Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: Different form of Open and carry

  1. #1
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Are you in favor of laws that ban baggy pants, Kelly J?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    "Are they going to go after construction workers and plumbers, because their pants sag, too?"

    ^^ Heheh

    While I think baggy pants are retarded, I don't believe it should be illegal. Seriously.... the whole thing is stupid. My guess is people will still wear baggy pants and there will be too many people to arrest.

    Hell, it almost makes me want to buy some baggy pants and run around Atlanta for a week or two...

  4. #4
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    Absolutely.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    kurtmax_0 wrote:
    "Are they going to go after construction workers and plumbers, because their pants sag, too?"

    ^^ Heheh

    While I think baggy pants are retarded, I don't believe it should be illegal. Seriously.... the whole thing is stupid. My guess is people will still wear baggy pants and there will be too many people to arrest.

    Hell, it almost makes me want to buy some baggy pants and run around Atlanta for a week or two...
    Every generation has it's own statement that they tend to make, but I have witnessed so many cases of indecent exposure, that it has become more than a statement of fashion, it is simply indecent exposure, and the law des arrest flashers and people that do pratice the indecent exposure issue, so why not this as well.

    I don't know if I would go so far as Jail, but public service would be ok.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    KC,MO, ,
    Posts
    168

    Post imported post

    Hey, whilethose politosare at it, I would like a law that says if you are over 300 pounds you cannot wear spandex anda tube top that only covers 2 of your 9 flab rolls.

    Especially in the Mall where my wife drags me totally unprotected in that no gun zone. Bad enough my rights are assaulted but do my eyes need to be subjected to that as well....

    :what:

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    Indecent exposure? That's fine, I wont argue that. Saggy pants? Well I have two opinions on that. First of all, the woman said that it's basically a form of racial profiling. I agree. Certain races are profiling themselves by dressing in a matter that is different from everyone else, yet at the same time they wanted to be treated like everyone else...mm hmm, that makes sense.

    With that being said, I'm out of the military and no longer will I have people telling what I can wear and how I can dress. Any law restricting any kind of clothing (indecent exposure aside) is absolutely ridiculous.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    Whoa. Here I was thinking the term fashion police was only figurative.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    Indecent exposure? That's fine, I wont argue that. Saggy pants? Well I have two opinions on that. First of all, the woman said that it's basically a form of racial profiling. I agree. Certain races are profiling themselves by dressing in a matter that is different from everyone else, yet at the same time they wanted to be treated like everyone else...mm hmm, that makes sense.

    With that being said, I'm out of the military and no longer will I have people telling what I can wear and how I can dress. Any law restricting any kind of clothing (indecent exposure aside) is absolutely ridiculous.
    People like this always crack me up, back during the Flower child days, the Hippies, the yuppies, and the what ever you want to call them,every one was dressing just the way they wanted to, and all said we are different, and it is our way of making a statement to be different.

    The problem is that every one wants to make the same statement and they all look alike, now where is the individualism in that?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    I want them wearing the baggypants, ever seen one try to run while holding his pants up. No way to do that and carry his gun.:P

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    Kelly J wrote:
    People like this always crack me up, back during the Flower child days, the Hippies, the yuppies, and the what ever you want to call them,every one was dressing just the way they wanted to, and all said we are different, and it is our way of making a statement to be different.

    The problem is that every one wants to make the same statement and they all look alike, now where is the individualism in that?
    Ha! Sounds like you're talking about harley riders now.

    I think we should ban them.....

  12. #12
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Kelly J wrote:
    ...it is simply indecent exposure, and the law des arrest flashers and people that do pratice the indecent exposure issue, so why not this as well.

    I don't know if I would go so far as Jail, but public service would be ok.
    It's interesting, really interesting how a forum filled with guys soooooo committed to the constitution....sooooooooooooo committed to individual rights.....soooooooooooo committed to preventing and discouraging undue and unneeded governmental regulation.......and we have some who favor enactment of a rule on baggy pants!

    And some who even favor consideration of jail time!

    The big H rears its ugly head--again.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NoVa by way of Chesapeake, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    Certain races are profiling themselves by dressing in a matter that is different from everyone else, yet at the same time they wanted to be treated like everyone else...mm hmm, that makes sense.
    how does dressing different equal "profiling themselves" individuals have the right to dress how they feel, this is supposed to be a free society....i dont care if you wear a clown suit everyday you should still be treated the same as everyone else...somewouldsay just because you choose to open carry your gun you should be treated different and expected to be stopped everytime a LEO sees you....your logic is severely flawed

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    dkd wrote:
    DreQo wrote:
    Certain races are profiling themselves by dressing in a matter that is different from everyone else, yet at the same time they wanted to be treated like everyone else...mm hmm, that makes sense.
    how does dressing different equal "profiling themselves" individuals have the right to dress how they feel, this is supposed to be a free society....i dont care if you wear a clown suit everyday you should still be treated the same as everyone else...somewouldsay just because you choose to open carry your gun you should be treated different and expected to be stopped every time a LEO sees you....your logic is severely flawed
    I appreciate you questioning my statement so that we may further discuss the topic, but attempting to insult my logic is, at best, childish. The examples you just gave are not relative to one another. Let me try to explain my point of view....

    Legally carrying should not be a reason for a person to be treated differently. Lets pretend, however, that there was a group of "open carriers" that went aroundmurdering people, and they looked exactly like anyone else open carrying, except that they wore red top hats. Now, after a while, it becomes common knowledge that if you see someone with a gun and a red top hat, then he's most likely going to murder someone.

    Now lets say you go out one day, with your gun, and decide that a red top hat would go very well with the jeans you're wearing. You know you're not a murderous person, and you don't know anyone who is. What kind of reaction do you think you're gonna get from the sheeple? From LEOs? Could the combination of a sidearm and red top hat be enough, by itself, to warrant detention for questioning? It probably shouldn't be, but it would probably happen. So now you're gonna go complain to the court and the PD that you were unconstitutionally detained based only on the facts that you had a gun, and were wearing a red top hat...and you're probably going to be told that if you don't want that to happen, then don't wear a red top hat while you're carrying!!

    There is statistical evidence that shows that an overwhelming majority of black males that commit crimes do so while dressed in the stereotypical ghetto black manner. You almost never see a black male wearing properly fitting jeans and a nice polo breaking the law. Yet these guys still run around wearing clothing that is neither practical nor attractive, and furthermore puts them into a stereotypical group that they don't want to be associated with!

    I do not believe there should be any laws restricting ones choice of clothing, but I don't see anything wrong with noticing patterns in behavior and acting on them (i.e. questioning every person you see with a gun and a red top hat).

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NoVa by way of Chesapeake, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    dkd wrote:
    DreQo wrote:
    Certain races are profiling themselves by dressing in a matter that is different from everyone else, yet at the same time they wanted to be treated like everyone else...mm hmm, that makes sense.
    how does dressing different equal "profiling themselves" individuals have the right to dress how they feel, this is supposed to be a free society....i dont care if you wear a clown suit everyday you should still be treated the same as everyone else...somewouldsay just because you choose to open carry your gun you should be treated different and expected to be stopped every time a LEO sees you....your logic is severely flawed
    There is statistical evidence that shows that an overwhelming majority of black males that commit crimes do so while dressed in the stereotypical ghetto black manner. You almost never see a black male wearing properly fitting jeans and a nice polo breaking the law. Yet these guys still run around wearing clothing that is neither practical nor attractive, and furthermore puts them into a stereotypical group that they don't want to be associated with!

    I do not believe there should be any laws restricting ones choice of clothing, but I don't see anything wrong with noticing patterns in behavior and acting on them (i.e. questioning every person you see with a gun and a red top hat).
    so there is statistical evidence on how people are dressed while commiting crimes?...i would love to see these stats...how many people black,white hispanic or other do you see commiting crimes in polo shirts?...what you are doing is making generalizations which leads to profiling a tactic often used by police on young black males
    i can attest to this because i am black, look rather young but if you saw me outside of work you would automatically assume i was a "gangbanger" if i had on jeans thatyou would consider ill fitting or didnt have a polo on...but you couldnt be further from the truth because i am a college grad and have a clean record and a good job, but because i dont fit into your mold of how a criminal doesnt dress you would automatically assume i was a BG because i was dressed inwhat you consider"stereotypical ghetto black manner"


  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    so there is statistical evidence on how people are dressed while commiting crimes?...
    yes, the information is gathered whenever they record a description of the person in question...
    what you are doing is making generalizations which leads to profiling a tactic often used by police on young black males
    I agree, but there are already set patterns that show that these generalizations are, in general, legitimate. There are ways that white guys dress that throw a red flag up, as well. The clothes you wear say something about you, period. There is no way around it. It is a form of communication. The minute people set eyes on you, they start forming an opinion in their mind of who you are. It is unavoidable. It is human. When someone see's that 8 of out 10 people that dress a certain way, act the same way, then they've noticed a pattern. They can now logically deduce that 80% of the people the meet dressed in that manner are going to act the same way. Now, if the person is intelligent, they will be constantly looking for new patterns, but when the pattern exists, then it exists!
    i can attest to this because i am black, look rather young but if you saw me outside of work you would automatically assume i was a "gangbanger" if i had on jeans thatyou would consider ill fitting or didnt have a polo on...but you couldnt be further from the truth because i am a college grad and have a clean record and a good job, but because i dont fit into your mold of how a criminal doesnt dress you would automatically assume i was a BG because i was dressed in a "stereotypical ghetto black manner
    Keep in mind that black males were used as an example because that is what the original topic referred to. Any group of people can be used as an example in this case. If I, beingwhite,didn't shave for a couple of days and threw on a beater and torn jeans and wandered out to the children's soccer field to watch the kids play, I guarantee I'd get some negative attention around here. I might even be approached by a LEO after some concerned mother called. At that point I could explain that I was simply there to watch my g/f's son play soccer. If I did the same thing wearing what I normally do (khaki shorts and a clean t-shirt, for instance) I probably wouldn't be questioned.

    With all of that said, I would personally question the intelligence and decision making abilities of any person who wear pants that were literally too big to stay on by themselves. There is no practical application for that type of clothing, so the purpose of wearing them MUST BE to communicate something....

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NoVa by way of Chesapeake, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    Keep in mind that black males were used as an example because that is what the original topic referred to. Any group of people can be used as an example in this case. If I, beingwhite,didn't shave for a couple of days and threw on a beater and torn jeans and wandered out to the children's soccer field to watch the kids play, I guarantee I'd get some negative attention around here. I might even be approached by a LEO after some concerned mother called. At that point I could explain that I was simply there to watch my g/f's son play soccer. If I did the same thing wearing what I normally do (khaki shorts and a clean t-shirt, for instance) I probably wouldn't be questioned.

    With all of that said, I would personally question the intelligence and decision making abilities of any person who wear pants that were literally too big to stay on by themselves. There is no practical application for that type of clothing, so the purpose of wearing them MUST BE to communicate something....
    but we arent talking about showing up at a soccer game dressed a little weird either. this is policing fashion(that is really not in style anymore) for people that are walking down the street, which i believe would leave people open to more harrassment, in my youthisometimes did dress in oversized clothes but it didnt make any different a person and definitely didnt need policing, which i why i would have a problem with this, the last thing we need is the govt telling us how we should and shouldnt dress

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    but we arent talking about showing up at a soccer game dressed a little weird either. this is policing fashion(that is really not in style anymore) for people that are walking down the street, which i believe would leave people open to more harrassment, in my youthisometimes did dress in oversized clothes but it didnt make any different a person and definitely didnt need policing, which i why i would have a problem with this, the last thing we need is the govt telling us how we should and shouldnt dress
    I agree, and will again state that I would not support any decision to regulate what people choose to wear. The thought of that is absolutely ridiculous, and IF any laws like that are ever passed, I will be going to that area and dressing in the "inappropriate" manner for the sole purpose of making a point....and I bet when someone saw me doing that, they'd be able to figure out what point I was making without ever talking to me.....

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NoVa by way of Chesapeake, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    but we arent talking about showing up at a soccer game dressed a little weird either. this is policing fashion(that is really not in style anymore) for people that are walking down the street, which i believe would leave people open to more harrassment, in my youthisometimes did dress in oversized clothes but it didnt make any different a person and definitely didnt need policing, which i why i would have a problem with this, the last thing we need is the govt telling us how we should and shouldnt dress
    I agree, and will again state that I would not support any decision to regulate what people choose to wear. The thought of that is absolutely ridiculous, and IF any laws like that are ever passed, I will be going to that area and dressing in the "inappropriate" manner for the sole purpose of making a point....and I bet when someone saw me doing that, they'd be able to figure out what point I was making without ever talking to me.....
    i feel the same way and often wonder if danbus would've had the police called on him had he been dressed in khakis and a nice shirt as opposed to all black t-shirt and jeans

  20. #20
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    i feel the same way and often wonder if danbus would've had the police called on him had he been dressed in khakis and a nice shirt as opposed to all black t-shirt and jeans
    I'd be willing to bet that his outfit effected the situation. I'd also bet that his skin color effected the situation. We already know that his gun effected the situation. Should ANY of these things have been factors? Morally, legally, and constitutionally speaking, no. The problem is, there are some people that grow up and literally NEVER meet a black person that wasn't rude, racist, poorly spoken, and poorly dressed. This person then becomes an adult, and since they've never met anyone to prove contrary, they believe that all black people are like that. Then they meet a black person who is intelligent, well spoken, and well dressed, and they might think "oh, well he's smart and looks good, so it's only the dumb poorly dressed ones I have to watch out for". They're not being maliciously prejudice towards anyone, they're just calling things how they see them.

    I've been around most of this country and part of Europe, so I've met a LOT of people. I've learned that there are exceptions to every pattern and stereotype, and, morally speaking, one should always assume that the person in front of them is the exception. The problem is logic says otherwise...

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gary, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    518

    Post imported post

    In case anyone forgot, the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. I don't know about any of you, but whether you like saggy pants or not, a six-month jail sentence for sagging pants seems to me to be a bit excessive. I believe that a fine (maximum $100)is sufficient for an offense of this nature.

  22. #22
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    My, oh, my. What happened to the Libertarians on this forum?

    You can never find on of those guys when you need him.... :P

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gary, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    518

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    There is no practical application for that type of clothing, so the purpose of wearing them MUST BE to communicate something....
    If that's the case, then maybe we should only allow people to exercise RKBA only when there is a practical reason for them to do so ( after all, it is already done in may issue states such as the PRNJ, PRNY, and some parts of PRMA). After all, don't the gestapo in those states assume that the only reason anyone would ever want to carry a gun is to communicate something? Furthermore,your logic for supporting a ban on sagging pantssuggests that if people are only allowed to do things based on what their practical application is, then it would be okay to onlyban speech that has has no practical application.



  24. #24
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    I believe that a fine (maximum $100)is sufficient for an offense of this nature.
    Short of indecent exposure, how are baggy pants an offense? Perhaps we should outlaw hijabs while we're at it, since a woman covering her face might very well be attempting to conceal her identity while comitting a crime. Now granted baggy pants aren't religiously connected as hijabs are, but they are both harmless pieces of clothing....

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    tattedupboy wrote:
    DreQo wrote:
    There is no practical application for that type of clothing, so the purpose of wearing them MUST BE to communicate something....
    If that's the case, then maybe we should only allow people to exercise RKBA only when there is a practical reason for them to do so ( after all, it is already done in may issue states such as the PRNJ, PRNY, and some parts of PRMA). After all, don't the gestapo in those states assume that the only reason anyone would ever want to carry a gun is to communicate something? Furthermore,your logic for supporting a ban on sagging pantssuggests that if people are only allowed to do things based on what their practical application is, then it would be okay to onlyban speech that has has no practical application.


    lol You must not be reading everything on this thread. I don't, under any circumstances, support a ban on any sort of clothing...quite the contrary in fact. I do, however, believe that people complaining (as in the article) that such a ban would be considered racial profiling is silly. Why? You can not take off your skin color, so judging someone on that IS wrong, period. You can, however, put on any clothing that you wish, so if one type of clothing is giving people a bad impression, then it might be a good idea to wear something else. You don't HAVE to, and there shouldn't be a law requiring you to, but you can't say that the people getting the bad impressions are wrong, either.

    I do believe that you should only be allowed to keep and bear arms when it is practical. To do so impractically would be pointless. I also believe, however, that it is ALWAYS practical to have a way to defend yourself, your family, your neighbors, and your country...so your point is lost to me.


    DreQo wrote:
    With that being said, I'm out of the military and no longer will I have people telling what I can wear and how I can dress. Any law restricting any kind of clothing (indecent exposure aside) is absolutely ridiculous.
    I do not believe there should be any laws restricting ones choice of clothing
    I agree, and will again state that I would not support any decision to regulate what people choose to wear. The thought of that is absolutely ridiculous, and IF any laws like that are ever passed, I will be going to that area and dressing in the "inappropriate" manner for the sole purpose of making a point....
    Short of indecent exposure, how are baggy pants an offense? Perhaps we should outlaw hijabs while we're at it, since a woman covering her face might very well be attempting to conceal her identity while comitting a crime. Now granted baggy pants aren't religiously connected as hijabs are, but they are both harmless pieces of clothing....

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •