S
strugglin4420
Guest
What is the name of your state? Louisiana
Bill would make wearing low-riding pants a crime
03:09 PM CDT on Thursday, May 6, 2004
Associated Press
BATON ROUGE, La. -- Louisiana residents who wear low-slung pants that expose underwear or certain body parts could be charged with a crime if lawmakers agree to a bill approved Thursday by a House panel and spurred by complaints about visible boxer shorts and sagging pants that sit nearly at men's knees.
"In our society we have a line of decency that should not be crossed, and that line starts around the waist area," said Rep. Derrick Shepherd, D-Marrero, sponsor of the bill.
Lawmakers turned aside concerns from Heather Hall, with the Louisiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, who said the measure was rife with the opportunity for discrimination and selective enforcement from police.
Hall said the bill institutes a literal "fashion police" and a "really invasive violation of the fundamental right to public expression."
Despite those complaints and an assessment from the committee chairman that such a law would be unenforceable, the House Criminal Justice Committee approved the bill in a 4-1 vote, sending it to the full House for debate. Only Rep. Don Cazayoux, D-New Roads, voted against the measure.
Shepherd's bill would make it a crime to wear clothing in public that "intentionally exposes undergarments or intentionally exposes any portion of the pubic hair, cleft of the buttocks or genitals."
"We should be able to say what is moral, what is decent and what is acceptable behavior for our young people," said Glenn Green, a Westwego city councilman.
Violators of the proposed law would have to perform three eight-hour days of community service at a fire department and could have to pay a fine up to $175.
Rep. Danny Martiny, chairman of the committee, said he agreed with the spirit of the measure and said the trend of wearing sagging pants that expose underwear was offensive, but he said the law would be impossible to enforce. Martiny, R-Kenner, did not vote on the bill.
"I don't know that it's respectful to pay my respects at a funeral without my shirt on, but that's not illegal; that's just stupid," he said. "Government can't fix everything."
Opelousas Police Chief Larry Caillier said the clothing style promoted sexually deviant behavior and was offensive to women and children. He said Opelousas has a similar local ban.
Cazayoux said such behavior already was illegal under other laws, and Hall said she bristled at suggestions wearing a certain type of clothing was linked to criminal behavior and sexual deviancy.
The bill doesn't apply to clothes worn in a private residence, swimsuits, fashion shows or "clothing worn by a person in the practice of their legal profession or trade."
Voting in favor of the bill were: Reps. Beverly Bruce, D-Mansfield; Roy Burrell, D-Shreveport; Eric LaFleur, D-Ville Platte; and Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs.
(Copyright 2004 by The Asciated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
can this happen? i mean, wtf? can the goverment get involved? hello?
freedom of speech down the drain?
Bill would make wearing low-riding pants a crime
03:09 PM CDT on Thursday, May 6, 2004
Associated Press
BATON ROUGE, La. -- Louisiana residents who wear low-slung pants that expose underwear or certain body parts could be charged with a crime if lawmakers agree to a bill approved Thursday by a House panel and spurred by complaints about visible boxer shorts and sagging pants that sit nearly at men's knees.
"In our society we have a line of decency that should not be crossed, and that line starts around the waist area," said Rep. Derrick Shepherd, D-Marrero, sponsor of the bill.
Lawmakers turned aside concerns from Heather Hall, with the Louisiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, who said the measure was rife with the opportunity for discrimination and selective enforcement from police.
Hall said the bill institutes a literal "fashion police" and a "really invasive violation of the fundamental right to public expression."
Despite those complaints and an assessment from the committee chairman that such a law would be unenforceable, the House Criminal Justice Committee approved the bill in a 4-1 vote, sending it to the full House for debate. Only Rep. Don Cazayoux, D-New Roads, voted against the measure.
Shepherd's bill would make it a crime to wear clothing in public that "intentionally exposes undergarments or intentionally exposes any portion of the pubic hair, cleft of the buttocks or genitals."
"We should be able to say what is moral, what is decent and what is acceptable behavior for our young people," said Glenn Green, a Westwego city councilman.
Violators of the proposed law would have to perform three eight-hour days of community service at a fire department and could have to pay a fine up to $175.
Rep. Danny Martiny, chairman of the committee, said he agreed with the spirit of the measure and said the trend of wearing sagging pants that expose underwear was offensive, but he said the law would be impossible to enforce. Martiny, R-Kenner, did not vote on the bill.
"I don't know that it's respectful to pay my respects at a funeral without my shirt on, but that's not illegal; that's just stupid," he said. "Government can't fix everything."
Opelousas Police Chief Larry Caillier said the clothing style promoted sexually deviant behavior and was offensive to women and children. He said Opelousas has a similar local ban.
Cazayoux said such behavior already was illegal under other laws, and Hall said she bristled at suggestions wearing a certain type of clothing was linked to criminal behavior and sexual deviancy.
The bill doesn't apply to clothes worn in a private residence, swimsuits, fashion shows or "clothing worn by a person in the practice of their legal profession or trade."
Voting in favor of the bill were: Reps. Beverly Bruce, D-Mansfield; Roy Burrell, D-Shreveport; Eric LaFleur, D-Ville Platte; and Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs.
(Copyright 2004 by The Asciated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
can this happen? i mean, wtf? can the goverment get involved? hello?
freedom of speech down the drain?