The Instigator
Cheeseburers010
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imabench
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

Should sagging pants in public be made illegal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/9/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 14,220 times Debate No: 23513
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

Cheeseburers010

Con

Many would say its just a trend that will pass over in time and others would propose that this issue is a movement that goes beyond the limit of pants, but is it really that big of a problem to make it illegal? Now I understand that it's one thing for a school to have dress codes but its a whole different topic to issue ordinances that would carry consequences and fines for citizens who aren't even breaking the law. Having to pull up your pants should not be punishable especially for those who cannot afford to buy new pants or event belt. Clothing regulations are simply a violation of citizens rights such as the first admendent under the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution. It states that all citizens of the United States have a right to freedom of speech. Expressing their beliefs and ideas through their apparel is their own decision. Bussiness owners, government buildings these places have the right to establish dress codes. But I should be able to wear my baggy pants in my front yard without fear of police harassment.
imabench

Pro



Sagging originated as a sign for allowing consensual gay sex among prisoners who were incarcerated. However the knowledge behind the origins of sagging has been lost to many people and now people sag because they think its cool, but in reality they are endangering themselves by putting them at risk to get buttf*cked by an ex convict who just got out of jail and could be looking for sex, consensual or not.

"Clothing regulations are simply a violation of citizens rights such as the first admendent under the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution."

That is most certainly is not true because there are laws on the books forbidding public nudity. The government has and exercises the right to regulate clothing as a means of expression so it is perfectly legal for them to outlaw sagging.

Lets think of this from another angle.

If someone sags their pants, then according to the pro it should be legal even though it encourages gay unconsentual butt sex by ex convicts and children. However if a person is sagging their underwear, then that can be considered public nudity, which is a crime. Sagging can be tied to existing criminal laws, and picking apples and oranges over which article of clothing is sagging shouldn't be an issue for the law since they both condone illegal activity.

Sagging pants condones gay sex, rape,

public nudity, and can hint at gang related

activity all at the same time.


Do you want this child to be raped in the a**hole by a prisoner?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.



I didn't think so.

Sagging pants should be illegal unless you want innocent children to be forced to have unconsentual butt sex with ex convicts.
Debate Round No. 1
Cheeseburers010

Con

I agree with you that sagging originated from prison and that it is a sign of homosexualality for men but if we were to make it illegal it will do more harm than good. Oh yeah sure you see a person sagging there pants shove a fine in there face but what about the families that are too poor to buy smaller pants for there children or even a belt and if that was the case giving them a fine will not only make there life harder but it will put them at risk of any more government problems. And also you can't legislate how people dress but you can legislate when people become indecent by exposing private body parts that's why the nudity law was passed which leads to the fact that sagging could not be the same as nudity because they have boxers on covering that private area because if that was the case then we might as well ban bikinis and underwear for the summer since " showing boxers is a form of nudity"

And another thing since sagging was originally brought up in the African American culture in the early 1990s where an estimation of 12% of Blacks aging from 20 to 34 are in jail or prison compared to the1.6% of any other race, this act should be left alone. Making it illegal to sag in public isn't just discrimininating against the rights of African Americans but it's very disrespectful to other ethnic groups. Studies from today's anthropologists have shown that the lack of respect cause fights, wars, riots, and destruction. You fear that one kid can get rapped from sagging well you should take it in to consideration that if you make this act illegal instead of harming 1 you will harm 20 from the violence that will follow. REMEBER Travon Martin who got killed do to suspicions. He was sagging and wearing a black hoodie but that just one person. Your basically saying as in comparance to sagging that because one vehicle got into a car wreck and a person were killed that we should ban all automobiles besides if we were to base everything off of people's suspicions there would probably be a law that bans the use to freely use Internet because millilions of people think that is suspicious.

I would rather save three full house families rather than one sexually abused child.
imabench

Pro

" what about the families that are too poor to buy smaller pants for there children or even a belt and if that was the case giving them a fine will not only make there life harder but it will put them at risk of any more government problems."

People dont sag pants because they are poor, they do it for many other reasons that are not related to economic well being at all. There are countless charities that exist that help people get clothes for next to nothing, and how many times does it actually occur where a family cant buy small clothes, but can buy BIG ones that are too LARGE? If you afford large clothing but then suddenly not have enough for smaller clothing that actually fits, then you just need to manage your finances better since its impossible to be able to afford bigger clothing and not smaller clothing.

" you can't legislate how people dress but you can legislate when people become indecent by exposing private body parts...."

Thank you for that little statement.

"that's why the nudity law was passed which leads to the fact that sagging could not be the same as nudity because they have boxers on covering that private area because if that was the case then we might as well ban bikinis and underwear for the summer since " showing boxers is a form of nudity""

First of all, punctuation. Second of all, people who sag dont always wear boxers and people can sag both their pants and their boxers which still leaves the connection to public nudity open. Thirdly, this wouldnt ban the use of baggy pants, just wearing them inappropriately in a fashion that can be related to indecent exposure, because like bikinis and underwear, baggy pants are perfectly legal. They only become an issue if worn improperly in a way that constitutes indecent exposure.

"12% of Blacks aging from 20 to 34 are in jail or prison compared to the 1.6% of any other race, this act should be left alone"

So your arguing that since black people go to jail more often, we should let them do things that are illegal and not arrest them..... Prison populations arent meant to fill quotas or to be equal, and if one race commits mroe crimes then another race it doesnt mean that that race should be allowed to get away with more crime.

"REMEBER Travon Martin who got killed do to suspicions. He was sagging and wearing a black hoodie but that just one person. Your basically saying as in comparance to sagging that because one vehicle got into a car wreck and a person were killed that we should ban all automobiles"

First off, that doesnt make any sense at all. Secondly, cars are different from sagging because cars dont lead to public nudity or prison rape. Lastly, owning a car isnt indicative of gang related activity, but sagging pants are.

"I would rather save three full house families rather than one sexually abused child."

Says the person who wants to let black people get away with crimes just so that the number of black people in prison is equal to that of the number of white people in prison......

========================================================================================================================================================

Apart from making several ridiculous claims of what I think should and shouldnt be banned, the Pro has admitted that the government does have the authority and power to regulate indecent exposure, and the sagging of pants can be seen as a form of indecent exposure.
Debate Round No. 2
Cheeseburers010

Con

Sorry for my punctuation I'm not typing on a computer keyboard.

How can you decide for everyone that sagging is caused by negative influence , etc. now there may not be a lot of poor families who can't buy pants or belts but you must consider the fact that there are some children out there who sag because of economic issues and another thing big pants are usually handed down to children the parents aren't that crazy to go and buy larger pants rather than ones that fit there size.

Also I was saying that since sagging originated from jail and since more black people are common in jail the sagging trend would be more relevant in the African American culture than any other meaning it will disrespect blacks more. And also if you think we should make sagging illegal your basically putting in jail for a stupid reason because 9 times out of 10 people aren't going to pay the fine for sagging pants and if you don't what you gonna do send them to jail. Well if that's the case then your really going to piss off the people in America that have to pay taxes because since you're going to throw people in prison that means its going to be over populated so now we the people have to pay the government more taxes to build more jails. And since we taking people off the street and putting them in jail for gagging then that makes it bad for big market salers like wal mart because that where most people shop and
if you reduce the amount of people in that area then Walmart in that area is going to go out of business.

" you can't legislate how people dress but you can legislate when people become indecent by exposing private body parts...."

Yeah I understand where your thinking is coming from on this statement but maybe you didn't read the last part when I said by exposing PRIVATE body parts and your not exposing private body parts if you don't see bare skin ( the penus, vagina, butt) area. All you're seeing of that person is the boxers or underwear

And owning anything can be just as gang related and violent as sagging
imabench

Pro

" big pants are usually handed down to children the parents aren't that crazy to go and buy larger pants rather than ones that fit there size."

1) You mean parents arent crazy about buying pants that fit their kids and arent too large
2) It is ridiculously easy to find fitting clothes for a low price. Salvation army, goodwill, any charity that gives out clothes, all of them allow people to have easy access to clothes that fit
3) If they were handed down then why do the people who wear them exacerbate how big they are? people who have big pants who dont want to sag can fix it by pulling them up when they sag too low, but what is observed in the real world is people letting their back pockets be behind their knees to the point where they are sagging through their own choice, not because of economical reasons

"Also I was saying that since sagging originated from jail and since more black people are common in jail the sagging trend would be more relevant in the African American culture than any other meaning it will disrespect blacks more."

It would only apply to them more, it isnt disrespectful to them unless people ONLY arrest blacks for sagging, but thats not the case nor will it be the case

"9 times out of 10 people aren't going to pay the fine for sagging pants and if you don't what you gonna do send them to jail."

Thats how laws worked last I checked...... The fine is a hell of a lot cheaper than time in prison so unless your basing all of this off a study you decided to not quote, then I can assume people will pay the fine since the alternative is going to jail and getting butt raped for doing the thing that got you in jail in the first place.

" so now we the people have to pay the government more taxes to build more jails"

How many people do you think would be arrested for sagging who refused to pay the fine which is probably 100x cheaper than the costs of going to prison? Once again your over blowing how many people would be affected.

"since we taking people off the street and putting them in jail for gagging then that makes it bad for big market salers like wal mart because that where most people shop and if you reduce the amount of people in that area then Walmart in that area is going to go out of business."

1) WTF?
2) Walmart doesnt sell goods only to black people, they sell to other races too and they would be more than enough to make the chain profitable
3) Again barely anybody would even do jail time, meaning the impact they have on stores would be minimal

"Yeah I understand where your thinking is coming from on this statement but maybe you didn't read the last part when I said by exposing PRIVATE body parts and your not exposing private body parts if you don't see bare skin ( the penus, vagina, butt) area. All you're seeing of that person is the boxers or underwear"

Exposing underwear or boxers could be argued as a form of indecent exposure which means that sagging could be considered a violation of the law. There is a difference between being nude and indecent exposure, and sagging more than qualifies for the second one.

"And owning anything can be just as gang related and violent as sagging"

I have never seen a black person holding a lollipop and immediately thought they were in a gang, or were violent....

========================================================================================================================================================

Dropped arguments

1) The government has the power and justification to regulate clothing violations and codes to a reasonable degree
2) Sagging is indicative of gang activity
3) Sagging is related to other harmful and illegal acts

========================================================================================================================================================

Sagging in public is done by a very small proportion of the population, the fines would be a much better option than jail time, economic conditions can easily be overcome to buy clothes that arent ridiculously big, and people who do sag often dont do it accidentally but instead choose to only sag MORE. Sagging is related to gang activity and many other illicit practices, it would not affect taxpayers, communities, or Walmart since this would only be a problem for a small number of people. Lastly the government has the right and authority to regulate clothing policies and define what is or isnt indecent exposure, and if a person is sagging their pants and showing off their boxers or their tiger colored thong, then that could be considered indecent exposure. This is why sagging pants could be considered to be made illegal in public
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by MouthWash 5 years ago
MouthWash
Tuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhh-ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLL DEBATE!!! >.<
Posted by Prox 5 years ago
Prox
Hilarious. Also, terrible.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
and now we wait
Posted by Cheeseburers010 5 years ago
Cheeseburers010
Actually 1dustpelt this is a highly debatable topic and it's surely not a stupid genre and if this questin were it probably would not be storming into the minds of professional debtors today in states of the U.S such as Tennesee and Hampton, Georgia who already made
it illegal to wear pants 3inches below the waist line aka sag. However if you still believe that this is undebateable and/or unconstitutional you should try telling that to the people who already enforced the matter of the act being illegal not the ones that are agreeing with you:)
Posted by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
This is undebatable. Stop creating stupid topics. Seriously, who can debate as Pro? It is totally unconstitutional. It's like saying "Hey, I don't like coke so I am going to ban it for every single person in the world"
Posted by bluepawn24 5 years ago
bluepawn24
wow a very good beginning for a debate! nice..
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by t-man 5 years ago
t-man
Cheeseburers010imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made so many errors.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
Cheeseburers010imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: "Hey, let's let black people get away with crimes just because they're black! If we don't it's racist!" ~ Con
Vote Placed by K.GKevinGeary 5 years ago
K.GKevinGeary
Cheeseburers010imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: con dropped it and i just gave the conduct to pro because the opening was funny.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Cheeseburers010imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Poor kiddie getting raped... Pro wins