February 10, 2005

LEISURE SUITS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CAPITAL OFFENSE:

Bill sets fine for low-riding pants (CNN, February 9, 2005)

Virginians who wear their pants so low their underwear shows may want to think about investing in a stronger belt.

The state's House of Delegates passed a bill Tuesday authorizing a $50 fine for anyone who displays his or her underpants in a "lewd or indecent manner."

Del. Lionell Spruill Sr., a Democrat who opposed the bill, had pleaded with his colleagues to remember their own youthful fashion follies.


If only there'd been laws against all the clothing choices made during the 70's. However, why are they focussing on this side issue when everyone knows the real crisis is an obese nation where young women insist on exposing their spacious midriffs?

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2005 09:03 AM
Comments

So, if the butt is the right size it's cool with you if they want to air out the crack in public?

Posted by: NC3 at February 10, 2005 09:51 AM

NC3:

No. It's just not significant to most of us that inner city black kids wear their pants too low. We don't see them anyway. Get young girls to cover their joes.

Posted by: oj at February 10, 2005 10:10 AM

I guess the bill is an indirect way of teaching young blacks that if they dress like a thug they'll be treated like one. If they were more overt cries of "racial profiling" would abound.

Posted by: Bartman at February 10, 2005 11:51 AM

You'll never get a male-majority legislature to outlaw female exposure. Male exposure is deeply offensive, but female exposure is quite tolerable.

Posted by: pj at February 10, 2005 12:25 PM

Say No to Crack.

Posted by: h-man at February 10, 2005 02:47 PM

My Friend's wife calls it "overdrift."

"Uh uh, girlfriend."

Posted by: bb at February 14, 2005 02:47 AM
« DESIGNER SELECTION: | Main | UNDOING PROGRESSIVISM: »