Pantyless is not bottomless. There is no excuse for flaunting the law with this type of behavior. She should be immediately stripped and I hope she will be placed on Strict Nudity for the maximum time allowed.
This is a hard one. Technically, as long as her vagina is showing, she is in compliance, but clearly that denim mini-skirt is a bottom which means she is technically not bottomless. I guess we’d have to watch and see how long she can keep it up, but the moment it drops low enough to conceal her genitals we’ll have to confiscate the skirt and cite the violation.
We could certainly get bogged down with legislation here. The simple answer would bottomless = no covering or articles of clothing allowed from navel to ankle (assuming footwear is allowed for health & safety). As it is this could be a lawyer’s dream. If the US sentencing protocols are anything like what the drinking laws were last time I visited relatives there, she may be legal in one area then cross the county line and be in violation.
My take is that the standard would be whether her genitals are visible when standing. It is acceptable to have a garment styled like a dress for instance, as long as it’s too short to cover. But although very short by normal standards, I’m doubtful that skirt actually passes the test.
So a police officer encountering this situation would order her to stand so as to see how the garment naturally rests. If it’s too long they would at minimum confiscate it. If she cooperated and this was a first offense she might get off with a warning since it’s not like she’s actually wearing pants or anything.
Her ass is covered. While all the attention is focused on her vagina, you got it keep the actual rules in mind. Her ass needs to be bare for bottomless.
Pantyless is not bottomless. There is no excuse for flaunting the law with this type of behavior. She should be immediately stripped and I hope she will be placed on Strict Nudity for the maximum time allowed.
This is a hard one. Technically, as long as her vagina is showing, she is in compliance, but clearly that denim mini-skirt is a bottom which means she is technically not bottomless. I guess we’d have to watch and see how long she can keep it up, but the moment it drops low enough to conceal her genitals we’ll have to confiscate the skirt and cite the violation.
We could certainly get bogged down with legislation here. The simple answer would bottomless = no covering or articles of clothing allowed from navel to ankle (assuming footwear is allowed for health & safety). As it is this could be a lawyer’s dream. If the US sentencing protocols are anything like what the drinking laws were last time I visited relatives there, she may be legal in one area then cross the county line and be in violation.
My take is that the standard would be whether her genitals are visible when standing. It is acceptable to have a garment styled like a dress for instance, as long as it’s too short to cover. But although very short by normal standards, I’m doubtful that skirt actually passes the test.
So a police officer encountering this situation would order her to stand so as to see how the garment naturally rests. If it’s too long they would at minimum confiscate it. If she cooperated and this was a first offense she might get off with a warning since it’s not like she’s actually wearing pants or anything.
Her ass is covered. While all the attention is focused on her vagina, you got it keep the actual rules in mind. Her ass needs to be bare for bottomless.
That’s a good point, I’ll keep them higher 🙂