1

Squawk of the Day - April 16, 2012

"Hooray for the judge in Alabama that sentenced the man to three days in jail for wearing his pants too low. He said that the guy “showed his butt” in his courtroom and he wouldn’t stand for it. He also said he was tired of the lack of respect that he was seeing all around. It’s a shame we don’t have some judges like that in Albany."

For more squawks, pick up a copy of today's Albany Herald.

To submit a squawk, Click here.

Comments

watchman 2 years ago

I for one, do not like the dress of those that expose their undies. Nor do I like piercing and I find some tattoos offensive, however, I truly dislike not allowing an individual to express themselves in whatever manner they desire if it does not infringes upon the rights of another. And all of the aforementioned does not infringe upon anyone rights. Tasteless, perhaps.

0

erudite 2 years ago

Yes, people are screaming for less government intrusion in personal life and we get more and more of it everyday. Regulating clothing is going too far; sort of like fundamentalist religious communities/nations.

0

Outtahere 2 years ago

Agreed 100%. But, I do agree that dressing appropriatley in court is a must and the judge has a right to enforce that. The guy should have known better. If he didn't , he does now.

1

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

".......express themselves" by walking around with their pants falling off???? Here's what it expresses to me "Hey look at me I'm a stupid freaking idiot!"

The only other thing it might mean is "Ready to drop my draws and make a father-less welfare baby".

1

tocar 2 years ago

I say "Hooray" to the Judge in Alabama also. I get so sick of seeing saggy pants in this town. Maybe our Judges will follow suit.

1

chinaberry25 2 years ago

There was an advertisement in the Southwest Georgia Magazine who displayed yuppie white boys advertising something and their underwear was showing. Of course it was expensive looking duds. I was shocked and would never buy anything that promoted this type of behavior. To me it is thumbing the world.

0

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

There's always two sides to every situation. Don't forget that it's pretty much impossible to "snatch and run" when they holding they pants up by the crotch.

0

justme 2 years ago

holding their pants up by the crotch, bet you wish you could.

0

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

What I wish I could do is kick 'em in the crotch.

1

erudite 2 years ago

These are the people we should be robbing; the pants are so low that they cannot chase!! Grab the bling and go!!

0

KaosinAlbany 2 years ago

What a moron for showing up in Court dressed in saggy pants. I don't blame the Judge on bit.

0

VSU 2 years ago

The judge should have put him in jail for a month.

0

Jimboob 2 years ago

And this is important...?

0

Somebody 2 years ago

It is you you don't want to see people's underwear.

0

43cop 2 years ago

And ignorance is certainly in Albany. Read reudite, justme, Jimboob and this will tell you the mentality that helps fuel the fires right here. The law or ordinance is enforceable and it should be, especially in a Courtroom.

0

erudite 2 years ago

If you are going to criticize, learn to spell. I know the law is enforceable; I question whether we should make it a law. Should we make all women wear burkas like other theocracies? Should we make men wear kaftans and turbans to indicate their status or lack of it?

0

tocar 2 years ago

Maybe we should not have to have the judicial system dictate as to how we dress, but common sense goes a long way. Saggy pants and having to hold them up to the point that you have to walk like a penquin is offensive. There are senior citizens and children who should not have to look at this. Have some respect and descency for others. The Judge was right in doing what he had to do in the courtroom. It is understandable why there are so many streetwalkers unemployed. I would not want you working for me dressed in saggy pants. It is hard to work with one hand when you have to hold your clothes up with the other. How repulsive!

0

erudite 2 years ago

Yes, if i find something offensive, I have the right to say so. Please do not make the government be my mouth piece. Many squawkers despise the current government and want to return to conservative rule; is this really what you want? Do you want the givernment to not only set your gas prices and speed limits but how you dress as well?

0

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

The worst offenders in totalitarian rule, not only in the USA but globally, have ALWAYS been Democrat (Jimmy Carter 55 mph speed limit? Gas rationing?) or Socialist/Communist countries. You of all people, erudite.....with your vast learning and overwhelming intellectual prowess, should know this!!

0

erudite 2 years ago

What? Totalitarian rule has no "parties"; just a ruling class. No people were ever allowed to vote; they were not even asked to vote. We do not live in a democracy--what do you pledge allegiance to..A Republic!!! A fancy word for empire; every empire has folded because it 'ruled' the lower classes out of existence. That is where we are headed with the government entering our bedrooms and now our dressers. No tsar was a democrat, no emperor, no national socialist, no communist, no theocrat, no monarchist, nor any anarchist, are interested in political parties so therefore how can they be democrat? What does being a democrat or a republican mean?

0

gotanyfacts 2 years ago

Now, now Erudite. There you go redefining words again. You know very well "republic" and "empire" are not synonyms. And the next time that guy comes into your bedroom and goes through your drawers, you better ask for his government ID. ;)))

0

erudite 2 years ago

Carter did not set prices; the oil companies stopped producing and exporting to the US. The was no oil to be refined into gasoline. It actually prompted much of the drilling we have in the US today in hopes of not being subject to OPEC whims. In order for everyone to get some, he established days for gasoline but not be his own accord. He was not 'the decider'. The speed limit was alos initiated because of the scarcity of gasoline.

0

1d2ec 2 years ago

Isn't that what our current President is asking for the power to do should there be war with Iran?

0

JustAnotherVoice 2 years ago

If the local government can pass an enforceable ordinance against baggy pants that show someone's underwear where is the ordinance against blouses that show a woman's underwear or breasts? Or too much leg? or worse yet, butt cheeks?

1

agonized 2 years ago

I was waiting for someone to mention this, and I agree. These days, womens' manner of dress is equally offensive, where clothes are so tight, short, lowcut, etc., they leave nothing to the imagination. Unfortunately.

But the larger point is ordinances of this sort present a slippery slope. Believe me, I don't enjoy seeing saggy pants with drawers exposed, and if it's in front of my daughter, I tell her to close her eyes. But I don't dial 911 because of that alone.

With regard to the ordinance here in Albany, unless the saggy pants offender is into "indecent exposure" territory , which is a state crime, to me, it is a waste of time and resources, of which Albany has precious little, to prosecute these offenders. There are more than enough crimes to keep law enforcement busy and the jails full here. This is taxpayer dollars we're discussing. I think violation of the Albany ordinance results in a very low fine, and most of the time the charge is in connection with some other charge against the saggy one.

I don't know all of the facts of the case in Alabama, but if this idiot was dumb enough to dress that way in court, perhaps he got a contempt charge as well, which resulted in 3 days jail. It's that judge's court, and he can conduct it as he sees fit.

0

erudite 2 years ago

I too am wary of this. Back in the day, a girl was responsible for being raped because "she asked for it" by the way she dressed. Whose fault is it when a man cannot keep his desire for power under wraps? G Rivera--the fake hispanic--said that Martin's hoodie was to blame. This can spiral out of control very quickly. Because he was wearing baggy pants, I thought he was a thug so I shot him.

0

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

I saw a girl today that I thought was "asking for it".........but there didn't seem to be any takers. But it WAS Monday so that might have some bearing on the situation..........?

0

Somebody 2 years ago

I always said that people wearing sagging pants are stupid, and this joker proved it.

0

agirl_25 2 years ago

Well the story made the Associated Press wires and is also on the London wires so maybe someone will want their 15 minutes of fame and the ACLU will get involved....oh lordy.....now it has the potential of becoming a media circus. Bring out the clown cars. Toot toot. Someone will surely be on the Today Show's sofa next week along with Al Sharpton and his bullhorn.....and his slicked back hair...but it may take away from the frenzy that is Martin-Zimmerman for a while.

0

TrixibelleBento 2 years ago

Judge Judy continually admonishes people for dressing poorly for her courtroom. Bravo Judge! There has to be some sort of decorum.

1

Black_Falcon 2 years ago

I think everybody on this blog should meet for coffee. I like to put faces to comments. With all the diverse opinions, it surely won't be a dull gathering.

0

Sister_Ruby 2 years ago

I prefer my coffee BOLD, bro!! Not a surprise, surely??

You say the TIME and the PLACE and I'll say the BREW!!

0

Sign in to comment