" Personally, i thought Diogenes made perfect sense. Although i hate looking at butt when im at the mall or walking down the sidewalk, what he said made perfect sense. funny too "

" Moving out of Iowa, if noise and seeing peoples undies offends you it would be best to not move to a bigger city. It only gets wilder when you add more people.

Personally I find this thread amusing, I've lived in the bay area in SF, Berkeley, Oakland and now in Las Vegas. You guys really have nothing to complain about. "

" REPETE,

What parts did you not understand? "

" IM SORRY DIOGENES, WOULD YOU MIND WRITING THAT AGAIN, I DIDNT GET IT THE FRIST TIME OR THE SECOND,WOULD YOU EXPLAIN IT TO ME LIKE I WAS IN KINDEGARTEN,AND THEN MAYBE ONE MORE TIME AFTER THAT IF YOU STILL HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO SAY OR DO. MORON "

" Yes, by all means, we should legislate how much Underwear is Permitted to Show Above the Pants (UPSAP).

I believe the amount of UPSAP should be at most 2.334 inches with a minimum of .667 inches showing. We will need special Underwear Cops, dressed in plainclothes to enforce the law. These undercover UC should be attired so that either exactly 2.335 inches or exactly .665 inches of underwear peeks out above their pants, so as not to tip-off the criminal element. UCs will need special equipment, perhaps some sort of laser measuring device, to accurately gauge the amount of underpants that the alleged perpetrator may be displaying.

Once the perpetrators Underwear Exposure (UE) has been measured and determined unlawful, he or she should be apprehended by the swift, stealthy application of a Wedgie, also known as a Snuggie. Other acceptable variations of apprehension are permissible: the Melvin, the Atomic Wedgie, and the Hanging Wedgie.


Naturally, in cases of .667 inches or less of UPSAP, apprehension by Wedgie may prove difficult. In this case, a swift partial de-panting movement can be executed and the Wedgie applied. "