godtomsatan Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 I saw this note this morning in the paper. While not that big of a deal, I find it has less to do with terrorism as it has to do with keeping food and alcohol out and maximizing concession revenue. Hawks fans' frisking suit in judge's hands SEATTLE -- A federal judge is expected to decide in the next few weeks whether to dismiss a lawsuit challenging a policy that requires fans to be frisked before they enter Seahawks games at Qwest Field. Lawyers representing the Seahawks and the Washington State Public Stadium Authority, which manages the stadium, filed motions to have the case dismissed. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge James Robart heard from both sides, including lawyers for Fred and Kathleen Stark, two season ticket holders who filed the lawsuit last year. The lawsuit contends that since Qwest is a publicly owned stadium, mass pat-downs without suspicion violate the Fourth Amendment's protections against warrantless and unreasonable searches. The lawsuit seeks an injunction ending the practice. The NFL instituted the policy for all of its 32 teams in 2005, saying it was necessary to protect fans from terrorism. A similar lawsuit is on appeal in Tampa Bay. If the case continues, hearings will begin July 24. The first Seahawks home game is Aug. 25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 (edited) Good way of losing revenue by turning fans away from the team/league altogether... Edited June 11, 2007 by Crazysight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Seriously, in this day & age, what reasonable person wouldn't want frisking/bag searches to go on? The Bill of Rights may protect someone in this case (and that remains to be seen, obviously), but why wouldn't any citizen of this country concede that the rights of the thousands in the stadium to safely enjoy the game is more inviolate than their privacy? Common sense has to start prevailing in this country at some point, doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Seriously, in this day & age, what reasonable person wouldn't want frisking/bag searches to go on? The Bill of Rights may protect someone in this case (and that remains to be seen, obviously), but why wouldn't any citizen of this country concede that the rights of the thousands in the stadium to safely enjoy the game is more inviolate than their privacy? Common sense has to start prevailing in this country at some point, doesn't it? While I agree with the premise.... the problem as I see it is that they don't, and never will, catch anyone. I have been through the lines at Seattle and the searches are ludicrous at best. I could have smuggled a tank through that search. If they did it right I wouldn't have any problems with it whatsoever. Unfortunately.... they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 This wouldn't apply to any other stadium, would it? They do it at Soldier Field and I think the NFL implemented it for the playoffs or something (someone correct me if I am wrong). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 This wouldn't apply to any other stadium, would it? They do it at Soldier Field and I think the NFL implemented it for the playoffs or something (someone correct me if I am wrong). Since the NFL enacted across the board in 2005 (see above article) I would assume that if the Seattle people win their case...or the Tampa people do... it would effect all of the NFL stadiums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted June 11, 2007 Author Share Posted June 11, 2007 The Bill of Rights may protect someone in this case (and that remains to be seen, obviously), but why wouldn't any citizen of this country concede that the rights of the thousands in the stadium to safely enjoy the game is more inviolate than their privacy? Common sense has to start prevailing in this country at some point, doesn't it? Common sense would tell you they aren't looking for terrorists when they look through your bag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Seriously, in this day & age, what reasonable person wouldn't want frisking/bag searches to go on? The Bill of Rights may protect someone in this case (and that remains to be seen, obviously), but why wouldn't any citizen of this country concede that the rights of the thousands in the stadium to safely enjoy the game is more inviolate than their privacy? Common sense has to start prevailing in this country at some point, doesn't it? I'd agree completely if it were not for the fact that this practice interfers with my God given right to have a flask on my person at a ball game. I'm just certain this was in the Bible somewhere, Corinthians perhaps, because everyone knows those Corinthians could party in addition to making kick ass leather. I suppose if push comes to shove and the Court has to balance my privacy and my right to get drunk cheaply against the safety of tens of thousands that the needs of the tens of thousands maybe should prevail. Still it rankles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 I'd agree completely if it were not for the fact that this practice interfers with my God given right to have a flask on my person at a ball game. I'm just certain this was in the Bible somewhere, Corinthians perhaps, because everyone knows those Corinthians could party in addition to making kick ass leather. I suppose if push comes to shove and the Court has to balance my privacy and my right to get drunk cheaply against the safety of tens of thousands that the needs of the tens of thousands maybe should prevail. Still it rankles. But this isn't the case at baseball stadiums or basketball arenas, so why are NFL games different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 While I agree with the premise.... the problem as I see it is that they don't, and never will, catch anyone. I have been through the lines at Seattle and the searches are ludicrous at best. I could have smuggled a tank through that search. If they did it right I wouldn't have any problems with it whatsoever. Unfortunately.... they don't. I'm glad I read the thread first because I was going to post the exact same thing. The searches are indeed ludicrous - mere lip service. Target Center where the Timberwolves play and the Metrodome when the Twins are playing are exactly the same. Anyone could sneak anything in there - in fact, I do, a bottle of water for my wife, every game. Not gonna pay $4 for a bottle of water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 But this isn't the case at baseball stadiums or basketball arenas, so why are NFL games different? See above - here in Minny all sports events have frisk searches but they are completely ineffective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 But this isn't the case at baseball stadiums or basketball arenas, so why are NFL games different? Cause NFL games actually have fans who attend the games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Looks like Mrs. PD has seen her last NFL game......I charge for that kinda thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 They aren't looking for water bottles. Or knives. Or guns even. The type of search they do at Colts games tells me they are looking to see if you have a bomb strapped to your torso. They do check bags. I'm ok with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heydave76 Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 are there any openings in security at the Cowboys stadium. I'd like to be there to make sure Carrie Underwood is not carrying explosives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 This wouldn't apply to any other stadium, would it? They do it at Soldier Field and I think the NFL implemented it for the playoffs or something (someone correct me if I am wrong).I would presume that since they are going at it with the public funds = forth amendment protection, any ruling would have implications with other publicly funded stadium. But if the stadium wasn't publicly funded, then it becomes private party where you don't have the same rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Seriously, in this day & age, what reasonable person wouldn't want frisking/bag searches to go on? The Bill of Rights may protect someone in this case (and that remains to be seen, obviously), but why wouldn't any citizen of this country concede that the rights of the thousands in the stadium to safely enjoy the game is more inviolate than their privacy? Common sense has to start prevailing in this country at some point, doesn't it? Agreed. The yammering is is more about disappointment over the "unintended consequence" of making it harder to break the refreshment rules than it is about righteous indignation over civil rights or concern about ineffective searches. If searches didn't make smuggling in unauthorized beverages a hassle, no one would complain. If they changed it so you could keep whatever contraband they found as long as it wasn't an explosive or a weapon, why would anyone mind a search? Even if it is cursory, a search is still a basic level of deterence as "never gonna get checked" is a far different scenario for brainless troublemakers than "have to make it through security". It's the loss of the thrill of sneaking in cheap beer that irritates the opponents ... No NFL fan will stop going to games because of the search ... except maaaaybe those who care more about what they are trying to hide than the action on the field, and then it's just as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSULions Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 But this isn't the case at baseball stadiums or basketball arenas, so why are NFL games different? Because NFL games actually have more than 15 - 20K at attendence versus most NFL games run 65 - 75K at the game. Each would be terrible to have an terrorist incident, but with 3 to 4 times the people at an NFL game, the terrorist would make more headlines and inflict more damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Will they be checking Raiders fans for batteries? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 (edited) Because NFL games actually have more than 15 - 20K at attendence versus most NFL games run 65 - 75K at the game. Each would be terrible to have an terrorist incident, but with 3 to 4 times the people at an NFL game, the terrorist would make more headlines and inflict more damage. Not to mention awakening the sleeping giant that is the wrath of FF owners everywhere. They'd start with fantasy military units in the ME & the terrorist threat would be wiped from the face of the Earth. Hey, what kind of league do you play in? A 6 pt/killed, 2 pt/maimed terrorist with 10 pt bonuses for rescued hostages. Sweeeeeetttt! Do you think I should start the 101st in Bagdad this week? TIA. Will answer yours. Edited June 12, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 (edited) Well, common sense prevails and the bench issues a ruling that an 8th grader in Civics class could have provided. In a similar case in which a TB fan, high school teacher Gordon Johnson (why doesn't that surprise me?) won his challenge of being frisking going to a NFL game, the 11th Court of Appeals overturned an earlier ruling that fans can't be legally frisked before going into stadiums. The rationale for the ruling: There is no constitutional right to watch a football game. Also part of the reasoning behind the ruling is that Johnson also forfeited his right to challenge pat downs when he consented to them, that he was aware of the search policy before he entered the stadium, and that TB can revoke tickets for any reason. So when can TB & the public recover their costs for this prick wasting everyone's time & effort? Edited June 28, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolly Rodgers Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Since the NFL enacted across the board in 2005 (see above article) I would assume that if the Seattle people win their case...or the Tampa people do... it would effect all of the NFL stadiums. Tampa just lost their case. http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/27/Hillsbor...kets_Get_.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 (edited) Tampa just lost their case. http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/27/Hillsbor...kets_Get_.shtml They just won their case on appeal. That's what your link says and it's what I posted directly above your post. And that the guy was a Civics teacher absolutely floors me. How is it possible that he teaches kids Civics and doesn't understand how the Constitution & Bill of Rights works? Edited June 28, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSULions Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Well, common sense prevails and the bench issues a ruling that an 8th grader in Civics class could have provided. In a similar case in which a TB fan, high school teacher Gordon Johnson (why doesn't that surprise me?) won his challenge of being frisking going to a NFL game, the 11th Court of Appeals overturned an earlier ruling that fans can't be legally frisked before going into stadiums. The rationale for the ruling: There is no constitutional right to watch a football game. Also part of the reasoning behind the ruling is that Johnson also forfeited his right to challenge pat downs when he consented to them, that he was aware of the search policy before he entered the stadium, and that TB can revoke tickets for any reason. So when can TB & the public recover their costs for this prick wasting everyone's time & effort? What a loser! Are you trying to hide something Gordon??? If you go on a trip and you get frisked after you don't pass the metal detector are you going to forfeit your plane ticket because you don't consent to a pat down? The pat downs are not like having you strip off all your clothes.... it is simply a simple check to make sure someone is not carrying weapons or a bomb into the stadium. Is it a pain... yes, but I would much rather go to the game and be patted down when I enter the stadium than give you my seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.