Illinois Town Wants To Outlaw Eye-Rolling

Next time you’re in line at the grocery store and you roll your eyes at the person with two carts full of items refusing to leave the 10-items-or-fewer line, you might be in trouble with the law — at least if you live in Elmhurst, Illinois. Officials of the Chicago suburb are looking into finding a way of putting an end to the practice by legal means.

The idiocy stems from a recent city council meeting where an Elmhurst resident was ejected from the room after rolling her eyes in reaction to something that was said by a council member.

Members of the Elmhurst city council have asked the City Attorney to look into the creation of a “disturbance and disorderly conduct” violation and to see if eye-rolling could somehow be shoehorned into its definition.

Illinois state law defines disorderly conduct is “an act in such unreasonable manner as to alarm or disturb another, or to provoke a breach of the peace.”

While she apparently is against a prohibition on eye-rolling, the Elmhurst citizen who was booted from the meeting says she’s all for having a definition of disorderly conduct in the city’s books.

“I’d like for them (city officials) to have a better understanding of the open meetings act and its meaning and to understand what disorderly conduct is,” she explained.

As for the City Attorney, who is slated to report back to the council on his findings on Jan. 26, he seems doubtful that rude behavior at a city council meeting should be an issue for law enforcement.

“It’s not in any way a punishable offense by a fine,” he said. “It’s a matter of decorum.”

What do you think: At what point does eye-rolling and such behavior cross the line and become something that could be considered disorderly conduct?

Elmhurst considers violation for eye-rolling [Triblocal.com]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Genuineduck says:

    This idea makes me want to… wait for it..

    *rolls eyes*

    • obits3 says:

      LOL, first amendment anyone? What about sign language? Eye rolling could be considered a form of inflection to effect the meaning of one’s message.

      I know, let’s ban giving someone an “evil eye”!/sarc

      Free speach is worth nothing if we ban the power to express dissent by calling it “disorderly conduct.”

      • RvLeshrac says:

        Careful, in many parts of Africa and the Middle East, the Evil Eye is punishable by death!

      • Gramin says:

        While I definitely don’t agree with them trying to regulate eye rolling, your First Amendment rights have always had limitations. For example, threatening someone’s life is not protected, nor is yelling fire in a crowded theatre. Additionally, your employer can regulate your speech and clothing while at work. SCOTUS has routinely upheld a school’s right to regulate attire.

        Again, this is a far cry from any of the above mentioned scenarios, however, it’s important to realize that your First Amendment rights have several limitations, though nowhere near the restrictions of most countries in the Middle East or Asia.

    • c!tizen says:

      “At what point does eye-rolling and such behavior cross the line and become something that could be considered disorderly conduct?”

      About the point where you’re rolling your eyes while pissing on the city council’s desk.

    • nbs2 says:

      But this is a health issue. Don’t you know that if you roll your eyes, they could get stuck like that forever. Then you would be the boy with the rolled eyes (unless you’re a girl – then you’d be the girl with rolled eyes).

  2. Nigerian prince looking for business partner says:

    I wonder if my former senior drill sergeant from many years back is on the Elmhurst, Illinois City Council. He definitely didn’t take well to anyone rolling eyes or sighing.

  3. chaesar says:

    somebody had their feelings hurt and now the whole town has to suffer, or at least waste the City Attorney’s time

  4. oldwiz65 says:

    The town seriously wants to outlaw eye-rolling? They want the police to arrest people for eye-rolling? 30 days in jail for eye-rolling? Bull!

  5. GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

    In Germany, you can get a ticket as a driver for doing obscene gestures, like pointing at your head.

    Also, IIRC, there is a commenter here who has a “tic” of sorts where their eyes roll when they focus on something. I wonder if you would need a special id card for that.

    • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

      Also, in Germany, the fine you receive is based on your salary. So something like tailgating can cost like $10,000.

      • dragonfire81 says:

        Now see I kind of like that idea, it would stop rich people with fancy sports cars from driving like douches.

        • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

          Most idiots aren’t rich. They blow their money on gel, muscle milk, and iROC wax.

      • full.tang.halo says:

        I remember seeing that on the history channel, the American autobahn or something. The best one was the guy who had to translate the you’re crazy hand movement (you’re coocoo) from German to English, as “you have a bird in the head”…..

    • sonneillon says:

      Well you shouldn’t be making obscene gestures at police officers anyways. Better a ticket than a beating.

      • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

        No, it’s not at officers, only. It’s at other drivers. It’s because you weren’t “Honoring Other Drivers.”

    • Fidget says:

      I was wondering if I’d need a TS card myself, though normally if someone really doesn’t seem to get that it’s involuntary I’ll double-blink, click, or something like that. Damn eye-rolling got me kicked off volleyball in hs (didn’t help that I sucked), but I couldn’t imagine having someone actually approach me about it.
      Guess I could meow…

  6. RevancheRM says:

    I think we can all agree that Alderman Stephen Hipskind is unclear on the definition of Free Speech (especially with its focus on the spirit of expression) or is just a general idiot.

    I’m open to both being applicable.

    • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

      I don’t think so. If you can be fined/jailed for contempt of court, how is this different?

      • Polish Engineer says:

        That’s an interesting point. Free speech is restricted in court in order to maintain a fair trial. Is it unconstitutional to not be able to say anything in court?

        Where’s a legal scholar when you need one?

        • Gramin says:

          Free speech has always had limitations. SCOTUS has routinely upheld a school’s right to limit the speech and expression of its students. Furthermore, yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not permitted free speech.

          While I completely disgree with outlawing eye rolling, it’s important to know that even our First Amendment rights have limitations.

          There is one venue where free speech has no limits: Congress.

        • Gramin says:

          I sort of addressed your question without actually talking about the courts. The courtroom is just about the only place where the First Amendment provides no protection. In that domain, the Judge is King of the Land with nearly absolute power. There are checks on that power, but I doubt you’ll ever find an instance where a judge was reprimanded for denying someone their First Amendment rights.

      • pantheonoutcast says:

        I would think it’s because a city council meeting isn’t a court of law. It’s a meeting.

      • Awesome McAwesomeness says:

        Contempt is pretty observable through speech and very observable actions. At a city council meeting, all a member has to do is not like something someone said and they can claim someone rolled their eyes, and it would hard to prove you didn’t.

        Also, there are different types of eye rolling. I am well versed in the art of eye rolling and there are several different types of eye rolls. It might be hard for the roll recipient to interpret the true intentions of the roller.

  7. Robofish says:

    Glad the peoples tax dollars are hard at work there

  8. Rectilinear Propagation says:

    What in the Hell is this BS? Are they serious? Are they serious?

    Look, I’m not one to say that everything has to be important as world hunger to be worth discussing but how does someone rolling their eyes matter at all? Even if there’s nothing else at all bad happening on the planet how does this become worth discussing?

    Sounds like there are some city council members who need to be voted out.

    • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

      Wanna know why I roll my eyes? My father was a drinker and a fiend and one night he goes off crazier than usual. Mommy gets the kitchen knife to defend herself. He doesn’t like that, not one bit. So, me watching he takes the knife to her, laughing while he does it. He turns to me and he says “ARE YOU SERIOUS!?”. He comes at me with the knife “are you serious!?” ….

    • dg says:

      Dude – it’s ILLINOIS. Why does any of this lunacy surprise you? 99.9% of the elected officials in this state are morons. And we, the people, of Illinois are even bigger idiots for electing them…

      Term limits… term limits… term limits….

  9. Skankingmike says:

    Free speech. Moving on.

  10. SagarikaLumos says:

    See the First Amendment. If the City Coucil doesn’t like the reaction of a constituent at a meeting, perhaps they should do what they’re supposed to do: find out why she objects and see if maybe her opinion is more popular than their own. Politicians work for us! They should not be looking for a way to fine or lock someone up for rolling their eyes and should be ashamed of the suggestion.

  11. veg-o-matic says:

    How the hell did they create a city council made up entirely of iterations of my parents and my older sister?!?!?

  12. GuidedByLemons says:

    If this is the way the city council acts, I can see why she would roll her eyes.

  13. Keith is checking the Best Buy receipt of a breastfeeding mother (for tips!) says:

    “At what point does eye-rolling and such behavior cross the line and become something that could be considered disorderly conduct?”

    When my kid does it to me whenever I tell him to do anything.

    • Polish Engineer says:

      I’m betting the disorderly conduct commences during the beating for rolling the eyes, not the eye rolling itself.

    • Awesome McAwesomeness says:

      A few licks with a good paddle with most likely cure that problem.

  14. bward says:

    she was sighing too, I don’t even think the eye rolling would have been noticed if she hadn’t been sighing as well.

    Still, Elmhurst has nothing more pressing than legislating eye rolling? Have they lost their minds?

  15. sixseeds says:

    Stay classy, Illinois.

  16. AI says:

    Land of the free, eh?

  17. YouDidWhatNow? says:

    It’s staggering how utterly stupid some people are. Especially in Chicago suburbs…

    I have 2 further examples…

    In Arlington Heights, where I lived for a while, there was a period of time when police were directed to issue speeding tickets for 1 MPH over the speed limit. Reckon the speedo in your car is accurate to 1 MPH? Or that you can pay *that* much attention to your speedo while negotiating Chicago-suburb traffic? It was retarded.

    Another suburb, I forget which, outlawed the parking of pickup trucks in front of houses – even in your own driveway. They had to be in parking lots, or concealed in a garage. The “reasoning” was that having a truck parked in front of your house “cheapened” the property, and surrounding properties by association. Because, you know, owning a truck might indicate that you *work* for a living. This despite the fact that a pickup truck can easily cost north of $50,000 – but your deadbeat neighbor was still perfectly free to park his 1976 Maverick with 4 different colors from mismatched body panels and a duct-taped window on the street – in front of YOUR house – if he wanted to.

    It well and truly is staggering how stupid people can be…especially about city ordinances.

    • Nigerian prince looking for business partner says:

      The pickup truck ban sounds way more like a HOA rule than a local ordinance.

      • YouDidWhatNow? says:

        Some of the burbs in Chicagoland operate a lot more like an HOA than a municipality. And some of them are so homogeneous as to well and truly look like one huge HOA too.

    • Firethorn says:

      accurate to 1mph? HAH! By both GPS and radar, my spedometer is 5mph fast at 65 – I have to be doing 70mph per the spedo to really be doing 65.

      Another suburb, I forget which, outlawed the parking of pickup trucks in front of houses – even in your own driveway.

      I’ve heard this being applied to marked utility type vehicles, not just ‘pickup trucks’. Too many things like that mercedes shortbed that defineltly aren’t used for ‘work’.

      Dual-cab with a 4′ bed doesn’t really count as a ‘pickup’ in my book. Might as well get a SUV.

      • athensguy says:

        You must drive a BMW.

        Speed limits — keeping your eyes on the dash instead of the road since 1901.

        I wouldn’t recommend rolling your eyes at the cop that pulls you over for swerving while you were trying not to speed because he will tase you.

  18. smo0 says:

    It’s the universal action of rebellion! You can’t make that illegal!

    Oh god, my teenage memories, why for you shame me!! NOOOOO!

  19. Me - now with more humidity says:

    I broke the law reading the headline

  20. NarcolepticGirl says:

    They need to add: sneering, walking away from a conversation, raising eyebrows and waving someone off.

  21. El_Fez says:

    I’m okay with the law, as long as they don’t outlaw the *FACEPALM*.

  22. Brandroid says:

    “At what point does eye-rolling and such behavior cross the line and become something that could be considered disorderly conduct?”

    When you’re rolling someone else’s eyes.

  23. TouchMyMonkey says:

    If rolling my eyes will get me cited, what would hysterical laughter get me?

  24. Unclaoshi says:

    Ugh I would hate to be a cop that called because someone wanted me to come out and ticket someone because they rolled their eyes at them

  25. Retired Again says:

    ELMHURST ILLINOIS CITY COUNCIL …. above is another example of people in power that are STUPID and SELF-SERVING.
    Last year I attended a city council meeting where the Librarian wanted authority to BAN anyone she chose. Did not pass but came close. Fact was she did not want her ex-husbands children in the Library. (her ex-step-kids). Were not rowdy or anything she just lashing out at her ex.
    IDIOTS at the top …. do IDIOTIC things that can affect us all.

    • veritybrown says:

      What’s the old saying? “Power corrupts”? Sadly true, in a great many cases (and especially true in Illinois). Everyone claims “not me!” but I’ve seen it too much.

  26. Anonymously says:

    There’s no way I could just stop eye-rolling over night. It’s a common, involuntary response for me.

  27. leprechaunshawn says:

    Do you smell that?

    It’s the stench of liberalism taking over our freedoms little by little.

    • SixOfOne says:

      Really? Smells like a facist dictatoriship in the making to me.

      • dolemite says:

        …which is totally different from “liberalism”. The Right has done a good job of painting liberalism as some kind of ignorant disease, when all it means is you are for finding new ways to combat problems. Conservatives believe things are great the way they are, and should stay that way.
        Liberalism doesn’t mean anything like you are for socialism, fascism, welfare or any of the above. It merely means you think things can improve and are looking for ways to improve them.

        • erratapage says:

          It’s a totally conservative thing to try to outlaw eye-rolling or sighing. If it were liberals, they’d be outlawing public perfume.

    • TheSpatulaOfLove says:

      I think the stench of FauxNews regurgitation by the disciple leprechaunshawn overwhelms any other stenches…

      • leprechaunshawn says:

        Thank you for thinking outside the liberal box. I would have expected the stench to be blamed on George Bush.

    • Anonymously says:

      Smells like *insert broad stereotype here* to me.

    • coren says:

      Sounds like limiting someone’s freedom of speech, which is something that is totally conservative, DUHHHH

    • Awesome McAwesomeness says:

      Nice broad paintbrush there. I’m a bit liberal myself and am all for protecting freedom of speech, freedom of firearms, etc… I am adamant about not losing personal freedoms and will defend them to the death.

      Are the Republicans willing to protect my freedom to have an abortion and to do what I want with my body? Or do they just pick and choose which freedoms it’s is okay to violate?

    • YouDidWhatNow? says:

      I think you’re confusing liberalism with reckless conservatism.

    • JJ! says:

      Why is it liberalism and not, say, an idiotic public staff?

    • dolemite says:

      How do you figure it’s a liberal? It sounds more ‘conservative’ to me. “How dare you not show the respect and decorum for this venue, someone try and come up with a law so that we city council members are shown proper respect!”

      • veritybrown says:

        It’s Illinois. It’s liberal by default. I’d have to see proof that the council members in question were registered Republicans to believe otherwise.

        • magus_melchior says:

          The “Chicago school” is the economic school of thought of Milton Friedman and other conservative/libertarian economists.

          And corruption isn’t partisan– the Bush-era Minerals Management Service is evidence of that.

          • veritybrown says:

            I was addressing the overall trend of politics in Illinois, not suggesting the utter non-existence of non-Democrats in the state or the exclusivity of corruption to one political persuasion. Methinks thou does protest too much.

    • Sillyheart says:

      Seriously, ignore the troll.

  28. pantheonoutcast says:

    If this was the NY City Council, they’d find a way to tax eye-rolling.

    • smo0 says:

      Perhaps a quarter in the “Cursing” jar?

      Even better, tickets for cursing in New York City – like those machines in Demolition Man….

      Biggest money maker ever… I’m a hero – your senator should thank me and Hollywood.

      /giggle

  29. Link_Shinigami says:

    When you say something stupid, it’s only natural to have eyes rolled at you. A lesson to the council, stop being stupid and people will stop rolling

  30. CWG85338 says:

    How thin-skinned are we getting that eye-rolling causes us to be traumatized? Hopefully, the voters will oust this loser. It seems to me that the 1st Amendment protects our right to express ourselves, even non-verbally. If the council is serious about this, perhaps someone should truly act in a disorderly manner and smack the idiots who think this rule has merit.

  31. NarcolepticGirl says:

    I really have no interest in Illinois and especially Chicago. Their nanny laws are so ridiculous. I thought Massachusetts was bad – but the more laws/suggestions of laws that I read about from this state make me want to stay far away.

    • Firethorn says:

      Be glad that we DO have a set process for selecting and rejecting proposed laws, because yes, a lot of proposals SUCK.

      But that’s part of the democratic process. I get a bit irked when a legislature at a state or national level proposes something excessively stupid and/or unconstitutional, but I fully expect stupid stuff lower down.

      I actually like people being able to propose bad stuff because I believe that it makes them less likely to do something else that would be worse. Most are satisfied with ‘I tried’, or spend years working through the legal system when they’d otherwise, perhaps, resort to terrorist acts.

      • veritybrown says:

        The problem comes when the people in power are so far off in their own ideological world that they pass stupid proposals just because they “fit” the ideology (regardless of the actual consequences) or were proposed by members of their ideological group. Extremism is the death of democracy.

  32. Smashville says:

    First Amendment, bitches. Perhaps someone should provide them with a copy.

  33. HalOfBorg says:

    Every member of that council that wastes one moment of taxpayers time in favor of this should be run out of town. And their houses burned just in case stupid really IS contagious.

  34. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    In a related story, the U.S. discusses outlawing Elmhurst, Illinois.

    Dumbest thing ever.

  35. JGB says:

    I always tell my teenage daughters to check behind them before rolling their eyes at me. You never know what you might be landing on

  36. HalOfBorg says:

    *bad german wwII movie accent*

    You VILL sit QUIETLY, you vill listen to vhat ve have to tell you. Then you vill leave without protest!
    There vill be NO FURTHER discussion! All hail President Pelosi!

  37. dosdelon says:

    What’s next, getting ticketed for swearing? Did anyone watch Demolition Man? *rolls eyes*

  38. redskull says:

    Cheezus H. Rice, I gotta find a new planet to live on. Preferably an unpopulated one.

  39. Yabai.Youth says:

    This issue is important. Everybody knows that having good manners is key in improving society; unlike all those other “issues” such as crime prevention, improving education, assistance to the needy…
    /sarcasm

  40. brianisthegreatest says:

    If I am in a forum where one person is talking, and verbal input whilst talking is not allowed, you better be sure I’d roll my eyes if I didn’t like. You can’t disallow people to express themselves, even if it is negative to your own ideas. This is ignorant and a misuse of position.

  41. canaguy says:

    MUCH easier to enforce (with software) the limit of items at the register……….the cashier gets cutoff and a total without question !!!
    I have sent the ‘suggestion’ to more than one food vender…!
    Have the ‘express’ register limited via software settings…!!!

  42. dulcinea47 says:

    What facial expressions will they regulate next? Better go get shot up with botox.

  43. anime_runs_my_life says:

    The Alderman needs to put on his big boy pants and deal with it.

  44. psiphiorg says:

    “As for the City Attorney, who is slated to report back to the council on his findings on Jan. 26…”

    According to the linked article, he is scheduled to report back on July 26 (5 days from now), not January 26 (half a year and 5 days from now).

  45. macruadhi says:

    We should all move to Elmhurst, Illinois. They have solved all of their problems and have so little crime that they can waste time creating laws again what is usually an automatic reaction. After they’ve thoroughly trounced this eye-rolling problem, they are going after reflexive eye blinking!

  46. coren says:

    While she apparently is against a prohibition on eye-rolling, the Elmhurst citizen who was booted from the meeting says she’s all for having a definition of disorderly conduct in the city’s books.

    “I’d like for them (city officials) to have a better understanding of the open meetings act and its meaning and to understand what disorderly conduct is,” she explained.

    Well, yeah. Basically translated, “these are some real fucking idiots, and it’d be nice if the law were clear so they couldn’t inflict their stupidity upon me”

  47. Benobi says:

    What’s next? Death penalty for a facepalm?

  48. Awesome McAwesomeness says:

    For me, eye rolling has become so common that at this point, it is an involuntary reflex to morbid stupidity. Imagine being ticketed for an involuntary reflex (rolling eyes).

  49. Wysguy says:

    and people wonder why local governments have difficulty in balancing their budgets.

    The councilperson who thought up this genius should be slapped, then we all can roll our eyes as they lie there crying like a baby

  50. Draygonia says:

    I didn’t know consumerist was taking the fark approach with their articles? How does this affect consumers?!

  51. Endgame says:

    OMG

  52. Sparty999 says:

    As long as we’re outlawing facial expressions… can we outlaw the stupid fish kiss lips (whatever the hell it’s called) that every girl under 25 seems to think is the right face to make in a picture?

  53. maztec says:

    Eye Rolling = Free Speech. It’s an expressive act.

  54. DeepHurting says:

    Elmhurst city council‘s s suggested legal punishments for eye-rolling:
    • Confinement to one’s bedroom for 1 – 2 hours
    • Relinquishment of one’s XBOX privileges
    • Legal prevention of one’s consuming of desserts after dinner
    • Non-sexual spankings

  55. lvixen says:

    Don’t you look at me in that tone of voice!

  56. d0x360 says:

    The can try all they want but i do believe this would violate Freedom of Speech. True its not speech in the verbal sense but we also have freedom of expression and that falls in there.

    This is a huge waste of time and money…why would anyone come up with this insane law?

  57. MountainCop says:

    Law against eye-rolling? That has to be the stupidest damn idea I’ve heard all week. This town is just asking for a massive lawsuit.

    City Officials – find something better to do (like maybe your job??) than whine and get all pissy about your sensibilities being offended.

  58. scaldinglake says:

    I can’t wait for them to tell us how they cracked world peace, because no sensible person would want their tax dollars going towards the wasted time and effort to put this into law

    wait, really?

  59. dolemite says:

    That’s probably one of the most asinine things I’ve heard. “You there…with the stroke! Stop rolling your eyes!” Those people should be embarrassed for even suggesting that.

    And as a side note, I’d probably be in prison for 20 years if eye rolling was an offense as I do it about 10 times a day.

  60. quirkyrachel says:

    On a technical level, what do you define as an actual eye-roll? I mean, if someone’s eyes roll sideways but only partially up, would that constitute an eye-roll? Or perhaps they could devise a lesser fine for side-eye-rolls instead of a full on eye-roll fine?

  61. Random Guy on the Internet says:

    First eye-rolling, next face palming…look out America, pretty soon they’ll be passing out medication to inhibit emotions altogether. There could be an Equilibrium sequel in the works because of this!

  62. PixDawg says:

    All public officials should be REQUIRED to take and PASS a course on the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It might curb this sort of utter stupidity!

  63. Bryan Price says:

    Why did I roll my eyes after I read this?

  64. zappdaddy says:

    Just another example of “Government Gone Wild”! When will this “we know best” attitude of presumably elected officials stop? Next on the agenda….where and when you can vacation. Oops…..that’s already been taken care of in the Gulf region.

  65. ForrestWhitakersLazyEye says:

    Will they outlaw the douchebags that warrant the eye-rolling, as well?

  66. Warren - aka The Piddler on the Roof says:

    Can’t we just outlaw the town of Elmhurst, Illinois for harboring douche bags?

  67. sopmodm14 says:

    are sighs still legal ?

    the taxpayers in elmhurst sure know how to elect their officials who then know how to waste funding

  68. Narmical says:

    Never.

  69. ElizabethD says:

    Where’s that .gif of the prairie dog rolling his ojos? LOL

    Disclosure: We lived in Elmhurst for a while when I was a kid.

  70. oops says:

    Holy Mackeral, There must be something better for the members of the Elmhurst city council to be doing with thier time.

  71. Splendid says:

    somehow i wanted to cleverly connect this to the open-cary fad, but words fail me.

  72. Gregg Araki Rocks My World says:

    Talk about a passive aggressive town.

  73. drburk says:

    Well gosh this council member disturbed for acting in an unreasonable manner. Honestly, I hope someone sues the council for breach of public trust and wasting tax payer money on pure self loathing garbage.

  74. Fenrisulfr says:

    Illinois is not exactly known for its governance, so no surprise here.

  75. bwcbwc says:

    I suppose if your eyes make loud grinding noises as you roll them it might constitute an unreasonable disturbance.

  76. jennamalia says:

    “his findings on Jan. 26″
    should be corrected to July 26 (as per the linked article).

    i was wondering if this was last year’s story, or if Elmhurst council really does require 6 months to study the issue.

    -pedantic

  77. chbrules says:

    As a liberatarian, f’ any form of censorship of free speech (including eye-rolling) by the government. This country is turning into such a ridiculous nanny state.

    YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED.

  78. mileena says:

    How does a post as pointless as this get 149 comments from Consumerist readers, but the one entitled “Like Being Single? That’ll Be $388,059, Please” get only 49?? The latter one was a lot more interesting to me and affects us more, as I assume many, if not most, Consumerist readers are single. Do Consumerist readers not have their priorities straight?

  79. wolf says:

    This is an over the top type of law that is not in the best interest of consumers, the official that proposed this should be fired. As a frustrated citizen this is stupidity at it’s best. Each person has the right to show frustration at the imbecile that cannot read or who demonstrates his /her lack of common sense at the
    checkout line or at town hall meetings. Eye rolling is a trait that I personally use to show frustration without verbalizing. Freedom takes another hit, if everything is outlawed the we are all outlaws.

  80. MPHinPgh says:

    How nice of Elmhurst to employ the mentally handicapped in such a lofty position as city council.

  81. frosteternal says:

    Living three towns from elmhurst, I am not surprised. [rolls eyes]

  82. damageddude says:

    Cough … cough …rolling eyes = freedom of speech … cough

  83. R Johnson says:

    I see room in this edict for making a V with your fingers and sticking your tongue through them at city council meetings. Or maybe the oh-no-you-dint finger wave and head bob.