Post by: tyme on August 23, 2007, 09:16:37 AM
From http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8R6SCL80&show_article=1
Quote
ATLANTA (AP) - Baggy pants that show boxer shorts or thongs would be illegal under a proposed amendment to Atlanta's indecency laws.
The amendment, sponsored by city councilman C.T. Martin, states that sagging pants are an "epidemic" that is becoming a "major concern" around the country.
"Little children see it and want to adopt it, thinking it's the in thing," Martin said Wednesday. "I don't want young people thinking that half-dressing is the way to go. I want them to think about their future."
The proposed ordinance would also bar women from showing the strap of a thong beneath their pants. They would also be prohibited from wearing jogging bras in public or show a bra strap, said Debbie Seagraves, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia.
...
The amendment, sponsored by city councilman C.T. Martin, states that sagging pants are an "epidemic" that is becoming a "major concern" around the country.
"Little children see it and want to adopt it, thinking it's the in thing," Martin said Wednesday. "I don't want young people thinking that half-dressing is the way to go. I want them to think about their future."
The proposed ordinance would also bar women from showing the strap of a thong beneath their pants. They would also be prohibited from wearing jogging bras in public or show a bra strap, said Debbie Seagraves, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia.
...
Post by: K Frame on August 23, 2007, 09:20:24 AM
Post by: Paddy on August 23, 2007, 09:23:20 AM
Post by: wmenorr67 on August 23, 2007, 09:32:46 AM
Post by: Standing Wolf on August 23, 2007, 10:04:37 AM
Quote
I don't want young people thinking that half-dressing is the way to go. I want them to think about their future.
If that's what government is up to, I'd say the future is bleak, indeed.
Post by: Thor on August 23, 2007, 10:54:33 AM
Post by: The Rabbi on August 23, 2007, 11:14:20 AM
Post by: El Tejon on August 23, 2007, 11:15:05 AM
I want the following banned: men in sandals, monkey butts, beer guts, wearing Harley t-shirts to court, wallets with chains, dirty work boots and shorts worn together, and a long list of stuff that I will think of later.
Post by: Balog on August 23, 2007, 01:43:08 PM
Hooray! Finally someone in the US is making sense!
I want the following banned: men in sandals, monkey butts, beer guts, wearing Harley t-shirts to court, wallets with chains, dirty work boots and shorts worn together, and a long list of stuff that I will think of later.
I want the following banned: men in sandals, monkey butts, beer guts, wearing Harley t-shirts to court, wallets with chains, dirty work boots and shorts worn together, and a long list of stuff that I will think of later.
[/Gasps] A list of things to ban, and nothing lawn related?!?!?! I'm telling your underlords at the HOA the time is ripe for a coup.
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 23, 2007, 01:53:15 PM
Quote
Baggy pants that show boxer shorts or thongs would be illegal under a proposed amendment to Atlanta's indecency laws.
The proposed ordinance would also bar women from showing the strap of a thong beneath their pants. They would also be prohibited from wearing jogging bras in public
The proposed ordinance would also bar women from showing the strap of a thong beneath their pants. They would also be prohibited from wearing jogging bras in public
Quote
I suppose C.T. Martin wants to ban wearing of swimsuits too?
All of those ideas make perfect sense. And just when did it become acceptable for men to be shirtless in public?
Post by: Pew pew pew on August 23, 2007, 02:01:52 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 23, 2007, 03:15:15 PM
Post by: tyme on August 23, 2007, 05:44:15 PM
Quote
And just when did it become acceptable for men to be shirtless in public?
When did it become unacceptable? And why am I supposed to care if some clown wants to wear falling-down trousers, baring his boxers?And why should I complain if a woman wants to wear sports bras or visible thongs? It's not "proper" lady-like behavior?
Not to mention that it's often impossible for a woman to completely hide bra straps if her dress/cami/whatever also has straps. So that prohibition bans an entire class of summer women's clothing.
If bra straps and thongs and boxers are so offensive, I propose banning underwear. That ought to motivate people to properly wear their primary layer of clothing.
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 23, 2007, 06:03:47 PM
Post by: tyme on August 23, 2007, 06:31:59 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 23, 2007, 07:33:53 PM
Do you support nudity laws?
Post by: Antibubba on August 23, 2007, 08:13:58 PM
Seriously, in a city rampant with murders and assaults, who does he think is going to pay for this?
Post by: tyme on August 23, 2007, 08:38:53 PM
Quote
We're talking about its close cousin, public near-nudity and showing off your boxers. The principles that justify nudity laws should be extended a tad further.
Well, when you put it like that... absolutely. I think it's morally offensive for anyone to be out in public without a burkha. That would merely be extending current nudity laws a bit further, right? I mean, heaven forbid that anyone actually sees anyone else's skin.Do you not recognize a difference between nudity laws, which prohibit exposure of genitals and female breasts, and laws prohibiting exposure of undergarments (which happen to be functionally indistinguishable from swimwear, which is legal just about everywhere)?
Post by: The Rabbi on August 23, 2007, 11:31:20 PM
Do you not recognize a difference between nudity laws, which prohibit exposure of genitals and female breasts, and laws prohibiting exposure of undergarments (which happen to be functionally indistinguishable from swimwear, which is legal just about everywhere)?
That begs the question.
If the law can dictate wearing clothing then it can dictate wearing certain kinds of clothing. I'd like to see someone argue against this without relying on a slippery slope fallacy.
Post by: LadySmith on August 24, 2007, 12:01:21 AM
Who made this guy the parent of Atlanta's youth?
It's a fad, just another ridiculous fad like ankle-breaker platform shoes and paisley prints, hot pants and neon-colored polyester leisure suits. Those that practice it will either abandon it when they learn it gets them nowhere in the game of survival (like at a decent job) or they'll find somewhere that it's accepted (like in prison).
Gee whiz, if you see something you don't like, quit staring at it.
Post by: S. Williamson on August 24, 2007, 12:46:39 AM
- Ban the wearing of socks with sandals; leisure suits; sweater vests; doo-rags; horn-rimmed glasses; sunglasses with lenses of an area greater than 2 in^2; jewelry depicting any letter, combination of letters, or symbol (especially a unit of currency); flat caps or close variations including the Newsboy style (unless over the age of 50); wifebeaters in public (unless engaged in exercise); etc.
- Ban the display of upper butt-crack (A.K.A. fanny cleavage), either male or female, either intentional or unintentional
- Ban use of cell phones while driving, punishable by flogging on the local nightly news (unrelated, but while we're at it...)
- Repeal anti-smoking laws due to their basis in blatant discrimination
Post by: wmenorr67 on August 24, 2007, 01:04:49 AM
For those of you who don't know. The trend started in prison as a way for a guy to show that he was available.
Post by: mtnbkr on August 24, 2007, 02:07:02 AM
Don't oppress my nipples, fistful.
Consider your nipples oppressed.
When did we start practicing S&M here?!?
Chris
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 24, 2007, 03:15:30 AM
Post by: HankB on August 24, 2007, 04:27:26 AM
Consider:
Sports bra.
Thong.
Rosie O'Donnell.
Think about it.
Post by: wmenorr67 on August 24, 2007, 04:39:58 AM
Sometimes, there can be too much freedom of expression.
Consider:
Sports bra.
Thong.
Rosie O'Donnell.
Think about it.
Consider:
Sports bra.
Thong.
Rosie O'Donnell.
Think about it.
Where is the poke your eyes out smiley and the vomit smiley?
Post by: Manedwolf on August 24, 2007, 04:51:44 AM
Sometimes, there can be too much freedom of expression.
Consider:
Sports bra.
Thong.
Rosie O'Donnell.
Think about it.
Consider:
Sports bra.
Thong.
Rosie O'Donnell.
Think about it.
Where is the poke your eyes out smiley and the vomit smiley?
Solution, there.
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 24, 2007, 05:38:17 AM
Do you not recognize a difference between nudity laws, which prohibit exposure of genitals and female breasts, and laws prohibiting exposure of undergarments (which happen to be functionally indistinguishable from swimwear, which is legal just about everywhere)?
Do you support laws against public nudity? On what grounds?