BOO HOO. Pull your pants up bitch

How is keeping your ass crack showing important? You know? If the TSA wanted to be more stringent, they ought to just have a Ramming Bear ram its dick up anyone who's exposing their booty crack.

 

He passed TSA, it was an Airline infraction.

 

What's a Ramming Bear? I know about the Dancing Bear...

 

It is a safety issue, multiple issues actually:

1. One less layer of clothing for his farts to be trapped between.

2. His pants are so low, therefore increasing the potential for him triping and becoming a fire hazard, or in the eay of me escaping an airplane disaster.

3. The obvious sighting of skid mark or shart.

etc, etc. etc.

 

It wasn't a breach of security if he went through screening and had nothing on him that was dangerous. Also, he had all the proper credentials, so it wasn't a TSA infraction. There are no codes to address a person's attire.

They let him go because they aren't the ones responsible for him at all.

It's a well endowed black bear that possess a few prongs on the tip of his penis and when penetrated by his dick, the sheer force would cause an anal rupture.

 

at least no one can scream racism.

They pulled a white chick of a plane for wearing a mini skirt, and fool off the plane for showin' his ass.

GOOD!

 

LOL I was thinking the same thing! Finally we agree on something...:smt058

 

but why is it anyone else's concern? he went through security, so he was no threat... the important part is, that if he didn't break any laws, they don't have the right to harass him, civil liberties 101.

 

the odds of these things happening are about the same no matter how he dresses.

 

I read a news article about this online that characterized it as a violation of the airline's policy against indecent exposure. :butthead:

 

4. Innocent young ladies/grandma's swooning at the sight of a gentleman's undergarments and fainting across the aisle/having heart attacks.

I'm curious as to how anyone can keep their pants below their arse and above your knees without some kind of taping or a belt, but then the belt would have to be so tight you wouldn't be able to move your legs above the knee?? Neither option seems to fit with the image.

Think it's a stupid reason to get kicked off a plane, but why be stubborn about it? Maybe I'm being unfair, perhaps he forgot to pick up his belt after going through security(easily done if you have a lot to take off!) and was too embarrassed to say so...

 

did they charge her with battery, trespassing and resisting arrest too?

 

Homes is stuck on stupid. He should had put his pants on.

 

hahahaha! US Airway's cut the motherfuggin check!



Man flies US Airways in women's underwear (Photo)

Six days before a college football player was arrested at San Francisco International Airport in a dispute that began when a US Airways employee asked him to pull up his sagging pants, a man who was wearing little but women's undergarments was allowed to fly the airline, a US Airways spokeswoman conceded Tuesday.

A photo of the scantily clad man was provided to The Chronicle by Jill Tarlow, a passenger on the June 9 flight from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., to Phoenix. Tarlow said other passengers had complained to airline workers before the plane boarded, but that employees had ignored those complaints.

CLICK AT YOUR OWN RISK
Acceptable airline attire.​

US Airways spokeswoman Valerie Wunder confirmed she'd received the photo before last week's incident in San Francisco and had spoken to Tarlow, but said employees had been correct not to ask the man to cover himself.

"We don't have a dress code policy," Wunder said. "Obviously, if their private parts are exposed, that's not appropriate. ... So if they're not exposing their private parts, they're allowed to fly."

So, does that mean Deshon Marman, the University of New Mexico player yanked from an Albuquerque-bound flight June 15 at SFO, was displaying his private parts when his pajama pants sagged to mid-thigh level?

Wunder declined to comment on the incident directly. Police have said only that Marman's boxer shorts were exposed, and his attorney said surveillance video would prove Marman's skin had not been visible.

Police arrested Marman, 20, who grew up in San Francisco, after he allegedly refused an US Airways employee's request to pull up his pants to keep his underwear from showing. Marman's later refusal to comply with the pilot's orders to get up from his seat led to his arrest on suspicion of trespassing, battery and resisting arrest, police said. The San Mateo County district attorney has not determined whether he will charge Marman.

Marman's attorney, Joe O'Sullivan, said his client had been stereotyped by US Airways as a thug, and that the airline was guilty of racial discrimination for asking Marman to adjust his clothes. Marman is African American.

"It just shows the hypocrisy involved," O'Sullivan said after he viewed the photo of the cross-dressing passenger. "They let a drag queen board a flight and welcomed him with open arms. Employees didn't ask him to cover up. He didn't have to talk to the pilot. They didn't try to remove him from the plane -- and many people would find his attire repugnant."

O'Sullivan added, "A white man is allowed to fly in underwear without question, but my client was asked to pull up his pajama pants because they hung below his waist."

Tarlow, 40, who was returning home to Phoenix after helping her mother move, said she had been shocked when she noticed the older man in blue underwear and black stockings standing in the Fort Lauderdale terminal. Tarlow said the man had obliged when she asked to take his photo.

"No one would believe me if I didn't take his picture," Tarlow said. "It was unbelievable. ... And he loved it. He posed for me."

Wunder reiterated the airline's stance that Marman had not been removed from the US Airways flight last week because of his clothing, but because he had failed to comply with an employee's request.

"The root of the matter is, if you don't comply with the captain's requests," Wunder said, "the captain has the right to handle the issue because it's one of safety."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/crime/detail?entry_id=91446#ixzz1PzM6pvYU

 

If he and the ACLU taken this to court and won (which I highly doubt) imagine how many men will come to a job interview or work even wearing pant below their buttocks.

A line has to be drawn somewhere.