Critical Issues of Our Time–Baggy Britches
James Hanley on Sep 22nd 2008
A federal judge has ruled that Riveria Beach, Florida’s, baggy pants ban is unconstitutional.
Somebody help me,” said Palm Beach Circuit Judge Paul Moyle, before giving his decision.
“We’re not talking about exposure of buttocks. No! We’re talking about someone who has on pants whose underwear are apparently visible to a police officer who then makes an arrest and the basis is he’s then held overnight, no bond.”
Never fear, though. The moralists aren’t giving up. Dallas and Atlanta are both reportedly considering such bans. And the police chief of Pine Lawn, Missouri, where at least 17 baggy pants tickets have been issued, is pleased with his town’s sartorial statute.
It is working in our community…When the children walk the streets now it seems like they look more like children now instead of their appearance making them look like thugs.
With economic hell allegedly breaking loose, and a never ending war on terrorism, it’s a relief to know that our cities are focused on the critical issues of our times.
It boils down to this: I’d much rather live in a world where young people dress like fools, than in a world where government has abrogated the right to determine how any of us dress.
Filed in The Bench
So you think public nudity should be legal?
I’d love to see this one make it to the SC. We could see once and for all how far J. Scalia (et al) is willing to take his “if a right isn’t explicit in the C, it doesn’t exist and the majority wins” interpretive approach.
Even deference to “morality” laws in rational basis review shouldn’t be enough to save laws this trivial; laws which should give even the most rabid majoritarian pause if for no other reason than that they mute the battle cry of the true zealot - “amendment!”. 6086th Amendment, anyone?
- Charles
Absolutely. However, I also think innocent bystanders such as myself should be able to sue the overwhelming majority of publicly nude persons for the intentional infliction of aesthetic distress.
Please re-read the quote from the judge. No nudity was involved, which is what makes this case particularly easy.
However my own opinion is that public nudity shouldn’t be such a big deal. I’m just not much of a moralist. I would, however, draw the line at public masturbation.
As the old joke has it:
Non-libertarian: “I can’t be a libertarian, they support sex in public parks.”
Libertarian: “What do you mean public parks?”
This is actually a good example of a Baptists and Bootleggers situation, with the cops as the bootleggers. These kind of petty, often violated, seldom enforced laws give the police a legal pretext to stop and search people on the street where there wouldn’t otherwise be probable cause.
Yes, I understood the situation, but I was curious about your view on the issue given the last sentence. I’ll simply second D.A. Ridgely’s opinion.
Didn’t Walter Williams allegedly say this is what Libertarians do?
Jim,
Does Walter Williams say libertarians draw the line there, or that they do public masturbation?