May 15, 2012 9:49:56 AM
Let's forget, for a moment, the challenges associated with enforcing a "saggy pants" ordinance. (Who wants to be the officer responsible for measuring -- and documenting -- how far a man's pants hang below his waist?)
Let's focus, instead, on the broader implications of an ordinance, such as the one set to be proposed by Ward 3 Councilman Charlie Box, during tonight's City Council meeting.
When we begin legislating how people dress, where do we draw the line, before becoming dangerously close to mandating a citywide dress code for adults?
At what point is a woman's low-cut blouse deemed too revealing or a pair of shorts characterized as too short?
There's no doubt this latest fashion trend is offensive to many. But taste certainly is subjective.
Wouldn't our time and resources be better spent on more concrete issues of image, like the perception no one cares about the increasingly frequent incidences of crime in our city?
While we applaud any efforts by elected officials to have a positive, lasting impact on Columbus, we believe there are more important battles to be fought.
A group of concerned citizens is set to speak at the same council meeting about their concerns over the city's crime rate.
Let's make that our law enforcement officers' area of expertise and keep them out of citizens' closets.
Incidentally, since Tupelo's indecent exposure ordinance -- which prohibits men and women from wearing pants three inches or more below the waist -- was implemented in March, no citations of violation have been issued. Surprising? We don't think so.
1. Slimantics: When mama fell, we knew her wishes LOCAL COLUMNS
2. Our View: Sloppy law enforcement leaves permanent stain DISPATCH EDITORIALS
4. Rheta Johnson: At least not landlocked LOCAL COLUMNS