Popular Culture

The Inalienable Right to Saggy Pants?

|

At least Martinez's pants weren't on backwards.

The New York Law Journal reports on a small victory for "distasteful" free expression courtesy of Bronx Criminal Court Judge Ruben Franco:

Wearing saggy pants that hang from your thighs and expose your underwear may be ridiculous, but it is not illegal, a Bronx judge has ruled.

"While most of us may consider it distasteful, and indeed foolish, to wear ones pants so low as to expose the underwear … 'people can dress as they please, wear anything, so long as they do not offend public order and decency,'" Criminal Court Judge Ruben Franco wrote in People v. Martinez.

In April 2009, defendant Julio Martinez received a summons because, as the arresting officer wrote, Martinez wore "his pants down below his buttocks exposing underwear [and] potentially showing private parts."

Read the whole story here. Greg Beato discusses the misguided war on saggy pants here.

(Via Above the Law)

NEXT: Bill to Legalize Online Gambling Advances

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I like the saggy pants. If we made saggers wear a T-shirt that said “Idiot” they’d never do it. The pants do that work for us.

    1. like ed hardy t-shirts

    2. I dunno, a lot of kids would wear the “Idiot” shirts. People go to great lengths to be recognized as idiots.

      1. What in the name of Hayek is that fucking thing?

          1. Ah, I’ve heard of that but didn’t recognize it. I’ve lost my field guide to cunttards, apparently.

            1. field guide to cunttards

              I think the Audubon Society would be interested in publishing your guide.

              I’d keep a copy on my coffee table.

    3. It also shows us who the whining nanny-bitches are. Knowing who to avoid is a good thing.

  2. I like the saggy pants. If we made saggers wear a T-shirt that said “Idiot” they’d never do it. The pants do that work for us.

    Exactly. I have made a basically identical argument in favor of facial piercings and tattoos (and those giant earlobe implants).

    It saves me from expending any unnecessary effort.

    1. Saves the cops from burning calories unnecessarily as well.

    2. Be careful walking across the street.

      http://www.thesmokinggun.com/a…..orns1.html

      1. Ah, he’s nothing but a little button buck.

  3. The judge got it wrong. People have a right to wear anything they desire and that right is not constrained by “public order and decency.” IOW, the right is absolute.

    1. Yes, anarcho-apparel.

      1. Freedom to look like a douchebag is a freedom we must uphold.

    2. Your right to swing your penis ends at my nose.

      1. Not that there’s anything wrong with that…

    3. A right to walk around showing off your brown-eye?

      1. Why not? We are born naked and every other animal on Earth except for douchebags with gator bait dogs go naked their entire lives. Clothes are a social construct that have nothing to do with rights.

        1. Every other animal on earth does not really have the option to wear clothes or not. Clothes, for humans, are as much a tool for surviving in harsh climates as any of our other technology is. The social conventions that grew up around when it is appropriate to wear clothing grew out of those necessities.

      2. “Don’t you make my Brown-Eye… Blue?”

    4. As long as you eat the vegetables the government tells you to eat.

  4. Conservative types should be happy about saggy pants. It makes criminals easy to catch.

    1. Conservative types are never happy. Back in my day they bitched pants were too tight.

  5. Jump! Jump!

  6. Conservative types should be happy about saggy pants. It makes criminals easy to catch.

    Even (especially) the “fleet-footed” ones.

  7. Iran and Saudi Arabia have fashion police. The US doen’t. Some dumbass cop in the Bronx needs a dressing down.

    1. I see what you did there.

  8. The judge cited a Wikipedia article

    That’s wiggidy wiggidy unfortunate.

  9. Some dumbass cop in the Bronx needs a dressing down.

    He can be reassigned to the men’s underpants aisle at Walmart.

  10. I remember 1972, Nehru jackets, gold chains, wide, wide ties, and wide, wide collars, and I thought, ‘I will never again see such stupid fashion in my lifetime.’
    Despite my ginormous cynicism, I still over estimate the human races’ intelligence.
    NEXT YEAR’s fashion trend: giant red satin codpieces.

    1. I prefer fushia and they should be made from chintz or chrenolin. Spelling don’t count.

    2. People stopped learning how to dress properly sometime in the 60’s. I blame the hippies.

      1. I love that you have that handle.

        1. But the science of gonadal warming is settled!

        2. I love that you have that handle.

          That’s what she said.

      2. 1960s? 1860s? 1760s?

    3. That’s so 1920s.

    4. NEXT YEAR’s fashion trend: giant red satin codpieces

      Sounds more like 1510’s–around Henry VIII’s reign.

    5. I still over estimate the human races’ intelligence.

      God, shut up already.

  11. Toga, toga, toga!

  12. OK, I haven’t been keeping up on these things, but are they saying that saggy pants are still in fashion?! What the hell. Or is Julio Martinez just an old fart that is still dressing the same way for years and years?

    1. My thought exactly.

  13. Saggy pants are no dumber than parachute pants or wearing clocks on chains.

  14. I’ll have you know that I wear a clock on a chain on those increasingly rare occasions when I bust out the three-piece pinstripe. The vest even has a little pocket for the clock (which happens to be an antique from the 1860s, beautifully hand-engraved case).

    1. YEEEEAAAAAAAH BOYEEEEE!

  15. Martinez wore “his pants down below his buttocks exposing underwear [and] potentially showing private parts.

    How exactly does one potentially show private parts? Either private parts are shown/exposed or they aren’t.

    What does that even mean?

    1. Penis cleavage.

    2. How exactly does one potentially show private parts? Either private parts are shown/exposed or they aren’t.

      Google “strip tease.”

  16. I love sagging pants. It let’s me get a look at the booty. BOOTY. A man’s butt. Booty is more important than food. Havin’ some booty is more important than drinkin’ water, man.

    I like booty.

  17. Kids have always made foolish fashion choices, but they’ve gone well beyond that now. They’re actually wearing costumes. Every day is Halloween. It’s kind of sad seeing kids dressing up as professional athletes and rappers.

    1. Nobody really gives a damn what you find ‘sad’. Shouldn’t you be at the Early Bird Special at Shoney’s by now?

  18. In April 2009, defendant Julio Martinez received a summons because, as the arresting officer wrote….

    Look, on the bright side, when Officer Dickhead is writing tickets for fashion violations, he’s not shooting our dogs.

    Glass half full, baby…

  19. If you’re saggin’ you’re faggin’.

  20. I’d be embarrassed to have kids like that.

  21. The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual’s Internet activity without a court order if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation.

    It beggars belief.

    ::sigh::

    I was pretty certain that a John McCain adminstration would continue Bush the Lesser’s totalitarian ways, and expected only a modest improvement from The Obama ™. Of course, those hope were dashed long ago, but every new outrage is a fresh wound.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. And we mean it.

    1. Meh! Wrong thread…

    2. Yes, this is the poopy pants thread.

  22. Their pants are on backwards!

  23. I don’t understand male fashion trends that are uncomfortable or ungainly to wear. I thought we males left that sort of thing to women?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.