Rosbif
Active member
Ahahaha, you crazy Americans!
From the Guardian online
Flint, Michigan's police chief isn't backing down from his crackdown on saggy pants.
The
American Civil Liberties Union said last week that today would be the
deadline for chief David Dicks to halt the stopping and searching of
individuals with low-riding pants exposing underwear or bare bottoms.
Legal action may be forthcoming because Dicks said he isn't changing anything.
"I'm
going to keep on doing what I'm doing," Dicks told the Detroit Free
Press yesterday. "I guess I'm expecting a lawsuit," he said, but there
has to be a plaintiff.
Dicks pointed out that he has only issued warnings since implementing the policy June 27.
"I don't see how a warning is a civil rights violation," he said.
Dicks
said wearing pants below the waist is a crime - a violation of the
city's disorderly conduct ordinance - and can give police probable
cause to search saggers for other crimes, such as weapon or drug
possession. He said exposing the buttocks is indecent exposure.
Both crimes are misdemeanours punishable by 93 days to a year in jail and fines up to $500, Dicks said.
The ACLU is particularly troubled by the searches of saggers.
"Your
new practice of stopping and threatening young men with disorderly
conduct for wearing 'saggy pants' is a blatant violation of the United
States Constitution," the ACLU wrote to Dicks in a letter last week.
"Although
you were recently appointed chief of the Flint police department, you
cannot appoint yourself chief of the 'fashion police'. You have no
power to criminalise a style of dress because you find it distasteful.
We ask that you halt this practice immediately."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/21/usa3
				
			From the Guardian online
Flint, Michigan's police chief isn't backing down from his crackdown on saggy pants.
The
American Civil Liberties Union said last week that today would be the
deadline for chief David Dicks to halt the stopping and searching of
individuals with low-riding pants exposing underwear or bare bottoms.
Legal action may be forthcoming because Dicks said he isn't changing anything.
"I'm
going to keep on doing what I'm doing," Dicks told the Detroit Free
Press yesterday. "I guess I'm expecting a lawsuit," he said, but there
has to be a plaintiff.
Dicks pointed out that he has only issued warnings since implementing the policy June 27.
"I don't see how a warning is a civil rights violation," he said.
Dicks
said wearing pants below the waist is a crime - a violation of the
city's disorderly conduct ordinance - and can give police probable
cause to search saggers for other crimes, such as weapon or drug
possession. He said exposing the buttocks is indecent exposure.
Both crimes are misdemeanours punishable by 93 days to a year in jail and fines up to $500, Dicks said.
The ACLU is particularly troubled by the searches of saggers.
"Your
new practice of stopping and threatening young men with disorderly
conduct for wearing 'saggy pants' is a blatant violation of the United
States Constitution," the ACLU wrote to Dicks in a letter last week.
"Although
you were recently appointed chief of the Flint police department, you
cannot appoint yourself chief of the 'fashion police'. You have no
power to criminalise a style of dress because you find it distasteful.
We ask that you halt this practice immediately."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/21/usa3
 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		