Brave Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 So Virginia will literally have the "Fashion Police!" Fantastic!! (I'd like to review some of those pics as well) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDoyler23 Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 wow. What a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNEET Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Welcome to red-state America. BUSH COUNTRY!!! Where we preach morals, not practice them. Yeeee-haaaaw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 dang...that sux...I've always loved seeing a woman with low riding pants and a nice g-string..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by SNEET Welcome to red-state America. BUSH COUNTRY!!! Where we preach morals, not practice them. Yeeee-haaaaw! A democrat sponsored the bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red zone Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Why does dressing like a fool gotta be characterized as a "black thing?":rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 I'm moving to N.C. immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpoch Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 So you get a fine for showing your underpants, just stop wearing underpants. I think the moral police are getting out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 i'm for it... If i want to see someone in their underpants... I'll go to the beach I don't want to see it in the mall, walking down the street ect... for fear of seeing skids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by goldenster95 On Tuesday, he said the measure was an unconstitutional attack on young blacks that would force parents to take off work to accompany their children to court just for making a fashion statement. [/i] :doh: ONLY if they refuse to obey the law and tell their children to wear the pants anyway. To turn this into a race issue is just nuts. NO ONE IS FORCING ANYONE TO WEAR THESE JEANS. If the law says no, then you can't wear them. If you do, then suffer the consequences. It's no different than saying that parents will have to take time off of work to accompany their children to court to pay a fine for using drugs or breaking the speed limit. IT'S THE LAW and law is law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PennState11 Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by Funkyalligator dang...that sux...I've always loved seeing a woman with low riding pants and a nice g-string..... my thoughts exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by SNEET Welcome to red-state America. BUSH COUNTRY!!! Where we preach morals, not practice them. Yeeee-haaaaw! Combined with your baseless accusation of racism against a poster in a football thread yesterday, I see all the evidence in the world that you should be banned so fast your head spins. Troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 So if a plumber shows his crack while fixing my sink, do I call the police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by E-Dog Night So if a plumber shows his crack while fixing my sink, do I call the police? You should at least ask for no charge for the service and possibly hold a call to the Police over his head... :laugh: Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NASMTrainer Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 As much as I hate to see a kid walking around with his pants down to mid thigh and his boxers sticking out (because I think it's looks stupid) this bill is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 This bill gives me a strange uneasiness. On one hand, it's a bill about pulling up your pants. It is trivial. No one can claim that this is some sort of grand overreach of power, when a cop simply says pull your pants up or pay me $50. But it is a big deal. It's a big deal to me, because I'd like to believe that adults should be left to make as many decisions as they possibly can. This law goes against the spirit of that in a rather strong way. Expecially because of this: We have laws about indecent exposure, why don't we just use the fact that we already have the important law? Somehow people decided that they knew what was right, and it goes agianst what I believe is right. I worry that this law is aimed at young black men, so that cops can search them. I'm not going to make a slippery slope argument, because I don't need to, although I do worry that this is indicative of a growing movement in america that liberty isn't as important as we once thought it was. Again, I run into a problem where it's hard to make a lofty argument that this is trampling on liberty when you ask a grown man to pull his pants up, but this isn't how it's supposed to be, is it? Can anyone really defend this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 :laugh: :laugh: Good 'ol Virginia. :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Here is the thing, don't plenty of people walk into convenience stores in the early morning or late-night in tank tops and boxers? So is THAT OK, but if you have saggy pants on, which exposes a tiny bit of the boxers, THAT is against the law? Also, how does this work when some clothing companies specifically design pants to sag. I am not a wearer of saggy pants, but I went through highschool in the mid-late 90's when this fashion really picked up, and while I found it kind of funny, it never bothered me or wanted to have it banned. This just seems like a silly, trivial thing, and makes it even more ridiculous when people trot out the statement "9/11 changed everything" LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBChick Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by Ignatius J. I worry that this law is aimed at young black men, so that cops can search them. I'm not going to make a slippery slope argument, because I don't need to, although I do worry that this is indicative of a growing movement in america that liberty isn't as important as we once thought it was. Can anyone really defend this? I can honestly say I don't think this bill was aim at any race in particular, but it's more of a clash of the age group. I think the older more active/funding voters are more appalled at the young white woman in the ultra - low rise jeans with the G-strings hanging out, then worrying about seeing the boxers hanging out. Realistically this law state no "underwear" showing, so there really isn't anything from stopping the guys from just wearing shorts under the jeans. But I'm with you on the whole, this is wrong. I do really feel for the plumber guy though.. the unintended victim! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Good... (not really) NOW ALL WE NEED is for them to make pro football players tuck their jersies in and we're good (Portis) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by iheartskins http://extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90895 Originally posted by pez This should not be in fedex to begin with.. 1) It's been merged. 2) Threads would get merged &/or moved to the correct forrum alot quicker if you guys would actually use the "Report This Post" feature & provide a link to the threads to be merged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Originally posted by TK-IV II I 1) It's been merged. 2) Threads would get merged &/or moved to the correct forrum alot quicker if you guys would actually use the "Report This Post" feature & provide a link to the threads to be merged. Sir, yes Sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Dropped http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2005-02-10-pants_x.htm Droopy-pants bill dropped in Va. Senate RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Virginia lawmakers dropped their droopy-pants bill Thursday after the whole thing became just too embarrassing. The bill, which would have slapped a $50 fine on people who wear their pants so low that their underwear is visible in "a lewd or indecent manner," passed the state House on Tuesday but was killed by a Senate committee two days later in a unanimous vote. Republican Sen. Thomas Norment said news reports implied that lawmakers were preoccupied with droopy pants. "I find that an indignation, which dampens my humor," Norment said. Republican Sen. Kenneth Stolle, the committee chairman, called the bill "a distraction." The committee hearing drew a standing-room-only crowd that included about 75 government students from Surry County High School. "If people in Florida can wear bikinis, a little underwear showing isn't going to hurt anybody," 17-year-old Elvyn Shaw said. The bill's sponsor, Democratic Delegate Algie Howell, declined to answer reporters' questions Thursday but issued a statement saying the bill "was in direct response to a number of my constituents who found this to be a very important issue." He has said the constituents included customers at his barber shop who were offended by exposed underwear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 The whole "jailin" thing is dumb. I bet some of these kids, don't even know what it signifies. With that said, fining people who do it, is even dumber. What a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Good. What a waste of time and what an embarrasment to Virginia that this actually attained international attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.