YourCT.com header image 2

Stratford: Council Says Hike Up Pants


by turfgrrl


August 27th, 2007 · 12 Comments

Stratford has plenty of potholes to worry about, but as opted to pursue an ordinance that would require police to issue a fine if someone’s pants were low enough to expose “buttocks.” Clearly, the town of Stratford felt that this issue needed more exposure.

Town Councilman Alvin O’Neal, D-2, has proposed a town ordinance that would make it unlawful for people to wear “pants which fall below the buttocks to expose their undergarments,” with a penalty of $250.

The council will try the proposed law on for size when the Ordinance Committee meets for a public hearing on the matter at 6 p.m. in Town Hall.

“I’ve had a lot of senior citizens complain that they were tired of going to the store and seeing people with their pants down below their buttocks,” O’Neil said Friday. “It’s been done in other states, and it specifically deals with the wearing of trousers below the buttocks — you’d have to have your pants almost fully off.”

He added, “We’re not out to get plumbers whose pants creep down while they’re working on your pipes.”

Well, good thing that they are not targeting plumbers, but does this mean they plan to ask what the wearer of saggy pants does for a living? I’m sure the public hearing on this one will be highly entertaining.
source: Connecticut Post, Councilman seeks pants crackdown, JOHN BURGESON, August 26, 2007

Tags: In the News · Local

12 Responses so far “Stratford: Council Says Hike Up Pants”



  • 1 Anonymous // Aug 27, 2007 at 8:58 am

    Lots of indecent exposure of this kind in Norwalk too! Yuck!

  • 2 #13 of the Miserable 25 // Aug 27, 2007 at 12:31 pm

    Yeah! try to stop a clothes trend, and get all those kids to kick up the $250. I would be more worried about the gang colors that they wear. Like all fads it will pass by, but the law is just another “Feel Good” take away freedom of choice law. We have laws for indecent exposure on the books now that we are hard pressed to enforce. I would say the council of Stratford, has a lot of problems

    1 Too much time on their hands

    2 Scared to pass meaningful ordinances

    3 Have no worry about gang colors, or DWI

    4 Planning on their next ordinance outlawing the wearing of leather shoes, to save the animals.

    5 Opening up a can of worms that will turn and bite them on the ass

    6 Burden their police force with more wasted time that will take away from pursuing serious crime.

    7 Keep the city lawyers busy fighting the suits that will be brought about by this law, costing the Stratford taxpayer more grief

    8 Refer back to point #1

  • 3 Anonymous // Aug 27, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    Not just kids. Some 30 year olds run around like this and I do mean round!

  • 4 MGeake // Aug 27, 2007 at 12:46 pm

    Actually, it’s a quite brilliant way to infringe on people’s rights: after arresting the offender, the police can then search them to uncover any contaband they may have.

    Welcome to our police state.

  • 5 Anonymous // Aug 27, 2007 at 2:43 pm

    Mike, it might be their right to show off their butt crack, cheeks and more but it is highly offensive. Young or old, I don’t want to see it.
    Keep in mind this so-called street fashion is attempting to emulate a gangsta persona. A lot of good that has done American culture.

  • 6 anon again // Aug 27, 2007 at 3:22 pm

    I don’t see any of our lawmakers distressed by excessive displays of bosom cleavage — which is another current trend. Gimme a break…

  • 7 anon again // Aug 27, 2007 at 3:39 pm

    By the way, “Councilman seeks pants crackdown” wins for best ever headline in a local newspaper…

  • 8 Sam August // Aug 27, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    Re Post #3

    Not just kids. Some 30 year olds run around like this and I do mean round!

    They should forget about the guy who shot up the Norwalk housing project. That’s no where as important as the thousands upon thousands of 30 year olds in Norwalk, who run around with their cracks half hanging out.

    Lets see, what would change my quality of life more.

    1. an occasional peep at some guys underwear

    2. His unusually bad taste in selecting clothes

    3. Men who wear really bad hairpieces that look like a dead raccoon or an old rug.

    3. A stray bullet in the chest from a gang member who is shooting up the neighborhood. (With his pants held up correctly)

    4. Will an ordinance also be passed that tells young women not to wear short shorts, and bare middrifs,low cut blouses, or anything that shows their Thong’s when they bend over

    Yeah! When pigs fly…..

    (Thank God)

  • 9 Sam August // Aug 27, 2007 at 4:06 pm

    Remember “Crack Kills”

  • 10 MGeake // Aug 27, 2007 at 5:51 pm

    #5

    Ah, but the Supreme Court long ago upheld our right to be offensive :) Any bets on a young lawyer fighting this on 1st Amendment grounds?

  • 11 Anonymous // Aug 27, 2007 at 6:06 pm

    After some public debate it’ll be alls well that ends well.

  • 12 anon again // Aug 27, 2007 at 6:25 pm

    Or “all ends that swell well”…

Leave a Reply