Hasn't gotten old yet, at least for me:
A Brooklyn cellphone crook’s poor wardrobe choices led to his arrest when his saggy jeans tripped him up during his getaway attempt and allowed cops to chase him down, police said.
By "cellphone crook," they mean he stole a cellphone from his victim. He did this after punching her in the face, which makes it especially satisfying that he was almost immediately ensnared by his own ridiculous pants:
[The crook] made it only about a block before his pants were completely around his ankles, allowing the officer to tackle him…. “He was zigzagging all over the place, but he couldn’t run because his pants was [sic] falling down,” witness Arlene Williams said.
Have I actually been reporting on pants-related legal issues for over five years now? You bet I have. Which is dumber, this incredibly goofy-looking fashion statement or the spectacle of American legislatures wasting time trying to ban it? (Which at least one court has held is unconstitutional, by the way.)
Maybe the latter, because as in this case (and this one, and this one) it leads directly to the apprehension of more crooks? Criminals are shackling themselves in advance with their own pants, and you want to ban that?
Or the former, because…. Well, I mean, look at it. Seriously.
This is a question it's almost certainly impossible to answer. It has a zen feel to it: What is the sound of one pant sagging? Or: If your pants sag in the forest and there's no one around to see it, does it still look stupid?
Such questions cannot be answered, only contemplated.