He (apparently) is an NFL player.
Bryant and three of his friends were ejected from the NorthPark shopping center Saturday after a dispute between Bryant and two off-duty officers over the men sagging their pants below their hips, exposing their underwear.
A Tuesday police statement says officers working off-duty Saturday as security at NorthPark encountered Bryant and three companions wearing the drooping pants.
When the officers asked the four to pull up their trousers, Bryant launched into a profanity-laced tirade. According to the statement, when confronted, Bryant told officers. “What the ****, you stopped me like I stole something.” That prompted the officers to escort the four from the mall.
Police say Bryant refused to leave, however, until his “representative” could arrive and he parked in a fire lane until a friend arrived and persuaded him to go.
No charge was filed, but a Miscellaneous Incident Report was filed.
Classy. (And I would expect no better from far too many of these "modern-day gladiators", unfortunately.)
When will people finally realize how utterly ridiculous (and trashy) it looks when you don't keep your pants pulled up? Exposing the top three or four inches of your underwear is an insult to everyone around you. (Also, I thought it was widely publicized about a year ago that if you "sag", then you're "lookin' like a fool with your pants on the ground"...)
Even if you defend his right to "sag" (oh, gag!), it sounds like he has no respect for authority (or probably anyone else). Hey, I don't care if they were off-duty officers at a shopping center. If an average person (read "not a very well-paid athlete) attracted the unfavorable attention of those officers, I doubt he'd be treated gently after "launching into a profanity-laced tirade".
I guess we have bigger problems to deal with...
Like Obamacare and this, for instance.
(But back when it hadn't been passed yet, you thought Obamacare was such a wonderful idea, Rep. Weiner... I'm confused. If it's so wonderful, why are you considering getting a waiver for New York City, should you become mayor?)
...And then you're reminded that so many of our problems are due to people like this one member of a craft-related Yahoo newsgroup I'm subscribed to. Yesterday, she posted a message about how if you're at risk of losing your home, you might want to check out this website, because there are some very old laws in some states that might help you. And then there's a little snippet that she forwarded: "Very interesting. Took this out of an article on AOL about how a couple gained title to their new home after only one payment, and now owns it free and clear. It pays to check out these questions and answers."
Yeah, it paid for that couple. What about whoever ended up picking up the rest of the tab for their new home, since the couple who now "own" it "free and clear" only made one payment (which obviously wasn't for the entire cost of the house)?
Now, let's just say the tease about the couple with the one-payment home isn't legitimate. (It sounds fake to me, but who knows. Maybe in some very, very rare circumstances, it could be true.) My point is that some people-- too many people-- like this woman-- read that and think, "Wow! What a great deal, if you can get it! Maybe I can get my house almost for free, too! Maybe I can get away with paying for only a quarter-- a half-- whatever percentage of the original price of my house!" Never mind that you agreed to pay X amount of dollars for the house. Never mind that someone is going to get a raw deal, if (1) you don't pay a fair price for the house, and (2) you keep it and live in it anyway.
Maybe I'm just being mean. (Wouldn't be the first time...) Maybe I'm just jealous, because we had to pay for all of our house. No magical old law came along and let us thumb our noses at our creditors with a merry round of "nanny-nanny-boo-boo". (Then we'd just have had to figure out how to live with the shame.)
Look, I know times have been tough, but for most people, if you find yourself unable to pay your mortgage, at least some of the blame falls on your own shoulders, whether you want to admit it or not.
Whatever. I'm just sick of people feeling entitled to this, entitled to that. I'm tired of the "If I want it, I should have it, by golly" mentality-- the "I'm owed this, simply by virtue of my fortuitous existence in this country" attitude. If so-and-so has one, you should have one, too! 'Cause otherwise it's jut not fair. Why should you have to work for it-- to pay for it, really? There's no need. Not with good old Uncle Sam to foot the bill, thanks to the redistribution of wealth and the printing of more moolah. Just put it on the tab! We're only $14,240,283,447,859 (give or take a few) in the hole. Once you're in for $14 trillion, what's a few thousand more, right? Obama can just pay for it out of his stash-- his special Obama-money stash.
Ugh. People. No wonder I prefer my dogs to most of 'em.
(...And, no, I don't wonder why I don't have more friends.)
Ah. I looked it up (brilliant of me, really) and found the story. It's true, and I have to say, after reading it, I still don't feel all warm and fuzzy over their "luck". (Good grief. Am I even human that I not feel the warm fuzzies?!)
Things like this are what stop the cozy feeling:
Matt acknowledges that at the time they bought a larger, previous house in 2003 "we couldn't afford the property." But like many Americans, they say they were a product of the mortgage industry, which at the time was handing out loans to almost anyone with a pulse.
Oh! Well, that explains it, then. You were duped, you poor darlings! You were merely a "product of the mortgage industry", so obviously you bear none of the blame for the unfortunate circumstances in which you found yourselves.
And also like many Americans, they used their home like an ATM, refinancing into a larger mortgage as equity climbed with rising home prices (and the extensive remodeling they did) just so that they could have money to pay for the upgrades as well as purchase the vacant adjoining lot.
Well, I don't know about you, but that makes perfect sense to me! Home = ATM. Yep. Got it!
This part amused me (beastly person that I am): They got their first loan on "their 6,000-square-foot dream home" (with a "vacant adjoining lakefront lot"-- courtesy of the ATM-home) through the wife's employer (First Horizon Bank)... so when that didn't work out, "it was awkward". (You don't say!)
"I owed them money and I defaulted, so I didn't want to pursue another loan through them again." The 32-year-old was also embarrassed and decided it would be better to keep her personal finances separate from her workplace.
...Yeah. Probably so.
"I don't like people saying we won a 'free' house," says Matt. "It's not like we entered a raffle and won. We lost practically everything we ever worked for."
Fine, but don't pretend that you were merely innocent victims. There's a reason you "lost practically everything". You (and your wife, who is a mortgage loan originator) should have known better. Sorry. It may not be pleasant to admit, but that's the way it is.