Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1POWBrxBS

Not a style I'd dress in, but something you commonly see in the Bay Area. Read the entire article as there's a lot more than can be posted here in a few lines.

I find it very disturbing that an airline can dictate to this extent what passengers can wear and would be very surprised if everyone could agree on the definition of "inappropriate" dress. From the article it sounds like he was covered; I have sat next to plenty of people who weren't yet were not prevented from flying. I would love to see him and the guy who was booted for swearing each successfully sue the airlines involved.

Don't tell the plumber's union about this.
Nor the entire male middle school population.

I was waiting at a gate for my plane from MEM to DCA when a badly sunburned man took off his shirt so his wife/girl friend could gently apply some lotion to his back and shoulders. In just a few minutes the airport police arrived and ordered him to cover himself up.
I realize that an airport gate is not a sandy tropical beach but common sense out to kick in somewhere.

It does not matter whether everyone cold agree on inappropriate dress as this issue is not for everyone to decide. While the airport is public remember the planes are private. As such, the airlines are within their purview to dictate what does and does not happen on their plane as long as they do not discriminate. So what the airline did is no different than a restaurant that refuses to serve/seat someone who does not dress to their standards.

I do agree here, and I don't see anyone contradicting the claim that the pants were "below the buttocks but above the knee", which is extreme, so I guess the airline can do what they want.

One section in the article caught my attention:

I would simply point out to Mom that if her son is "trying to make it" in the world, one thing he should learn is appropriateness, especially in public places. Kids seem to think it is all about them, and their "right" to express themselves freely, as they have been told over and over. It doesn't work that way in the real world. Consideration for others is a good place to start if you want to "make it".

The airline can put "inappropriate" in its contract all it wants; my point was that when such a vague, subjective term is used, the airline is asking for trouble. Restaurants generally post "no shoes, no shirt, no service" - pretty clear and unambiguous. In addition to the vagueness issue, there is also the issue of uneven enforcement. Not saying it is a slam-dunk; just saying it raises issues.

According to the article, the only thing exposed was part of his boxers - no allegation of any flesh. Apparently, having part of his boxers exposed bothers some people. Very skimpy halter tops, midruff-baring tops, bike pants, very low-cut crack-revealing pants and other traveling attire that I have witnessed bug some people but are allowed to fly. The list is endless. Doesn't it not smell right that this kid was booted and taken to jail for wearing something that is so prevalent?

Most everything is a gray area. But he was asked to pull up his pants. If he did it should be a non-issue. So not sure what happened. As the video shows nothing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOQI_FhKbw0

As for the guy who dropped the f-bomb. There is one big difference, from what I have read he was never asked to clean up his language. Had he been asked and copped an attitude and the airline tossed him he would be no different. But that fact they just tossed him paints a different story.

Now on CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/06/16...html?hpt=hp_t2

This story has nothing to do with travel safety or security, and it should be moved to OMNI.

Besides that, the title of this thread is greatly misleading - he was arrested for trespassing after an airline employee ordered him off the plane and which he refused to do for 15 minutes. He was NOT arrested for baggy pants.

But let's not be hypocritical. So many times I have seen on this site that the airlines and the passenger have a contract. I will bet its in the contract that the airline can kick you off a flight at their discretion - EVEN if you DONT like the reason. So it was over a dress code you may not agree. Then don't fly this airline. And if they ask you to leave, abide by the rules of the contract you signed and leave.

Again, this thread should be moved or closed and the title is VERY misleading. My two cents.

He was not taken to jail for what he was wearing, but for refusal to leave the plane when asked to. The arrest was for trespassing. There is also mention of battery and resisting arrest, but no description of the conduct that resulted in the charge.

Word of warning to the wise: if you're on private property and the owner of the property, or his agents, tell you to leave, even if you think they're wrong, leave because, otherwise, you're trespassing.

Common sense, you would think. ^

But I wonder, do some here wish to see it as a dress code? The article was clear why he was arrested.

My attitude is this: if you dress like a gang member, prepare to be treated as one. If you dress like a homeless person, prepare to be treated as one. If, for example, I were to come across someone wearing a "White Power" t-shirt, I'm not going to bother finding out if he's wearing because he likes the aesthetic design.

If indeed the events are true (from the airlines perspective), then I am glad they kicked his ... off the plane!

What really bothers me though is the fact that his mother "played the race card". I for one I am sick & tired of seeing peoples butts & underwear sticking out in public. Color, race, gender is TOTALLY besides the point. Shame on her for bringing it up!!!

Believe when I say I ani't NO fan of US Airways, BUT, I'll side with them on this one...

Unfortunately, he did not follow the airline dress code. He was hauled off the plane. This is unacceptable for his behavior. He could be banned to enterance at airport property or inside the aircraft for the life. He have to follow a proper dress code rules. He can't take it off his pants. He was arrested as charges with trespassing, interfering with a flight crew and resist arrest, too. You have to obey the airline policies. You must be enforced to follow the dress code. His bail is set $11,000.

Agreed 100% ^