"Pull 'em up or pay up" is new law in Mansfield

[motivez]

MANSFIELD — “Pull ‘em up or pay up.”

That’s Police Chief Don English’s interpretation of a new law that takes effect in Mansfield on Sept. 15

Anyone caught wearing sagging pants who exposes his or her underwear will be subject to a fine of up to $150 plus court costs, or face up to 15 days in jail.

Mansfield aldermen voted unanimously at today’s 4:30 p.m. meeting to enact the new law.

The law makes it illegal to found in a “state of nudity, or partial nudity, or in any indecent exposure of his or her person or undergarments, or be guilty of any indecent or lewd behavior.”

City attorney Richard Z. Johnson Jr. said he used a similar law in Delcambre as a guideline in creating Mansfield’s ordinance. Several municipalities and parish governments in Louisiana have enacted similar laws in recent months.

The Shreveport Times

What do you guys think about this? Government overreach or sensible law?

I'm not sure really. I mean, I suppose it's up to the people to decide (through their representatives) what is socially acceptable as far as 'indecent' exposure / behavior..

On the other hand, it's certainly targeted at a specific group of people (how long before Jesse Jackson is down there playing the race card?).. how appropriate is it for a bunch of old people to tell kids they can't wear the "in" styles in public because they're mildly offended?

[WickedLou9]

It will be struck down. I can't see how that possibly could be constitutional. Nudity OK, that's fine to ban in public. But a particular style of clothes? It will never stand. The first kid with rich parents that gets a fine will take it to the supreme court.

[Thorgrim]

sounds great on paper, but in real life, trailer trash people are so much worse with wearing disgusting outfits, much more so than people imitating ghetto life...if the legal reasoning is that we are banning things that are "partial nudity" then i mean...there goes wearing two piece bathing suits, which are 100x more revealing than this stuff

Also, its so vague, i mean i can stretch at a bar and if im wearing an untucked shirt and its a certain size the very top label of my boxers (ya know where it says aeropostale or whatever you buy) will show, am i going to get a fine for that?

easily, what will get this overturned is "in a state of lewd behavior" which is so subjective they are letting the police do whatever they want

[hsmith]

just another law on the books so they have justifiable "reason" to stop and search you

[Linzyhop]

I can see some smart ass kid wearing bathing suit under his pants and when they try to fine him saying, but it's not my underwear, it's a bathing suit...

this will get overturned. retarded.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by hsmith

just another law on the books so they have justifiable "reason" to stop and search you

That was my first thought on this too.

[RMNIXON]

While these low pant riders have a very crude type of social expression, it is not public nudity. Give me a break!

Parents and peers are the ones who need to tell em to pull up their pants!

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Parents and peers are the ones who need to tell em to pull up their pants!

They should be, but they are just as willing to pass the buck, its the greater problem of lack of responsibility. While everyone spouts off about "morality" - or their version of it - they forget that it takes personal work i.e. have responsibility to be that and they forget to teach their kids, they want government to do the work for them

Its not governments job to tell what is acceptable in these kinds of cases, society via our parents, friends and our own personal tastes etc should be the driver of such.

People don't mind passing the buck but then they the same ones who are SHOCKED their taxes are so high and wonder why government's ass in our faces every where we go. This lack of responsibility is the reason why people as a whole don't mind the constitution and our rights get shredded

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

The Shreveport Times

What do you guys think about this? Government overreach or sensible law?

I'm not sure really. I mean, I suppose it's up to the people to decide (through their representatives) what is socially acceptable as far as 'indecent' exposure / behavior..

On the other hand, it's certainly targeted at a specific group of people (how long before Jesse Jackson is down there playing the race card?).. how appropriate is it for a bunch of old people to tell kids they can't wear the "in" styles in public because they're mildly offended?

I really dont have a lot of problem with this if it is a local law. If it were a federal law I would have a HUGE objection, but as far as I can tell this is a city ordinance right?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I really dont have a lot of problem with this if it is a local law. If it were a federal law I would have a HUGE objection, but as far as I can tell this is a city ordinance right?

city cops being able to do whatever they want is just as bad as state police, or even federal officers

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

city cops being able to do whatever they want is just as bad as state police, or even federal officers

Oh I dont dispute that, but local authorities should have a lot more leeway in what they can and can not legislate. I'm torn on this issue because where do you draw the line on what is acceptable clothing and what isn't? I dont particularly like this law but I'm not too worked up about it because it is a local law.

[thomez]

This shit never makes any sense beyond targeting certain individuals. If Lance Armstrong rolled into town on his bicycle with his stretch shorts, is he getting pulled over? I truly doubt it but he is obviously showing more than the guy with sagging jeans and his boxers sticking out.