We agree completely with the Richmond County school board's taking on the problem of saggy pants at school events.

We just disagree with how they're going about it.

The proposed policy, agreed to by a board committee Tuesday, would say, "Provocative clothing and baggy pants that do not fit properly are prohibited."

Moreover, the committee talked about only enforcing the policy on students, not on other spectators at sporting events.

We understand the timidity of trying to enforce a dress code on non-students. But while it's dicier, it can be done: As a guest of the school district, you are expected to abide by certain rules. This should be one of them.

That all-inclusive tack, for instance, would include gang members and other ne'er-do-wells, which we think is absolutely essential.

In addition, board members noted the difficulty of sorting out students from non-students. Thankfully the policy at this point pertains to all visitors at school events, as it should.

As for the wording, we disagree with both the terms "provocative clothing" and "baggy pants."

Golfers used to wear baggy pants, and nowhere is decorum more observed than on a golf course.

The most apt word is probably "saggy" or "sagging."

It does help that the proposed policy refers specifically to pants being fitted at the waist and not exposing underwear -- which is specific language directed at the crux of the problem the district is tackling.

We wonder, though, if the word "provocative" is overly vague as to be unconstitutional. A lot of free speech is provocative, for instance.

And who defines what is provocative? By many people's definitions, the cheerleaders' and drill teams' uniforms could be considered provocative.

Legal language needs to be more exact than that. Rather than using vague and subjective terms such as "provocative," the district needs to spell it out: Are we talking about plunging necklines, profanity on shirts, short shorts or skirts?

To be enforceable, and constitutional, the policy cannot be vague and subjective. It must be specific and easily understood.

But if that can be ironed out, we're all for a little more decorum.