Adam Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Anyone who doesn't like the patdowns should stop going to games. How dare those idiots try to invoke the Constitution to fight the pat downs. People think they have the right to change the Constitution, but they don't
ElMarko Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Not to mention the fact that if you wanted to really hurt people at the stadium - with the least amount of risk - all you would need to do is lob nail bombs into those huge pile-ups of people at the gates, backed-up because of the patdowns themselves. They offer large, tightly packed groups of people - with easy access to run-away and blend into a crowd or jump in a waiting vehicle. I'm all for safety and understand that it's not a RIGHT but a PRIVLEDGE to go to a football game, - but the pat downs DO NOTHING to improve safety. All it does is stop beer smuggling. And if the team wanted me to drink less once inside the stadium, why did they replace the 12 ounce Heineken cans (from last year) with 24 ounce cans right next to my tunnel entrance? No way I'm drinking draft beer in that joint.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 I agree with the other 2 replyers ... for the most part. If the pat-downs actually were an effective way to safely regulate the stadium, then I would agree with them. But as it stands, the only thing they do is make mothers happy (that the NFL is being "safe") and long-time fans angry.
Adam Posted November 20, 2005 Author Posted November 20, 2005 If it helps just a littel, even just a tiny bit, then every fan, player, and coach should get patted down before entering.
cåblelady Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 ......Which is probably the REAL reason that they follow through with the friggin' pat downs.... 507496[/snapback] Actually....they know I don't get out much.....and I'm easily amused.
Fezmid Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Wow, when this thread started several weeks ago, I was one of the only voices saying they were stupid and I was being attacked by people saying we needed to do them. Apparantly the others who agreed with me decided not to post back then! http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...005&hl=patdowns CW
KD in CA Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Oh brother.....wasn't this horse beaten beyond death a few weeks back?
IDBillzFan Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Is this about Bledsoe? 507542[/snapback] I'm certain if this were about Bledsoe it would not be patdowns but rather pat-pat-pat-down-he-goes. (Yeah, I know, he's the best quarterback in the league, blah, blah, blah.)
Chilly Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 The patdowns and metal detectors still haven't stopped me from sneaking crown royal into games.
MDH Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 People think they have the right to change the Constitution, but they don't 507476[/snapback] Somebody needs to go back to school and learn about their country.
Offside Number 76 Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 I haven't seen the patdown operation at the Ralph, so I can't speak for its efficiency. I can say that the Redskins have been conducting them since Sept. 2001, and although the procedure meant that it took 15 minutes to enter (15 whole minutes! What an intrusion!), I felt safer for it. Yes, I realize that someone could drive a truckbomb up to Fedex Field, but just because we can't prevent all forms of a disease doesn't mean we shouldn't cure those we can. For those who think this is about preventing the smuggling of alcohol: Your priorities are misplaced. Spend the same 12 bucks you spent on the liquor you were trying to sneak in, and just have 2 beers at the game instead. How much do you really need to consume DURING the game? I'm all for tying one on once in a while, but the 2 main reasons I don't go to live Bills games are the drunktards--yes, I spelled that purposefully--and the traffic. (Saw ND live yesterday. 3 beers before the game, 3 after, none during, and a much better time than I've ever had at the Ralph. No idiots.) Complain about 15 minutes of TV timeouts per quarter, not the 15 minutes someone is using to try and keep you and your friends and family safe.
PatPatPatSack Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 508162[/snapback] Just thought I should post. TIA.
Saudi Arabia Rob Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 Agreed the patdowns aren't necessarily effective, but in my mind, if it can pose some type of deterrent they're worthwhile continuing. It's funny, but they don't use a metal wand, just the patdown. I live down in Tampa where this thing has come up. The person doing it is a high school civics teacher who wants to set the example for his class. He claims since this was never part of the "agreement" on this year's season tickets, he feels it's an infringement on his rights and arbitrary. I'd like to see the NFL state if there are no patdowns, the team forfeits the game. This guy would be tarred and feathered.
gmac17 Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 but just because we can't prevent all forms of a disease doesn't mean we shouldn't cure those we can. good point. If someone wants to take down a plane they can probably figure it out, but does that mean we shouldn't have security in place? Don't make it easy for people.
Fezmid Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 I felt safer for it Yay, let's spend millions of tax payer dollars to not only break the law, but to also make people FEEL safer, even though they really aren't any safer at all. Why spend that money in ways that will MAKE people safer if they won't FEEL safer??? Two words: Window Dressing. CW
Offside Number 76 Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 Yay, let's spend millions of tax payer dollars to not only break the law, but to also make people FEEL safer, even though they really aren't any safer at all. Why spend that money in ways that will MAKE people safer if they won't FEEL safer??? Two words: Window Dressing.CW 508510[/snapback] Alright, I'll add this: I actually was safer for it. And please explain to me what's illegal about imposing a condition upon use of a revocable license, which is what your game ticket is. (Again, I have not seen the process used at the Ralph; I'm assuming that private security guards, such as off-duty police officers, are used.)
Fezmid Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 Alright, I'll add this: I actually was safer for it. And you know this how...? http://www.ucomics.com/cornered/2005/11/18/ CW
Alaska Darin Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 Alright, I'll add this: I actually was safer for it. 508517[/snapback] I doubt it.
stuckincincy Posted November 21, 2005 Posted November 21, 2005 NFL pat-downs are about abrogating liability.
Recommended Posts