Fezmid Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Same exact thing happens every day at airports... You don't see any lawsuits there... and many airports are publicly funded as well, so I don't buy that arguement. 475909[/snapback] I don't know about you, but I've never been patted down at an airport... The only time that happens (from my experience) is if you setoff the metal detector. Don't carry metal with you, no patdown. I'm in favor of the lawsuit because patdowns do NOTHING to increase security - it's all window dressing, and it's costing taxpayers money. Who do you think is paying the overtime for all of the extra people who need to do the pats? How quick we are to give up any civil liberties (and tax dollars) in this country, all in the name of "security." http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...ne/050920&num=0 http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005...ity_pat_do.html I'm guessing the people saying, "Deal with it, and if you don't like it, don't buy a ticket," are the same ones saying, "If Hollywood wants to put DRM on all of their movies so that you can't make a backup, or if the RIAA wants to put DRM on all of their music so you can't use it on an iPod, then just don't buy those products!" Lame argument. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Absolutely true. She'd be the same one lining up the attorney after some maniac carried a gun into a stadium. "they failed to protect me...blah, blah,blah." People are IDIOTS. Go call the aclu or someone who gives a sh@t. 475847[/snapback] If that were the case, I'd sue, too. Especially since they don't allow me to protect myself because they won't allow me to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights. You're just as much a sheep as this person is. We continue to ridicule the symptoms while ignoring the real problem (our overwhelming and overbearing federal government). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Who do you think is paying the overtime for all of the extra people who need to do the pats?The home team pays event security How quick we are to give up any civil liberties (and tax dollars) in this country, all in the name of "security."Being subjected to a pat down upon entering private property is ultimately voluntary. I'm guessing the people saying, "Deal with it, and if you don't like it, don't buy a ticket," are the same ones saying, "If Hollywood wants to put DRM on all of their movies so that you can't make a backup, or if the RIAA wants to put DRM on all of their music so you can't use it on an iPod, then just don't buy those products!" I'm not sure how anyone can view these to issues as one and the same. They're not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 If that were the case, I'd sue, too. Especially since they don't allow me to protect myself because they won't allow me to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights. 475924[/snapback] Yeah, that's what we need - 76,000 drunks, and all of 'em with RPGs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 The home team pays event security Right, and they don't turn around and charge the tax payers or the fans that fee, they're just ready to make $76,800 less this year... I'm not sure how anyone can view these to issues as one and the same. They're not They're exactly the same concept. You don't like something about the product, so you shouldn't buy it. I'd like to know what you think is different about them. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Yeah, that's what we need - 76,000 drunks, and all of 'em with RPGs 475936[/snapback] Uh, drinking and carrying a firearm is already against the law. There are few times I've ever been more uncomfortable than at a sporting event on the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 They're exactly the same concept. You don't like something about the product, so you shouldn't buy it. I'd like to know what you think is different about them. CW 475945[/snapback] How many times have people blown up innocent people using a greatest hits CD they burned from their collection of CDs? I don't think it's very often. How many times have people blown up other people using things like bombs? How many times have people smuggled firearms into places they're not allowed? Now, I don't have any hard numbers, but I'm thinking the Atlanta Olympics and Columbine High School are two times more than a DRM has killed, maimed, or injured anyone. Apples and oranges. The debate over civil liberties versus the protection of the public probably won't go away anytime soon, but the organization is responsible for the safety of those in attendance - hence the whole point of paying security to be there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Uh, drinking and carrying a firearm is already against the law. 475952[/snapback] Damn government! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Uh, drinking and carrying a firearm is already against the law. 475952[/snapback] The 2nd Ammendment makes no such distinction. My only point was there has to be some restrictions along the line. But frankly, if the Bills allowed firearms into the stadium, I'd never go to another game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 How many times have people blown up innocent people using a greatest hits CD they burned from their collection of CDs? I don't think it's very often. How many times have people blown up other people using things like bombs? How many times have people smuggled firearms into places they're not allowed? Now, I don't have any hard numbers, but I'm thinking the Atlanta Olympics and Columbine High School are two times more than a DRM has killed, maimed, or injured anyone. Apples and oranges. The debate over civil liberties versus the protection of the public probably won't go away anytime soon, but the organization is responsible for the safety of those in attendance - hence the whole point of paying security to be there in the first place. 475962[/snapback] You can't only look at the threat - you have to look at how effective the security solution is to stopping the threat. How many times has a patdown uncovered someone with a bomb? Even using your own concerns, how many times has someone brought a bomb into a football game? Into a sporting event in general? Aside from the Olympics (which I'm not sure was even in a restricted area, was it? My understanding was that it was equivelent to someone blowing a bomb up during a tailgate party at the Ralph but I could be mistaken). Are you in favor of patting down everyone going into a school (since you mentioned Columbine)? You'd want your child touched by a stranger every single day they went to school? How about every time they walk into the local Walmart? Patdowns have never stopped anything. They're a waste of money and an invasion of privacy. Either the NFL is doing this for window dressing, or they're doing it to stop people from smuggling in food, thus increasing their concession revenue. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 You can't only look at the threat... 475977[/snapback] I suggest we start enforcing pat-downs all of the time. There should be laws requiring pat-downs before.... getting onto a bus entering a club/bar entering the buffalo wing festival walking into times sqaure entering a movie theatre attending any college class attenting a parade going to six flags and pretty much before doing anything where there will be more than 3 people within a 5 foot raduis of each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 I suggest we start enforcing pat-downs all of the time. There should be laws requiring pat-downs before.... getting onto a bus entering a club/bar entering the buffalo wing festival walking into times sqaure entering a movie theatre attending any college class attenting a parade going to six flags and pretty much before doing anything where there will be more than 3 people within a 5 foot raduis of each other. 475991[/snapback] Not sure where you are, but you do go through metal detectors and get patted in DC at the 6 flags. Some bar down here, you do get wanded and patted as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 The 2nd Ammendment makes no such distinction. Thank God for that. My only point was there has to be some restrictions along the line. But frankly, if the Bills allowed firearms into the stadium, I'd never go to another game. 475969[/snapback] I have witnessed some of the worst human behavior at that stadium - especially in the bathrooms. I've felt safer in warzones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 You can't only look at the threat - you have to look at how ..... ... for window dressing, or they're doing it to stop people from smuggling in food, thus increasing their concession revenue. CW 475977[/snapback] We tend to agree on a lot of different things, and this lawsuit is no different. I think we should agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 I have witnessed some of the worst human behavior at that stadium - especially in the bathrooms. I've felt safer in warzones. 476003[/snapback] That sucks - I've never felt the least bit unsafe there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 ACLU = RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 I don't agree pat downs should happen in airports either btw. Its a weak security measure and causes way more problems than it solves. Sorry but I'm sure there are better ways to do things. Anyways, why do football games need security like that? Were too many people getting shot or stabbed at games or something? 475920[/snapback] Terrorists. That's why. Those bastards would love to kill 5-10000 with one martyr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Terrorists. That's why. Those bastards would love to kill 5-10000 with one martyr. 476041[/snapback] And again, how is a patdown going to stop anyone? Even if the 9/11 terrorists were patted down, nothing would've changed. Patdowns = RJ CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Patdowns have never stopped anything. They're a waste of money and an invasion of privacy. Either the NFL is doing this for window dressing, or they're doing it to stop people from smuggling in food, thus increasing their concession revenue. CW 475977[/snapback] Considering that Ralph has tried many times in the past to ban people bringing in food to the games unsuccessfully, the pat downs are rather half arsed, and it didn't appear that anyone was being patted down at the Club Seats / Luxury Box entrances; it sure does appear that the whole point of this (in Buffalo and league-wide) is to increase concession stand revenues. I'm sure the reasoning for no patdowns at the high fallutin entrance is something along the lines of "a terrorist wouldn't buy an expensive ticket". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Terrorists. That's why. Those bastards would love to kill 5-10000 with one martyr. 476041[/snapback] Hahaha, you think anyone with a turban will be able to hijack a plane again within the next 50 years. Those people if they knew the plane would be crashing into a building would have taken it over in a heartbeat. It's just that nobody considered they would do such a thing as they did. Since all previous hijackings ended pretty safely everybody felt that if they just sat quiet that everything would be ok. Now we know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts