Pants police cause the real problem

By Mac McKerral
08/04/08
8 comments

Nothing undermines efforts to get people involved in governance more than political pandering by politicians and bureaucrats.

While our communities and our country seem to spiral out of whack, leaders focus on benign issues that get media attention but do little to address community problems.

Lately it seems that community leaders throughout the country think high gas prices, rising unemployment, crime and underachieving public schools can all disappear if we go after kids who wear droopy pants.

And so another example crops up in Flint, Mich., where the police chief wants his officers to take on the roll of fashion police and ticket kids wearing pants at half-mast.

“Some people call it a fad,” Chief David Dicks told the Detroit Free Press. “But I believe it’s a national nuisance. It is indecent and thus it is indecent exposure, which has been on the books for years.”

Oh, boy, another pop-culture fashion that undermines democracy and threatens community norms of decency.

Meanwhile, check out these violent crime statistics from the 2006 FBI database. (The 2007 data becomes available in October.) These figures represent incidents per 100,000 residents.

Flint compared with the U.S.:

Murders: Flint, 45.7; U.S., 7
Rapes: Flint, 120.9; U.S., 33.1
Robberies, Flint, 530.2; U.S., 205.8
Aggravated assaults: Flint, 899.3; U.S., 336.5

In crimes against property — burglaries, larceny/thefts and vehicle thefts — Flint surpasses the national average by at least double or more in all categories, except motor vehicle theft, where it also exceeds the national average.

So, if you live in Flint or plan to move there, do teenagers who seemingly defy physics by wearing their pants slightly above their knees really deserve the scrutiny of police?

News stories report that violators face the possibility of fines and jail time as part of its crackdown on “this immoral self expression,” the chief says.

I am not picking on Flint. The propensity for government to focus on the insignificant at the expense of the important wove its way into the fabric of governance a long time ago, and now it’s systemic. The bureaucratic energy of the day seems to focus on droopy drawers. More reports from the Web and other sources:

The AP reported that the Chicago suburb of Lynwood passed an ordinance that would levy $25 fines against anyone showing three inches or more of underwear in public.
The Virginia House of Delegates passed and then the state Senate rescinded legislation that would have fined people $50 for wearing their pants so low as to display their underwear.
Delcambre, La., passed an ordinance focused on sagging pants, making it a crime that carries a fine of up to $500 or up to six months in jail.

I think Americans need to hike up their britches and demand that community leaders start addressing the important.

Heck, politicians have made a sport out of getting caught with their pants down.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Filed Under: politics, bureaucrats

8 comments so far. Add a Comment

11 weeks ago wkueileenryan commented:

In a culture that buzzes for months about Janet Jackson’s fashion mishap at the Super Bowl, it’s safe to say Americans blow wardrobe malfunctions out of proportion.

We may shake our fingers at sagging pants and peek-a-boo panties and question the moral decency of Victoria’s Secret ads. But in the instance of Flint, Mich., Chief Dicks’ cry of indecent exposure suggests a different issue.

This issue is not about the fashions, but, as WKU_WALLY said, the attitude those fashions are assumed to convey. Some authority figures seem to assume that by cracking down on the “indecent” styles of potentially disruptive teens, they will somehow improve flagging school systems and reduce staggering crime statistics.

These public figures need to realize that you can’t fix problems within the youth population by changing the way they look, and you can’t assume that the youth with ‘indecent’ attire are the ones who need the police department’s babysitting.

Every American teen needs at least one day in their melodramatic lives to walk down the stairs and see their parents’ jaws drop at what they had the audacity to put on. We live in a culture that almost begs for mild adolescent rebellion, whether that’s expressed in a loosened waistband or fuchsia hair-dye and a facial piercing.

Chief Dicks should just step back and leave the reprimanding to the fashion police.

11 weeks ago wku.Shaneka commented:

I laughed as I read this article. It would seem that the officers in Flint, Mich. believe that if they ignore the more serious problems at hand (murder, rape, etc.) that they’ll eventually go away.
I have a 13 year-old nephew that likes to wear his pants sagging. My mother constantly tells him to put on a belt. His excuse is almost always that he couldn’t find one. She feels that this style of dress is inappropriate and makes him look sloppy. But he doesn’t care about how sloppy he looks; wanting to fit in, he thinks he looks good! I remember when MC Hammer came out. Who can forget about the balloon pants? I had a purple pair with black polka dots! You couldn’t tell me I didn’t look good. Where was Chief Dicks when this fashion trend was prevalent?

My next thought concerns women and cleavage. How much is too much? More flesh is revealed than some may deem necessary and appropriate. Are women going to be fined for showing too much?

I look at this situation as another form of racial stereotyping. Whenever these law officials see a young male dressed in saggy pants, they automatically see a thug that has inclinations to commit crime(s). It would be hilarious to see cleavage-showing women fined or hauled off to jail for prostitution.

11 weeks ago wkujennifer commented:

I support your view on this fashionable topic. Everyone has their opinions on how others should dress and views on what is seen to be appropriate or inappropriate. The chief was quoted say that droopy pants are an “immoral self expression.” What is his definition of immoral? I am sure the whole conry does not agree with that statement. The problems with our country are obviously not because of kids sagging their pants. I think our country definitely has bigger issues to focus on than how low kids are wearing their pants. Yes, sagging may not be the classiest fashion trend we have seen, but it is not causing any harm or danger to the society. As you can see from the statistics in the blog, murders, rapes, robberies and assaults seem to be the main problems. Maybe if the leaders were more focused on stopping the important and dangerous crimes, they wouldn’t be doubling the country’s average. Kids will be kids. Sagging of the pants is one way they can rebel. If that’s how they want to rebel, let them. I would much rather have kids wear their pants low then be out robbing stores or killing people. The leaders of today need to get their priorities straight!

11 weeks ago wku_wally commented:

It never fails to amaze me how individuals, especially those in positions of authority, can gag at a gnat and swallow a camel. For the sake of this commentary, let’s just forget about real American dilemmas for right now, for any intelligent human being can come to the conclusion that baggy pants are not the cause of rising gas prices, unemployment, and a war going on in Iraq. The fact that Flint Police Chief David Dicks called this issue a “national nuisance” makes me laugh. Is it fair to call it indecent exposure when your underwear shows in public when television, magazines, and billboards proudly display half-naked men and women everyday for the world to see? At least they are wearing underwear! This isn’t about cracking down on indecent exposure. It is about stereotyping the attitude that many assumes goes along with the baggy pants fashion. If you are going to crack down on public indecency, focus on those who are actually indecent. Crack down on the pop culture that promotes the image of immodesty, even if it is appealing to eye. Let me leave you with a question. Which is more indecent: a young man walking down the streets of Flint, Michigan, with his pants sagging, or a Victoria Secret advertisement that runs on your television daily?

11 weeks ago wkuwilliam commented:

It doesn’t take a genius or a scholar to realize the numerous amounts of problems with our present day country. Whether it be tackling the issue of rising gas prices, the war, or even our slowly decreasing economy. The one thing that all these issues and problems have in common is how the media, higher powers, and authority figures a like, will do just about anything in their power to avoid said predicament.
A prime example of this evasion is in Flint, Michigan, where the chief of police wants to start ticketing people for wearing their pants to low. The chief was quoted saying he believes “it’s a national nuisance,” and “immoral self expression.” That may be but, the first amendment protects the right to freedom of expression from government interference. I’m not exactly positive on what people are expressing when they do sag, but I think it has to do partially with rebellion and current fashion trends. 
It is very annoying, having to see people’s unmentionables that are sagging, but that fact of the matter is that it’s not harming or putting any one in immediate danger. If someone wishes to sag, then that’s their prerogative and they should be able to do so with out being prosecuted.

13 weeks ago whiskeytango commented:

There is little to nothing that local governments can do in the form of legislation that will make a dent in our national problems. Problems such as gas prices, the gulf war(s), and national economic issues are by and large out of their hands. What they can do however is take a look around their communities and address issues as they see them at eye level. This ‘droopy pants’ legislation is hardly relevant nor will it ever really solve any social ills (aside from saving my eyes from a load of sweaty teenager undies). I think that the real failure at the heart of this matter is not the issues that they are addressing (social decency in turn affecting domestic violence) but how they are addressing it. In many ways domestic violence is only a matter that local governments can handle from a reactionary standpoint. It takes a nation’s decision and actions to quell major social ills before they happen.

self-evident

15 weeks ago an anonymous user commented:

We’ve got gas prices above $4, home mortgage foreclosures, rising unemployment, water shortages, domestic violence, urban sprawl…and that’s just in my state. If we consider the thousands who have died (or will continue to die) in the Gulf War, those lost in the AIDs epidemic, the problem of global warming and a myriad of other problems, how do we even have time to think about someone’s droopy pants? I’d much rather have local governments spend time on catching DWIs or people who throw those blasted plastic water bottles on the roadside than worry about a clothing fad. We should be so lucky if that’s all we faced.

14 weeks ago mmckerral commented:

Well stated! Mac McKerral