Posted on 02/09/2005 12:29:56 AM PST by Cato1
'Droopy drawers' bill seeks end to overexposure of underwear By Christina Bellantoni -- Virginia lawmakers to the state's youth: Pull up your pants or pay the price. Delegate Algie T. Howell Jr. doesn't want to see underwear hanging out of the back of your pants, and most lawmakers yesterday agreed with him. The House voted 60-34 for his bill, which would impose a $50 fine on anyone whose boxers, briefs or thongs peek above their pants or skirts. "It's not an attack on baggy pants," said Mr. Howell, Norfolk Democrat. "To vote for this bill would be a vote for character, to uplift your community and to do something good not only for the state of Virginia, but for this entire country." It's not clear if the fine would apply to plumbers, carpenters or other laborers who have problems with low-riding pants. The bill states the fine would apply to those who display their below-the-waist underwear in a "lewd or indecent manner." Several lawmakers and civil rights groups said the legislation -- sometimes referred to as the "droopy drawers" bill -- is excessive and would encourage racial profiling, arguing that exposed underwear is simply a fashion statement by mostly black youths. Delegate Lionell Spruill Sr., Chesapeake Democrat, said the bill violates the Constitution. "This is a foolish bill because it will hurt so many," said Mr. Spruill, who is black. "This will be a bill that will target blacks." At one point, Mr. Spruill suggested that lawmakers who vote for the bill "should be ashamed" and said Mr. Howell has let his constituents down. Delegate John S. Reid, Henrico Republican, said Mr. Spruill had "crossed the line" of traditional debate decorum. "I got your attention, Mr. Reid. I'm glad I did," Mr. Spruill told Mr. Reid after apologizing.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Government does legitimately have that power. Otherwise, we would have the right to go nude anywhere we want.
The question is, "Where to draw the line?" Most agree total nudity in public areas is too much.
I don't care if someone's underwear is peeping out - but I HAVE seen teenagers who were wearing pants with half or more of their butt crack showing - in a McDonalds. That was repulsive.
Should it have been illegal? Don't know...I would as soon see a law preventing the sale of spandex in clothes above a certain size, or a requirement that bare midriffs only be allowed if there are no rolls of fat showing.
Unwise law? Perhaps.
Unconstitutional? No.
I hope you're kidding. Do you really love the nanny state that much?
I assume you are female. Why?
Because I've never met a guy who thought fat chicks should be allowed to wear spandex...
Spandex with a size 42" waist is JUST WRONG!
I find it incredibly humorous, tell you the truth. What is funnier than a really fat woman in really tight clothes?
Since you asked, it would be the 1st amendment. It's interpreted to allow for the right to freedom of expression.
Freedom of expression has NEVER been interpreted to allow public nudity. The principle is the same.
bfl
Actually, if you review the career of Spencer Tunick you'll see that public nudity is in fact very much a legally protected act of self expression that is legal in many, many places and gets "judicially legalized" when it is challenged in an increasing number of jurisdictions.
How one chooses to dress is an act of self-expression. Revealing skin is a protected act. We may not like it but it's protected.
Horsepucky!
I wilt in contemplation of your impeccable logic.
You should - just be careful about what part wilts, as you stroll naked down the street expressing yourself publicly...
You have not tried to educate me. You have made a statement that is transparently false - that freedom of expression gives one the right to walk around naked in public.
Have you heard of nude beaches? They are called that to distinguish them from all other beaches - where nudity is NOT allowed.
If you believe your own drivel, walk down a public sidewalk in most any town in America nude - then have an adult explain to the cops that you are engaging in freedom of expression.
You will quickly find that you are wrong.
I hate to break it to you, but repeating what is obviously false does NOT constitute logic.
I say don't fine them...rather amend the law granting freedom from prosecution, those who give in to the terrible perversion of "sneak attack underwear wedgies"!
You want to stop this practice real quick, allow private citizens to band to gether to "wedgie" these punks without prosecution...IN THE NAME OF FREE SPEECH!
It is legal in many (and an increasing number)of jurisdiction in America to go naked in public. I am not going to waste any more time trying to educate the truly ineducable but I have given you references to follow if you want to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.