeing people wearing Sheffield United and Manchester United football shirts. I don't like seeing tramps, shell suits and obviously-placed "bling". I don't like seeing thongs sold for 6 year old girls. I can't see any reason why I must demand my MP tries to force a law through banning these things. They're clothes. It's not the end of civilisation - it's just fashion and fashion will move on - without us having to get all antsy and waste money and legislation on it.
*Actually, I wouldn't object to that one.
Not heard of the cameltoe then?
- 2,604
- Banbaria.
- GTP_Venari
Gah, the quicker I rule the World, the better. Owning an independent state (a nice island) would do.
How do you enforce a law like that? Would you spend money on a police training programme to objectively determine how much crack is showing or how baggy your pants are? I think you'd spend more cash on psychological counselling of your police force than your 'troubling citizens'. Government by freakshow. Washington is probably turning in his grave.
How do you enforce a law like that? Would you spend money on a police training programme to objectively determine how much crack is showing or how baggy your pants are? I think you'd spend more cash on psychological counselling of your police force than your 'troubling citizens'. Government by freakshow. Washington is probably turning in his grave.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,637
- Texas
I see full bikinis at a beach. Not everywhere I go, and definately not in schools.
I had no idea cameltoe was part of a clothing.
Yes, I love living in a perfect town. It keeps these "gangstas" away.
I don't care though. I laugh at how people are standing up for a "fashion" that has nothing to do with gangsters.
You can have all the fun in the world sticking up for guys who are promoting a trend that meant terrible things in prison. The rest of us here in "Perfect Town" will just laugh.
- 3,323
- GTP_Mark
- Mark T33
I see full bikinis at a beach. Not everywhere I go, and definately not in schools.
I had no idea cameltoe was part of a clothing.
The problem is if you start banning baggy pants, where do you draw the line?
I live on the coast and in the summer we see plenty of women wearing bikinis while they are walking back through town.
If your talking about baggy pants in schools, it's slightly different. A school should enforce a rule of smart appearance because it's a good example for kids growing up. If they choose to wear baggy pants outside of school they should not be fined or disciplined for it.
What would you rather see, a man wearing a skin tight pair of cycling shorts with his meat and two veg on a show, or a guy/girl wearing baggy pants showing off a bit of underwear. If you ban baggy pants, then the cycling shorts have to go as a matter of principal.
- 40,891
And the relevance of that is? I personally think saggy pants are retarded, along with a good majority of other "gansta" mannerisms. But I will damn well not sit by and let the government have a say in how people dress.
They had no belts. How is that so terrible? You make it sound as if saggy pants = prison rape.
Is perfect town a metaphor for Police State?
- 87,629
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I had no idea cameltoe was part of a clothing.
I was responding to your earlier comment that:
*McLaren*
Skintight clothing can show off your underwear and, in extreme cases, show off your genitalia. Hence the cameltoe reference...
It's nothing to do with standing up for a fashion - it's to do with standing up against the rule of overzealous bureaucrats.
Government has no place in telling citizens what they can and cannot wear, period.
- 6,977
- old-guy64
A crackdown on showing crack or boxers and no one saw that pun till the 32nd post.
Y'all are slippin.
I believe that there should be a modicum of "common sense" but damn the punishment is a bit harsh for dressing like an idiot.
Isn't it punishment enough to be seen in public like that?
Y'all are slippin.
I believe that there should be a modicum of "common sense" but damn the punishment is a bit harsh for dressing like an idiot.
Isn't it punishment enough to be seen in public like that?
Similar threads
