Hi Everyone

[abburke]

I have been reading what most have said regarding the police in America and although I personally have never experienced such horror yet it does not surprise me. America is practically a police state as it is. We have to ask or get permission to do most anything and when we do we have to pay a fee or get taxed somehow. I know this is a men's fashion discussion board but I would like to share real quick a link to a site about an upcoming movie due to release and I urge everyone to watch it if possible. It is a real eye opener. http://www.freedomtofascism.com is the site. I think the deception has gone on for too long regarding our government. Stu, didn't they ban weapons in the UK? I know they are working toward that in the US.

Aaron

[Stu]

Aaron

Weapons have been very tightly controlled here in the UK for many decades. That's not viewed as a problem by people here, though. Weapon ownership is not a part of British tradition. I'm a police officer, and I have never had any kind of weapon - and I would resign rather than carry one.

Having said that, I share the concerns that Americans have about their country losing long-cherished freedoms and liberties, and that the government is monitoring and seeking to control the movements of its citizens. We are going in the same direction here, and I find it very alarming - so alarming that I plan to emigrate in 22 months!!

Stu

[Since1982]

On the other hand, based on what I read in the newspaper and what I heard in 2 years on a Grand Jury, an amazing number of more serious offences are found out during traffic stops. Sometimes when they run the license plate, it turns out the car is stolen. Or when they run the driver's license, he is wanted on a warrant. Or they look inside the car and see weapons, drugs, or obviously stolen goods. Or someone matches the description of a robber reported over the radio. You'd think the crooks would have more sense than to drive the wrong way down a one-way street after a robbery or burglary. You'd be wrong.

This is all correct. BUT, if the person in the car does NOT act threatening or resists a car search or an officer, I still see no possible reason for an officer to slam people into the ground, kneel with full body weight on their head or neck while cuffing them behind the back, then grab them BY the cuffs, and lift the persons entire body weight by his wrists in the back to the extent of his cuffed hands being higher than his head and in the rear, then marched at quick time to the police car with his cuffed hands still being held higher than his head by 2 officers. To me, that still smacks of torture and brutality. Maybe I'm wrong because of the Patriot Act but I doubt it.

[Pleats]

Hi Mike,

I too wear denim most of the time. My primary skirt is a little shorter than the one you have. I have found that from ten feet away or more the skirt is just taken as shorts. I was out and about last week. Went to eat lunch at a fast food place and then to a big box store between Dayton and Cincinnati, Ohio. No comments from anyone. I did get a smile from a young lady that was with her boyfriend/husband. They were behind me in line at check out then walked past to take a shorter line. Her friend would not look my way but she did with a smile.

If I am going to have any problem it is with teenagers. A fear of mine is some young girl gets carried away and thinks she sees something she does not. As someone posted earlier if such a claim is made a guy is automatically guilty. I always wear dark underwear under the skirt. The stiff denim can tend to show a little more than lighter material or a pleated skirt. If sitting I will avoid facing any teenagers.

My favorite shorts are denim with a 3" inseam from International Male. I have had many comments and looks from teenagers. It finally dawned on me why. Older people remember the 70's when men wore shorter shorts so they don't pay any attention. The teenagers have never experienced that style on men so shorter short has to be from the women's department in their mind. I overheard a young teen male say to his friend "well, at least my shorts did not come from the women's department". At Home Depot a teenage girl followed me all over the store. I was not in a skirt but in those shorts.

Anyway, while I was out I stopped at the Goodwill store. Found two skirts of which one I will probably not wear in public. It is only 12" long with the lower part pleated, size 13. I noticed it actually shows less because of the pleats than the stiffer denim skirt that is longer, but that is beside the point. At 12" I think that may be pushing things a bit. The other skirt is a plaid wrap skirt, size 12. I will have to re-position the buttons as the skirt is too small. The length is perfect at just above the knee. I looked around for a size 14 of similar design but no luck. I have found some nice stuff at Goodwill. $7 for two skirts is not bad.

Mike

[crfriend]

A fear of mine is some young girl gets carried away and thinks she sees something she does not. As someone posted earlier if such a claim is made a guy is automatically guilty. I always wear dark underwear under the skirt. The stiff denim can tend to show a little more than lighter material or a pleated skirt. If sitting I will avoid facing any teenagers.

That's the biggest reason I don't wear my minis out in public save for around the neighbourhood where everybody knows me -- the worry that I'll face spurious (and indefensible) charges made by a troublemaker. That's a sad commentary, and probably one tinged with a bit of paranoia, but the stakes are just too high here in the 'States to get accused of anything when it comes to the under-18 set.

Older people remember the 70's when men wore shorter shorts so they don't pay any attention. The teenagers have never experienced that style on men so shorter short has to be from the women's department in their mind. I overheard a young teen male say to his friend "well, at least my shorts did not come from the women's department".

Well that's a silly, and ignorant, comment, but to be expected I suppose. Ignorance is easily overcome; stupidity isn't. The lads need a history lesson. Their father probably wore shorts like yours when he was their age.

As far as what passes for "shorts" these days, I'd rather wear a skirt; in fact, with the way that modern "shorts" are evolving (with wide legs and a droopy crotch), a skirt is merely the ultimate expression of the form. I remember explaining that to a couple of surfer-types when I was in Florida last year -- who then actually "got it" and agreed. I wonder if either of them tried the notion out for themselves.

At Home Depot a teenage girl followed me all over the store. I was not in a skirt but in those shorts.

That would have made me very nervous depending on the age of the girl in question.

[Stu]

I went to an antiques auction at an impressive, almost stately, "country house" this morning wearing a plain, straight black skirt, just below the knee, black-red patterned socks, clack slip-on shoes, pale green shirt, striped red tie and a short, black zip-up rain jacket. I bought a pair of drinking glasses - mid 18th century. I bid for an embroidered,early Tudor handkerchief and a Queen Anne stool, but the prices went too high.

A couple of people looked at me and did double-takes, but nobody gawked, or made any comments whatsoever. People were just too busy looking at the lots on display and bidding etc. I sat next to an elderly couple and discussed the handkerchief with them - marvelled at how it managed to survive nearly five centuries largely intact. My attire did not deter them from engaging me in conversation in any way. I guess that most people would have just assumed my skirt was some sort of kilt, although in reality it is more like a part of a woman's plain business suit. I no longer expect to get a reaction when wearing denim skirts, but it was a pleasant surprise at just how little reaction I received in this garment.

Stu

[Milfmog]

Way back at the end of June Skip wrote

A man CAN be arrested for exposing a bulge in underpants even though he isn't arrested for showing a bulge in the front of trousers. Strange world we live in but that is a fact.

Someone please tell me this is paranoia, surely it can't be for real? What about a guy in speedos?

Ian.

[Since1982]

Just wearing underpants without outer clothing in public can get you arrested, bulge or no bulge. The charge is "indecent exposure". The bulge is actually immaterial. However, a woman, wearing what used to be only considered "underwear" (a petticoat) with no skirt over it is just considered "trendy" and is commonly seen and worn at Modern dance clubs. There's that "Different standards" thing again. :shake:

[Milfmog]

So guy in speedos = OK,
Guy in underpants (that may cover more than the speedos) = not OK

Wow! Don't you just love the legal system?

Have fun,


Ian.

[me012247]

Here we go....the huge difference in what is called "fashion for women" = everything goes...and "fashion for men" = almost nothing goes.

[Milfmog]

Here we go....the huge difference in what is called "fashion for women" = everything goes...and "fashion for men" = almost nothing goes.

In a social sense this has been an absolute truth since well before I was born, I was surprised to read that this is also true legally.

If nothing else I guess it's an opportunity for all those hard up lawyers to earn a crust sorting out the mess that other legals have created.

Have fun (if that's still allowed),


Ian.

[Bravehearts.us]

A man CAN be arrested for exposing a bulge in underpants even though he isn't arrested for showing a bulge in the front of trousers. Strange world we live in but that is a fact.

Where are you getting your information from Skip? Where is this a fact? The only place in the country that had a turgid law was Kenosha, Wisconsin. When it went into effect, it made it a criminal offense to get an erection in public and a man could be arrested for an erection even though he was fully clothed. They got the law passed in an attempt to get rid of the Adult stores alone a strip of I-94 in their county. Needless to say the police chief and the mayor (who got the law passed) were laughing stocks when word got out about this law. I can’t imagine any cop who would jump at the chance to embarrass himself by arresting someone for having an erection? On top of that, it’s a natural body function. It’s not something you can control. I could just see the guy in court talking to the judge. “Well, you see your honor, MAM, I started to feel it getting bigger and I said NO but I guess sometimes no does mean yes.” LOL
As far as getting arrested for a lump in your pants or underwear…what about swimming trunks, running shorts, bike shorts, running tights, etc.? These pictures are two pairs of running/bike tights that are outerwear. If a person could be arrested for wearing them I would have been gone a long time ago because I wear them a lot to the stores.
Lar

[binx]

That a police officer would arrest someone for that is so funny! HAHAHA!! Your post really made my morning....

binx!

[Bravehearts.us]

Most of this thread you can let go in one ear and out the other. Someone has had their leg pulled good if they think they are telling you how it really is here in the states. I worked with the police for 18 years in the inner core in a major city and had to learn the take-down and arrest procedures and tactics. Police are taught to use reasonable and justifiable force during take-downs and arrests. They basically are to use equal force and not to escalate it to the next level until or unless the suspect does. They are also taught to put the handcuffs in the handcuff grove with the hands behind the back, facing away from each other (a position you have the least amount of leverage) and to lock them so they can’t get too tight and cut off the circulation and cause nerve damage.
I know that there are times when things get out of hand, emotions run high or there is only time to get the job done and go back and reset the handcuffs, etc. After a suspect is apprehended in a police chase they do get roughed up. The adrenaline is pumping and the emotions run high. So, many times police officers get over zealous.
Police officers are human like the rest of us. There are some bad apples in the bunch. I’ve worked with a few of them where they have a suspect handcuffed and they slam him face first into a cement pole as they are taking him into the emergency room at the hospital. I’ve also see them give what is called a “shake and bake”. This is where they put the suspect in the back of the paddy wagon with his hands cuffed behind his back and they turn on the heat full blast and drive real rough around the city for 20 minutes on the way to the jail. Some of these are not bad cops. They are frustrated cops when it comes to the system. They deal out punishment this way because they’re sick of arresting that person every other night of the week for the same offenses just to have the judge set them free the next morning. I’m not saying its right.
They don’t pull their guns unless they have reason to believe their life or the life of someone else is in danger.
They don’t throw average Joe citizen out of the car and slam their full body weight onto his head or neck, while squeeeeezing down on the handcuffs all because he had a tail light out or was going 5 miles over the speed limit.
Most cops I’ve met are nice people but yes there are some jerks in every job.
Lar

[Bravehearts.us]

All that for a speeding offence? I'll be keeping well away from the US! That sounds more like what you'd expect in some third world junta republic.

Stu

No Stu. See my other post about this. They had some reason to feel their life was in danger or they wouldn't have pulled their guns.
Lar