View Full Version : Police Sue NFL Over Guns in Stadium
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/
Depending on who owns the stadium (public vs. private), I may fall on the side of the NFL. That is to say, I think that property owners have the right to deny entry to anyone with weapons. I'm also glad that off-duty LEO aren't getting special treatment.
It's a non-issue here in Texas. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/20/of-course-texas-lonestar-state-tells-nfl-their-gun-laws-dont-apply-here/
If the LEO win this suit, that is the first step to changing the policy for CCW holders bringing a firearm into the stadium. One step at a time.
SeriousStudent
02-20-14, 20:46
Does anyone know if the Texas law applies to retired officers carrying under LEOSA?
I know some retired officers that I'd be very happy if they were armed, when going to games in Arlington or Houston.
Eurodriver
02-20-14, 21:35
If the LEO win this suit, that is the first step to changing the policy for CCW holders bringing a firearm into the stadium. One step at a time.
How so?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/
Depending on who owns the stadium (public vs. private), I may fall on the side of the NFL. That is to say, I think that property owners have the right to deny entry to anyone with weapons. I'm also glad that off-duty LEO aren't getting special treatment.
I disagree completely. One thing about being a cop is that it isn't a job you turn off when you take off the uniform and leave work. You spend your whole career training on how to deal with people acting outside what society will accept and then you should turn that off when you do go out after work? It doesn't work that way and any good cop should be an asset to the public being armed; whether it's at an NFL game, a movie theater or a mall... The latter two being scenes of some pretty horrific killings when the "gun free zone" signs somehow failed to stop bad guys with guns.
A person armed, whether a citizen or off duty LEO, would have made a huge difference in a lot of recent instances where killers went unopposed about their business and now we want to make NFL crowds open season too? Doesn't sound like people are learning much from history.
How so?
If the NFL will not let off duty LEO carry concealed inside the stadium, then it will be that much tougher for the NFL to rationalize that civilian CCW should be acceptable. If the LEO win their case and the civilian sector gains LEO support for their postion, it will be easier to win.
An issue we have in our part of the U.S. is that many have the attitude "If I can't do X, Y or Z, then I don't think LEO should be able to do X, Y or Z." The attitude is counterproductive and alienates some pro-CCW LEO. Dividing support for the issue is what the anti-2nd Amendment people want. We lose and they win.
Rome was not built in a day and we all have to stick together to pick apart the anti-2nd Amendment crowd one brick at a time.
scoutfsu99
02-20-14, 22:05
If an off duty cop can carry his pistol in, I should be able to do the same. If I can't, he shouldn't.
If an off duty cop can carry his pistol in, I should be able to do the same. If I can't, he shouldn't.
This is exactly what I am talking about.
scoutfsu99
02-20-14, 22:11
This is exactly what I am talking about.
Roger, I was replying to rocsteady more or less. I agree with you and Sensei.
If it is a privately owned stadium then let them do what they want. I don't care about football and don't go to games either. If I were a gun owner and attended games I would simply vote with my pocketbook and stop going.
BoringGuy45
02-20-14, 22:25
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/
Depending on who owns the stadium (public vs. private), I may fall on the side of the NFL. That is to say, I think that property owners have the right to deny entry to anyone with weapons. I'm also glad that off-duty LEO aren't getting special treatment.
Considering that almost all stadiums are built with taxpayer money, I think that should qualify them as public property. These greedy owners keep going to city hall telling the council that even though the current venue is only 10 years old and still state-of-the-art, they want a new stadium with twice as many luxury boxes and club seats, a retractable roof, etc, and if they're asked to contribute a penny, the city can kiss their beloved team goodbye. So, the city builds the new stadium whether the citizens agree or not. I think when I, the taxpayer, build your house, you don't have any right to tell me that can't exercise my rights inside it.
If it is a privately owned stadium then let them do what they want. I don't care about football and don't go to games either. If I were a gun owner and attended games I would simply vote with my pocketbook and stop going.
I agree. I am covered under the National Peace Officer Safety Act and the no CCW signs I see posted in some businesses do not apply to me. I still refuse to spend a dime at any business that has no CCW signs posted. No CCW = No Money.
Considering that almost all stadiums are built with taxpayer money, I think that should qualify them as public property. These greedy owners keep going to city hall telling the council that even though the current venue is only 10 years old and still state-of-the-art, they want a new stadium with twice as many luxury boxes and club seats, a retractable roof, etc, and if they're asked to contribute a penny, the city can kiss their beloved team goodbye. So, the city builds the new stadium whether the citizens agree or not. I think when I, the taxpayer, build your house, you don't have any right to tell me that can't exercise my rights inside it.
I was tempted to take that position as well, but simply getting a government subsidy does not change property rights. For example, people who receive an earned income tax credit, Medicaid, Medicare, public housing, farm aid, or any other type of welfare entitlement from the tax payers do not lose their property rights. Don't get me wrong, I disagree with almost all forms of subsidies, but I don't think that we correct that injustice with an even greater one.
Does anyone know if the Texas law applies to retired officers carrying under LEOSA?
I know some retired officers that I'd be very happy if they were armed, when going to games in Arlington or Houston.
I have no desire to watch or be involved anything football. I see too many POS thugs being promoted as role models for children. That being said, I have never personally tried it, but I know guys who are actively sworn that have been rejected by the staff and not allowed in with a weapon. Rangers ballpark, they're all for it. American Airlines is also great about it. The only dealings I have had with that stupid football stadium has been when the Superbowl was there, and that was purely work related.
An issue we have in our part of the U.S. is that many have the attitude "If I can't do X, Y or Z, then I don't think LEO should be able to do X, Y or Z." The attitude is counterproductive and alienates some pro-CCW LEO. Dividing support for the issue is what the anti-2nd Amendment people want. We lose and they win.
Your view is that pointing out privilege is divisive, not lobbying for and acceping the privilege?
...we all have to stick together to pick apart the anti-2nd Amendment crowd one brick at a time. While some individual LEO believe in my Rights, Law Enforcement DOES NOT. Law Enforcment is vocally anti 2A and self defence except for some small towns and rural Sheriffs.
If the LEO win this suit, that is the first step to changing the policy for CCW holders bringing a firearm into the stadium. One step at a time.
This becoming a reality is about as likely as a monkey flying out my butt. While individual officers can be strong supporters of the Constitution and the second, very few agencies and LEO organizations are so. Those organizations wont throw support behind expanding CHL permissions. Instead they will continue to lick the asses of the political leadership so long as they continue to have their little exemptions to the rules that is.
The most efficient way to insure that LEO organizations support CHL is to put them in the same category at every turn.
While some individual LEO believe in my Rights, Law Enforcement DOES NOT. Law Enforcment is vocally anti 2A and self defence except for some small towns and rural Sheriffs.
I'd like to know where you're getting your numbers. I've been in LE for 8 years now and at all levels, the anti crowd is typically at the top. It's the chiefs and sheriffs who are politicians that I've experienced being anti 2A.
Sure I've come across some at the operational level who don't think private citizens need certain weapons. And often those of us who are pro CCL/2A can get them to better understand. Usually the quickest technique is to ask them about their spouses and kids. How can their wife/husband protect the kids while they are at work if non-LE can't have guns? But most in my experience understand that more good guys with guns means more good guys with guns. Naturally this will vary by locale. Places that are rabidly anti (NY, NJ, MA, IL, CA, MD) will have a less friendly attitude because it's the system they grew up in.
ETA: I decided last fall, based on the NFL's stupid policy that I won't attend games and won't buy anymore of their merchandise. I doubt they'll even notice but I feel better.
The only way to get them to pay attention IMO would be for agencies to stop providing security at events and force the NFL/owners to pay for private security. The problem is that the officers who work the games often make very good money as details or OT. If agency "A" told the NFL to piss off, agencies "B" and "C" would be lining up to take the gig.
I always come back around to not fully comprehending how individual states, let alone businesses, can decide which parts of the Constitution they will abide by and which parts they will ignore. I know the NFL has "juice" but not so much that they should be able to override the 2A.
What's next? Telling me which team I can root for?
I always come back around to not fully comprehending how individual states, let alone businesses, can decide which parts of the Constitution they will abide by and which parts they will ignore. I know the NFL has "juice" but not so much that they should be able to override the 2A.
What's next? Telling me which team I can root for?
It's as simple as property rights vs individual rights. And I tend to agree with the property owner having the right to limit what happens on his property. I should be able to decide who can or cannot bring a weapon into my home. Your 2A rights are not more important than my property rights.
Where it gets sticky is when private property is used as a business that is more open to the public than a residence. I think the NFL's decision is stupid and will have the opposite of their declared desire for a safer experience. . But I also think they are within their rights to do so.
I always come back around to not fully comprehending how individual states, let alone businesses, can decide which parts of the Constitution they will abide by and which parts they will ignore. I know the NFL has "juice" but not so much that they should be able to override the 2A.
Well, the federal government does it so maybe they think that they can do it too. ;)
Two Minnesota police organizations have sued the National Football League, claiming that a policy prohibiting guns in football stadiums violates a state law by infringing on the right of off-duty cops to carry weapons.
If they were actually concerned about the citizens' constitutional rights it would be a welcome change.
I always come back around to not fully comprehending how individual states, let alone businesses, can decide which parts of the Constitution they will abide by and which parts they will ignore. I know the NFL has "juice" but not so much that they should be able to override the 2A.
What's next? Telling me which team I can root for?
The Constitution protects you against the government; it offers little protection against private individuals or businesses. Thus, you can't tell your boss to screw himself and then expect the First Amendment to save your job. Similarly, the Second Amendment prohibits the Congress and, through incorporation of the BOR, state / local governments from infringing on you ability to bear arms. However, it says nothing about private property owners banning your weapons on their premises.
Good point. I kinda' lumped it all together.
If they were actually concerned about the citizens' constitutional rights it would be a welcome change.
I'm sure that these LE organizations make no distinction between law enforcement and the rest of the populace when it comes to the Second Amendment. I mean, it must be an mistake that their lawsuit only argued for LEO's to have this special "right" to carry in an NFL stadium.
One interpretation of the Constitution for the protected class, another for the masses. That's how it works, right?
If its private property, I'd say its up to the owners. However if it was publically funded..........
I think the moral of the story is, don't go to professional sporting events. Its a waste of money at best, and perpetuates boozing and general low IQ activity (fights, fantasy, ect)
I'm sure that these LE organizations make no distinction between law enforcement and the rest of the populace when it comes to the Second Amendment. I mean, it must be an mistake that their lawsuit only argued for LEO's to have this special "right" to carry in an NFL stadium.
One interpretation of the Constitution for the protected class, another for the masses. That's how it works, right?
Bingo. Dead On.
I've been in LE for 8 years now and at all levels, the anti crowd is typically at the top. It's the chiefs and sheriffs who are politicians that I've experienced being anti 2A.
I know there are plenty of good guys out doing good work but those are the individuals. My point was about the anti crowd at the top who officialy speaks for "Law Enforcment".
SeriousStudent
02-21-14, 22:05
I have no desire to watch or be involved anything football. I see too many POS thugs being promoted as role models for children. That being said, I have never personally tried it, but I know guys who are actively sworn that have been rejected by the staff and not allowed in with a weapon. Rangers ballpark, they're all for it. American Airlines is also great about it. The only dealings I have had with that stupid football stadium has been when the Superbowl was there, and that was purely work related.
I hear ya about the role models, or lack thereof. The thing I was thinking about was Chief Kyle's funeral a year ago. You and I have some mutual friends that attended that. They wanted to carry into Jerry World, but could not.
And I'm a big Rangers fan, and have my fingers crossed this year.
Stay safe.
I'm sure that these LE organizations make no distinction between law enforcement and the rest of the populace when it comes to the Second Amendment. I mean, it must be an mistake that their lawsuit only argued for LEO's to have this special "right" to carry in an NFL stadium.
One interpretation of the Constitution for the protected class, another for the masses. That's how it works, right?
Not a mistake at all. Also not the kind of elitist mindset I take as an implication in your post. They argued for LEO's in the suit because the law they are using as the crux of their suit is the law about where in MN peace officers can be armed and who can restrict that.
If MN CCL laws could be interpreted as trumping property rights, then that could've been added to the suit. But I'd bet their CCL laws don't even come close to that level.
Belmont31R
02-22-14, 00:20
My guess is a lot of you have no idea what deals go on attract businesses to a locale. Your stadium deals will bring in a magnitude more tax revenue in the long run. Same reason our governor is trying his best to attract tech companies to Texas. We just surpassed California for tech exports. Apple is building a huge tech complex 10 minutes away from me. The Motorola X is built in Austin. The Mac Pro is built in Austin. I am trying to get my degree before more assholes move here.
However it works out, off duty or CCW, I want guns in the stadium for some form of protection from others (ie crazy person). Most of if not all extra job peace officers will be on the playing field. There might be a few rovers on the floors and depending on which stadium help could be literally minutes away. It would be too late then on an active type shooter scenario. Security officers aren't armed so they won't do any good. So what about pat downs before going in for weapons? Prior to the NFL policy which doesn't matter in my state anyway I carried off duty into our stadium which is county owned. Twice during the entry gate pat down they have missed my gun. It was in an IWB holster. It wasn't a deep carry one either. They passed their hands right over it. With that said, I did have my credentials in my hand in the event that they did feel it.
Will the stadiums run folks through metal detectors or use wands? I don't know. If I made it through the gates undetected think about all the other guns that have made it through that don't belong with a peace officer or a citizen with a CHL (if allowed).
I hear ya about the role models, or lack thereof. The thing I was thinking about was Chief Kyle's funeral a year ago. You and I have some mutual friends that attended that. They wanted to carry into Jerry World, but could not.
And I'm a big Rangers fan, and have my fingers crossed this year.
Stay safe.
That that did get in, got in with a full uniform on, or the "uniform" they would wear to work.
I'm a baseball fan in general, but an all out Cardinals fan. I don't think I need to explain that one anymore. :D
Most of if not all extra job peace officers will be on the playing field. There might be a few rovers on the floors and depending on which stadium help could be literally minutes away.
This is mostly true. There will be a lot of uniforms on the field and walking around, also a lot around the gates for incoming and outgoing/directing traffic. However there have been plenty of plain clothes jobs open up at venues like these, and many others, for those of us that no longer wear uniforms to work.
They argued for LEO's in the suit because the law they are using as the crux of their suit is the law about where in MN peace officers can be armed and who can restrict that.
Except the law against carry in a public place exempts LEO and CCW in the same paragraph.
Subd. 1a.Permit required; penalty. A person, other than a peace officer, as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, who carries, holds, or possesses a pistol in a motor vehicle, snowmobile, or boat, or on or about the person's clothes or the person, or otherwise in possession or control in a public place, as defined in section 624.7181, subdivision 1, paragraph (c), without first having obtained a permit to carry the pistol...
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=624.714
Texas has apparently just told the NFL to pound sand.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/20/of-course-texas-lonestar-state-tells-nfl-their-gun-laws-dont-apply-here/
Minnesota's firearms carry laws are substantially less restrictive than Texas. I'm kind of surprised Minnesota hasn't told the NFL the same thing.
Let's just hope nobody's texting during the game...
SeriousStudent
02-22-14, 15:12
Let's just hope nobody's texting during the game...
Nope, nobody can text there. You do know that AT&T bought the naming rights to Cowboys Stadium, right? They have a new logo as well: "Most dropped balls, most dropped calls."
So it will likely be a non-issue.
Texas has apparently just told the NFL to pound sand.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/20/of-course-texas-lonestar-state-tells-nfl-their-gun-laws-dont-apply-here/
Minnesota's firearms carry laws are substantially less restrictive than Texas. I'm kind of surprised Minnesota hasn't told the NFL the same thing.
Hurrah for Texas!
Magic_Salad0892
02-22-14, 22:08
The attitude is counterproductive and alienates some pro-CCW LEO.
The problem with that, is it works both ways. The cops SHOULDN'T have rights that we don't have. Both sides are right. That's the problem.
A question some people need to ask themselves is that if they are in a No CCW facility and a violent confrontation breaks out, do they want the off duty LEO seated close to them to be armed or unarmed.
Redacted. SeriousStudent made a good comment and I don't want that to drift.
I can understand the frustration of non-LEO when it comes to this issue.
SeriousStudent
02-22-14, 23:39
And a helpful suggestion for our viewers at home:
Guys, we don't want this to become an "us versus them" thread. Personally, I think it would be spiffy if folks could carry their legal firearms where they chose. Private property makes that complicated.
But a complication we don't need, is gouging each others eyes out while we complain that some animals are sleeping in the house where the farmer did, and are drinking his whisky.
Let's focus on the NFL here. Thanks.
T2C, I'd rather have my own firearm in the scenario you painted....
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
The problem with that, is it works both ways. The cops SHOULDN'T have rights that we don't have. Both sides are right. That's the problem.
From the previously posted article:
Meanwhile, in other stadiums around the country, the NFL policy only allows law enforcement officers “specifically assigned to work security at the games, or private security officers contracted for stadium protection” to carry a firearm.
The reasoning behind the NFL’s firearm policy in the first place?
The NFL believes its stadiums already provide adequate security and, therefore, that armed off-duty police officers are unnecessary.
The problem is the NFL wants to have it both ways. They want to pretend they're LE friendly, when in fact they're not. For those who are required by dept. policy to be armed in public at all times, that statement by the NFL shoud read: The NFL believes its stadiums already provide adequate security and, therefore, that armed off-duty police officers are unwelcome. The NFL hasn't said that people who possess a CCW permit are not welcome, gun or not. That's essentially what they're saying to these LE guys.
In OK, the Self-Defense Act that covers all requirements for the legal carry of a firearm, does not apply to off-duty LE. I happen to have an SDA permit, but I carry on my commission card and I'm covered by the dept. so long as I carry a firearm that's been logged with the dept. and I'm currently qualified with it.
We had a retired TPD Major who's in charge of security at the BOK center try to ban off duty LE carry. That lasted about 24 hours. I notified the TPD FOP President of the issue and there was a story on the 6 O'Clock news that night about it. The FOP President flatly stated on camera that if officers were not allowed to carry off duty in the center, that meant they were not welcome in the center. The policy was changed and a statement released by the center the next day. Now we check in at a specific gate with our creds and seat number and we're good to go.
I'm not saying that every LEO is religious about off duty carry, but the ones I socialize with off the clock are. If we go somewhere that alcohol is served and some want to drink, we have the "designated gun toters" who don't. I can't imagine anything more awful than to have a lethal situation occur and you're sitting there as a cop with no way to defend yourself, much less intervene for the safety of others. :(
From the previously posted article:
The problem is the NFL wants to have it both ways. They want to pretend they're LE friendly, when in fact they're not. For those who are required by dept. policy to be armed in public at all times, that statement by the NFL shoud read: The NFL believes its stadiums already provide adequate security and, therefore, that armed off-duty police officers are unwelcome. The NFL hasn't said that people who possess a CCW permit are not welcome, gun or not. That's essentially what they're saying to these LE guys.
In OK, the Self-Defense Act that covers all requirements for the legal carry of a firearm, does not apply to off-duty LE. I happen to have an SDA permit, but I carry on my commission card and I'm covered by the dept. so long as I carry a firearm that's been logged with the dept. and I'm currently qualified with it.
We had a retired TPD Major who's in charge of security at the BOK center try to ban off duty LE carry. That lasted about 24 hours. I notified the TPD FOP President of the issue and there was a story on the 6 O'Clock news that night about it. The FOP President flatly stated on camera that if officers were not allowed to carry off duty in the center, that meant they were not welcome in the center. The policy was changed and a statement released by the center the next day. Now we check in at a specific gate with our creds and seat number and we're good to go.
I'm not saying that every LEO is religious about off duty carry, but the ones I socialize with off the clock are. If we go somewhere that alcohol is served and some want to drink, we have the "designated gun toters" who don't. I can't imagine anything more awful than to have a lethal situation occur and you're sitting there as a cop with no way to defend yourself, much less intervene for the safety of others. :(
Not everyone here is LEO.....Your use of so many LE focused TLA's makes understanding your post extremely difficult.
I just might be the only one who doesn't understand all of these acronym's. It just seems a shame for such an otherwise well written post to be someone obscured.
FOP - Fraternal order of Police?
TPD - ??
BOK - ??
SDA - ??
NFL - National Football League
CCW - Conceal Pistol License
Not everyone here is LEO.....Your use of so many LE focused TLA's makes understanding your post extremely difficult.
I just might be the only one who doesn't understand all of these acronym's. It just seems a shame for such an otherwise well written post to be someone obscured.
FOP - Fraternal order of Police? Correct
TPD - Tulsa Police Dept.
BOK - Bank of Oklahoma Event Center (large arena that sometimes holds professional sporting events)
SDA - Oklahoma Self Defense Act (concealed carry law)
NFL - National Football League Correct
CCW - Conceal Pistol License Correct
Sorry, it's easy to get caught up in the acronym alphabet when discussing LE stuff. Clarifications above.
FWIW, I agree with those that feel it shouldn't be restricted to LE. I support property rights, but also support self-determination. So long as you are complying with all other applicable laws and restrictions, I don't see the need to ban carry. JMO, YMMV (just my opinion, you mileage may vary) :)
HackerF15E
02-23-14, 11:05
An issue we have in our part of the U.S. is that many have the attitude "If I can't do X, Y or Z, then I don't think LEO should be able to do X, Y or Z." The attitude is counterproductive and alienates some pro-CCW LEO. Dividing support for the issue is what the anti-2nd Amendment people want. We lose and they win.
What's counterproductive and alienating is the belief that LEOs are some kind of super-citizen that should be allowed more privileges than any other American citizen.
The view that we are all citizens and all entitled to equal privileges and protections is the one and only viewpoint that needs to be rallied around and supported.
T2C, I'd rather have my own firearm in the scenario you painted....
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
I don't blame you one bit. If that were not an option, would you want the off duty LEO seated close to you to be armed or unarmed?
In my opinion, any law abiding citizen should be able to carry a concealed firearm without a CCW license anywhere in the U.S. Unfortunately, that is not the case. We have to retake this ground from the Liberals who believe that no one should be armed and we will will have to fight for that ground one inch at a time.
SeriousStudent
02-23-14, 11:57
I ask politely once.
Get the hint, and stop crapping in this thread. Talk about the NFL's policy or stay out. I'm giving a vacation to the next person that does not have reading comprehension skills.
I ask politely once.
Get the hint, and stop crapping in this thread. Talk about the NFL's policy or stay out. I'm giving a vacation to the next person that does not have reading comprehension skills.
Roger that.
The NFL won't see one dime of my money, at home or at the stadium, until they back off unreasonable policies that affect anyone who wants to attend a game.
SeriousStudent
02-23-14, 14:06
....
The NFL won't see one dime of my money, at home or at the stadium, until they back off unreasonable policies that affect anyone who wants to attend a game.
Much agree, and really it's just simple economics for me. You have to be a truly dedicated fan or have an orchard of money trees in the backyard. I can go watch an NFL game, or buy a case of ammo for a training class.
Not joking. I just bought a case of 9mm from Grant for $330 shipped. By the time I buy one ticket to Jerry World and factor in gas, parking, food and beverages, it's virtually the same amount. If you can afford it, rock on. But I honestly don't know how a simple working man can afford to go.
Ticket prices here in Houston were retarded. During their winning season in 2012 seats ran around $120+ for the BFE nose bleeds. That doesn't include a parking pass of around $50. Or if you want to park in a shady parking lot that was around $20. Yeah, no thanks. Prices remained steady even after the shitty year we just had. No thanks NFL.
Sorry, it's easy to get caught up in the acronym alphabet when discussing LE stuff. Clarifications above.
FWIW, I agree with those that feel it shouldn't be restricted to LE. I support property rights, but also support self-determination. So long as you are complying with all other applicable laws and restrictions, I don't see the need to ban carry. JMO, YMMV (just my opinion, you mileage may vary) :)
Thanks, that helped a ton! :) The NFL's policy is short sighted and as demonstrated in Texas, not necessarily legal depending on property ownership I would guess.
I'll see how this all plays out over time across the nation. Our major venues here are county owned (Reliant Stadium, Minute Maid Park, BBVA Compass Stadium, Toyota Center). Curious if the NBA, MLB, and MLS will follow along.
TurretGunner
02-24-14, 07:19
The issue of private/public property/business does not apply to the NFL or any pro sport for that matter.
In the very very rare case that a stadium is not publicly owned/funded, there are so0 many public benefits like property taken under eminent domain, Police Security, Tax Credits, Tax breaks (sports are non profit....right), ect that ALL pro teams are supported by the government.
The flip side is that no business or gov entity can deprive you of your consititional rights without cause. Thats like saying the NFL can decide no more women or Black people can attend games. Let me know how that goes for you.
Bolt_Overide
02-24-14, 07:56
For me, professional sports have been dead for years. So the issue doesn't really affect me. But, I do not believe an entity, public or private, has the right to make such a determination when they receive any public funds for any reason.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.