The ‘Crack’ Exemption (The Plumber’s Bum Protection Act)

Please, on behalf of plumbers everywhere, contact your legislator immediately and urge adoption of a ‘crack’ amendment exempting plumbers from the underwear bill. 90% percent of them will be in violation of the law if this bill is not amended.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

  1. “Don’t be afraid to see what you see.”
    ~ Ronald Reagan

  2. Profile in Courage Takes a
    Holiday?

    RT-D: Votes Tuesday as the House, on a 60-34 vote, passed a measure to impose a $50 fine on anyone who displays his or her below-waist underwear in a “lewd or indecent manner.” Voting yes were 44 Republicans, 14 Democrats and two independents. Voting no were 14 Republicans and 20 Democrats.

    VOTING YES

    Democrats (14)

    Amundsen, Fairfax (44); Armstrong, Henry (10); Barlow, Isle of Wight (64); Councill, Southampton (75); Hall, Richmond (69); Howell, A.T., Norfolk (90); Johnson, Washington (4); Keister, Pulaski (6); Miller, Norfolk (87); Moran, Alexandria (46); Plum, Fairfax (36); Pollard, Lancaster (99); Shannon, Fairfax (35); Shuler, Montgomery (12).

  3. Will Vehrs Avatar
    Will Vehrs

    Just say “no” to crack.

    Look, this is crazy legislation, but it’s rooted in something serious. The gentleman from Tidewater who proposed this bill is trying to do thousands of young men a favor, but unfortunately you can’t legislate presenting a positive image so that individuals are not stereotyped and thus consigned to low-wage jobs or no jobs at all.

  4. Barnie Day Avatar
    Barnie Day

    This is Big Brother nannyism at it’s worst. It is unconstitutional on it’s face, and everyone on Capitol Square, down to the squirrels, knows it–they just don’t have the coconuts to say so. Stuff like this, and bats, and license plates, and bridge namings, and the Confederate flag provide wonderful cover–and brochure copy–for gutless legislators who refuse to address, in a meaningful way, real issues such as transportation, real tax reform, education, the cost of prescription drugs and tuition rates that are zooming through the roof.

  5. Jim Bacon Avatar

    I thought Republicans were against the nanny state. Maybe that’s only when Democrats are legislating the mandatory wearing of motorcycle helmets. I agree with Barnie. It’s a lot easier to cater to the populace by passing bills of purely symbolic significance that everyone knows will get struck down by the courts than to dig into the really hard issues of governance.

    It’s almost enough to make me strike my tent and move to another state…. except that I know that legislators engage in the same nonsense everywhere.

  6. Anti-bullying bills, official rodents, and now more big government nannyism like this? I’d rather the General Assembly spend a little more time figuring out how to refund the extra taxes it collected last year. 😉

  7. Will Vehrs Avatar
    Will Vehrs

    I guess you all are so busy congratulating yourself on being anti-nanny state that you don’t want to consider anything substantive that might be behind this ill-advised bill. Maybe social problems are beyond the scope of this blog. Maybe we all agree that Del. Howell is akin to the crazy aunt in the attic and we best not talk about him.

    Let me ask you this, Barnie: If someone is a Delegate not on the Appropriations Committee, what the heck does he/she do all session to get attention and show that he/she is on the job? It seems to me that Appropriations Committee members don’t propose a lot of this ill-advised legislation, although I haven’t tracked it closely. They’re too busy slicing the pie. My theory is that until the final votes on budget bills, we get mostly social issue posturing because delegates don’t have much of a substantive role in shaping anything but that.

  8. Barnie Day Avatar
    Barnie Day

    Will, most legislation originates when one schmuck walks into a legislator’s office and asks for it. And it takes about as long to do that as it does to read this post. The legislator fires the request up to legislative services and the bill is drafted. You know the rest. Strategy, if it can be called that, is limited to flinging as much muck onto the wall as possible and then see what sticks. That becomes the crushing ‘workload’ you hear so much about. What’s the thinking on this stuff? Nothing beyond, “A constituent asked for it.” Hence, bills like this. Still say we need the ‘Meat Yawing,Always Slyly Seen’ (MYASS) amendment for the plumbers!

  9. Anonymous Avatar

    Unbelievable but the Virginia legislature has just passed the underwear law. Anyone who has his underwear showing is in violation and subject to a $50 fine.

    I don’t know if there is plans to appoint special underwear police.

    Blows me away. Though I was never a fan of the underwear showing look but it shows to me an intolerance and how we as a state are moving to a locked gate mentality where anyone who dose anything the least different is subject to criminal prosecution.

    Possably now they will go after cleavage, then who knows what.

    I just heard that it has not passsed the Va Senate yet. Time to write. Maybe we can yet keep Virginia from being the laughing stock of the nation.

    On this general subject I wanted to tell about what my late friend Allen said to persistent comments about his but crack showing. He just came out and stated that he had no hips. His but crack ended up showing because he was busy doing something and his hips were small and his pants would slide down.

    I too have small hips and my crack sometimes shows when I am busy and have loose pants. Perhaps that is one reason why I prefer no clothes at all- Rod

  10. Phil Rodokanakis Avatar
    Phil Rodokanakis

    Can someone please explain to me why this stupid law isn’t unconstitutional? I thought that the Supreme Court has ruled that the messages or statements expressed in clothing are protected by the 1st Amendment. As long as the clothing doesn’t leave parts of the body uncovered which might run afoul of indecency laws, anything else should be acceptable.

    This is the silliest idea that’s come down the pike in Richmond. I’m now convinced more than ever that bills like these are due to the extremely weak leadership in the House of Delegates. It’s time for a serious change in the current House leadership…

Leave a Reply