Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-13-2013, 11:40 AM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,317,603 times
Reputation: 2314

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
Good, it will keep some of the riffraff off the boardwalk. I live by this place and it is INFESTED with gangster wannabes causing trouble.
You are proving my point. This isn't about the clothes. This is specifically about targeting certain groups of people, and using the police and the power of the government to tell those people they aren't welcome here and will be treated like criminals and harassed by the police.

This is a horrible use of government and police power. Taking legal behavior that hurts no one and making it illegal to get rid of certain groups of people out of public spaces is an immoral use of government power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-13-2013, 11:40 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,166,624 times
Reputation: 8528
Quote:
Originally Posted by All American NYC View Post
Your thoughts? unconstitutional ?

Freedom of expression (speech), I suppose. I think it looks stupid, but not enough to pass a law against it. I think the lawmakers in NJ have way too much time on their hands.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 11:48 AM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,317,603 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
Thanks for your reasoning.

I suspect you are right: that this ordinance is more about 'specifically targeting' a group of people (which, I note, at least one other poster mentioned).

That would take us out of the 'first amendment' realm and into the 'fourteenth's equal protection' clause.

So! Let us imagine Kate Upton (above) walking down this Boardwalk in the swimsuit that she is wearing so well.

Now, coming the other direction, is a young male, wearing saggy jeans that show 3 inches of his underwear in back (as per said ordinance, if I recall rightly).

The Boardwalk Police ogle Ms. Upton, but give the young male a ticket for failure to abide by the local ordinance.

I do not see any rational basis for the distinction.

Hence, I think a civil rights group may well have a basis for a lawsuit against the city.

However, there may be arguments that are being overlooked. Let us see what others have to say.
These kinds of ordinances are passed against groups without much political or social power.

We tend to look at certain people as being members of groups that a lot of society sees as criminal or bad in some way. Nobody is going to have any sympathy for a 16yr old kid because the police harassed him over sagging pants.

Unfortunately ,we use the police to tell certain groups of people we don't want them around all the time, and if you are in one of the groups that get targeted, you suffer through it.

I think many civil rights groups are actually very conservative in many ways and actually may support these kinds of ordinances. It is going to take blatant police violence and abuse to get anyone to take up the cause of defending sagging pants.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 11:53 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,496,793 times
Reputation: 4245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
You are proving my point. This isn't about the clothes. This is specifically about targeting certain groups of people, and using the police and the power of the government to tell those people they aren't welcome here and will be treated like criminals and harassed by the police.

This is a horrible use of government and police power. Taking legal behavior that hurts no one and making it illegal to get rid of certain groups of people out of public spaces is an immoral use of government power.
All they have to do is not wear those clothes and they are allowed there. Do you have a problem with bars and such not letting in people with "colors" representing their MC or other gang?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:21 PM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,317,603 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
All they have to do is not wear those clothes and they are allowed there. Do you have a problem with bars and such not letting in people with "colors" representing their MC or other gang?
LOL, a private business is not the same as a public boardwalk. So the comparison doesn't hold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:27 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,496,793 times
Reputation: 4245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
LOL, a private business is not the same as a public boardwalk. So the comparison doesn't hold.
They sure can, just like you need a dress code to enter a PUBLIC court room.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:33 PM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,317,603 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
They sure can, just like you need a dress code to enter a PUBLIC court room.
LOL, You are making a different irrelevant point. I didn't write that these ordinances are illegal. I wrote what I wrote, which is that these laws expand government and police power to target and harass certain groups of citizens, you agreed with me on that point because you specifically wrote "good it will get rid of riff raff", which is the exact point I made about the source of these kinds of ordinances and why they suck.

These ordinances are horrible ideas for the reasons I listed. I didn't say they couldn't create these kinds of dress codes, so you are arguing a point I didn't raise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 14,003,732 times
Reputation: 5661
It is unconstitutional, as there is no important governmental interest that would sanction prohibiting expression.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:41 PM
 
9,346 posts, read 16,738,037 times
Reputation: 15810
There is nothing unconstitutional about a dress code. There are signs in places that say, "no shirt, no service." No difference, whether public or private. If you can't go naked in public, is that unconstitutional?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 14,003,732 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellwood View Post
There is nothing unconstitutional about a dress code. There are signs in places that say, "no shirt, no service." No difference, whether public or private. If you can't go naked in public, is that unconstitutional?
Private places can post "no shirt, no service" signs. The constitution, except for the 13th Amendment, is a limitation on government. There is a 1st Amendment too, but that doesn't stop your mother from demanding that you shut up.

The government in an effort to restrict speech rights must have a compelling governmental interest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:51 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top