Posted on 01/09/2008 7:01:31 AM PST by rellimpank
NBA, NFL Go Anti-Gun But are they protecting their athletes, or protecting an image?
Last year, Washington Redskins safety Sean Taylor got out of bed upon hearing intruders entering his home. The house was situated in a wealthy, gated community on the outskirts of Miami. It was the middle of the night. To protect himself, his girlfriend, and their young child, Taylor grabbed a machete he kept nearby and crept to his bedroom door.
So Taylor, in fear, and concerned for the safety of his family, armed himself with a large knife used to hack away at jungle foliage. The intruder shot and killed him.
Many have asked why Taylor felt it necessary to have a machete nearby, but it's probably worth asking (as his friends and peers in professional sports certainly are), "What if it had been a gun?" Certainly, the outcome may have been different.
Unfortunately, officials in the NFL and the NBA increasingly take a paternalistic attitude toward their athletes. For years, the NFL and the NBA have attempted to distance players from firearms. Some would argue these policies are aimed at a culture that celebrates the criminal use of violent weapons, but the effect is pretty clear: The leagues would rather their players put themselves at risk than protect themselves with guns.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
didn’t he only have the machete because for some reason he didn’t have his gun?
The NFL cannot keep him from owning a firearm.
“The NFL cannot keep him from owning a firearm.”
No but they can keep him from playing football. $2 million dollar signing bonus or a gun. where do you think most people would go.
Metal detectors in the locker rooms?
NEVER take a knife to a gun fight!
Alarmist screed.
Maybe they should just ban the athletes who have criminal records from owning guns.
Was there a crime in his background that prevented him from legally owning a gun? I really don’t recall his background.
Taylor was on probation and was forbidden by law from owning guns. Really the NFL and NBA don’t care if the players own guns, what bothers them is when the players get in trouble with the law which sometimes involves guns.
‘Many have asked why Taylor felt it necessary to have a machete nearby, but it’s probably worth asking (as his friends and peers in professional sports certainly are), “What if it had been a gun?” Certainly, the outcome may have been different. ‘
He had a criminal record, which is why he wasn’t allowed to have a gun.
I’m pretty fed up with this punk being cannonized. He led the league in fines for cheap shots, spit in players faces, and refused to dump his homeboy’s, having some weird need to keep his so called ‘street cred’.
Maybe they should ban athletes with criminal records ( felonies ) from playing.
Won’t work. My guess it puts players in bigger jeopardy now since the bad guys know they have no protection.
ah.. here’s the story.
http://www.americandaily.com/article/21182
Except of course the leagues aren’t actually disarming the players. The article is wrong.
A private organisation insisting on the voiding of a person's Constitutional rights? You're kidding, right?
The bidding for that bit of idiocy starts at $100 million, m'friend.
“If the NFL tried that, he’d make one hell of a lot more than $2 million...depending of course on voir dire.”
No, there was one guy a couple of years ago found to have firearms in his car. They fined him a bunch of money.
“A private organisation insisting on the voiding of a person’s Constitutional rights? You’re kidding, right?”
Many employers do this currently. You cannot possess a firearm on their property. Major sports organizations have behavior clauses in their contracts. They go so far as to dictate how the athletes will dress when they attend events.
“The bidding for that bit of idiocy starts at $100 million, m’friend.’
Good luck with that, they aren’t forcing the person to give up their rights. The person is doing that voluntarily.
People (especially the NFL nannies) seem to have forgotten this choir boy pretty quickly.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/01/national/main2319138.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_2319138
THUGBALL. NICE GUYS NOT ALLOWED.
“It’s a pretty, I think, widely accepted statistic that if you carry a gun, your chances of being shot by one increase dramatically.....”
Horse hockey.
Do the leagues buy life insurance on their players to re-imburse themselves (i.e. leagues) for the deaths of the foolish players who follow league policy? That would be the ultimate conflict. Establish a policy but insure the ‘economic loss’ in case policy has some negative unintended consequences.
“I’m pretty fed up with this punk being cannonized.”
I’d have to agree with you. What happened was tragic but we’re only hearing about it because he was in the NFL. At least Tillman was serving his country and deserved respect for that move.
Exactly.
>>>
Maybe they should just ban the athletes who have criminal records from owning guns.
<<<
Federal law prohibits felons from owning guns or even possessing ammunition. That pretty much covers it.
That would leave enough current players to make up about three teams in the NBA. If it weren't for parole the Raiders would never win a game. Pro sports would be more accurately described as con-sports.
You can legally keep a gun in your home without the A-holes at the NFL or NBA ever knowing about it.
Right. The irony here is that the NFL and NBA are using this “we strongly discourage you from owning a gun” policy to effectively deal with the problem they face because of so many criminals working for them.
I have always held that there are enough talented, clean living players out there that the leagues could draw from and the level of play would barely be different. Most guys that get cut or sent to practice squads missed the team by a very small margin. It almost seems that they want the trouble makers so they can draw that demographic ( gangsta, loud mouths, and felons ) to the viewer list.
Also, I have never like the MLB spending so much time recruiting out of this country when there are plenty of American that are just as good or better than any Dominican et. al. ( one of the reasons I stopped watching MLB after the second strike )
HA!!
*Athletes*??
No-no, that's the wrong word.
...their gang-bangers.
players are just cattle.
they are replacable.
He says , Gee , How did that gun get there?
Nor will the ''employer's property'' argument fly here either. The various stadia and training facilities are the property of either municipalities or private owners, not the NFL. If a player is in possession of an otherwise legal weapon, properly carried according to state and/or municipal law, the NFL would be utterly screwed in trying to prevent him from doing so.
Conceivably, the owner of the particular franchise **might** have a means of discouraging firearms ownership/carry, but the NFL hasn't a prayer. Nor does the ''contractural condition'' argument pass muster; contracts have been overturned hundreds of times for insisting on provisions later found to be unlawful.
And, if the NFL should show the extremely bad judgment of ''leaning on'' an owner to enforce their no-guns policy, well, the law has a term for that, too: conspiracy to deprive civil rights. Ask some of the companies that have been hit with one of these actions just how much fun it really is.
Naturally, there's one other wild card here. The NFL is certainly wealthy (and crooked, imnnho) enough to attempt to buy the judge.
That was Tank Johnson, he wasn’t fined by the league for having guns in his car. He was fined by the league for getting in trouble with the law for having guns in his car.
Roll forward to 2006. I was taking the annual web based "ethics" training. One of the new items listed firearms are prohibited items on company property. That was slipped in very quietly. It won't affect my lunch time trips to the range because I now work from my home in Idaho instead of a company office building in San Diego.
It's disappointing to see that development. If I was still working in the San Diego office building, I would just work through lunch and leave early for a trip to the range.
“WIthholding, or threatening to withhold, employment, when a person exercises his rights is certainly actionable. They may indeed have fined this man, but if he paid it he was receiving very poor legal advice.”
nonsense, it is not that cut and dried. Employers have rights too. They can apply certain rules to their property and their time. I don’t agree with the rules where companys prohibit firearms but they/ve stood the legal tests.
You can be fired for spending work time talking about politics or posting on FR. You can be fired for bringing a firearm onto company property if the company prohibits them.
Most high profile athletes and media folks have other stipulations in their contracts. Many times they are referred to moral clauses or simular language. The image of these talents is as important as their skill. Anything that devalues that image is actionable by the employer.
So they’re denying people contracts if they own a gun?
“So they’re denying people contracts if they own a gun?”
I dunno if they are doing that and doubt they are going that far. I’d be surprised if they didnt have a rule saying the players couldn’t have one while attending practice or other official events.
Probably. It wouldn’t surprise me.
“disparate impact”
No, they NEED the felons. So they should ban the felons from carrying guns.
Course, felons already CAN'T have guns. So, they should demand that the felons obey the law.
Wait...
I think most players would sign and then flip off the NFL and have a gun anyways.
Such a basic technology. If they can't own conventional guns, most NFL players can afford the unconventional ones that are far more concealable. Better to say "I'm sorry" than have your jersey number stuck on every players helmet for a few games.
On June 2, 2006 the charges against Sean Taylor were dropped as part of a negotiated plea bargain. Taylor donated his time to various charities and made $1,000 donations to 10 southern Florida schools in scholarships and, in exchange, he would avoid jail time and a felony record.
He had 18 months of probation, without incident. In a cruel irony, his probation period was scheduled to end the week after his murder, at which time he would have been legally able to own a gun again.
Thank you for adding those interesting details.
“Maybe they should ban athletes with criminal records ( felonies ) from playing.”
Bingo. And issue the rest a pistol and a shotgun.
So who would play in the NBA? :-)
After I heard about the death threats aimed at Rex Grossman after the Super Bowl last year I don’t blame athletes if they feel the need for protection.
People go after them all the time.
I dated a Cubs player for awhile in the early 90s. He was not one of the stars and he still got harassed a lot. We sometimes went out with one of the bigger names and their wives and/or girlfriends and saw what they put up with.
Most of the time it’s someones jonesing for a punch and a lawsuit but someone could be armed.
I have heard some tales from Cubs and Bears players alone that would turn your hair blue. And not even the stars either.
The best one was of someone harassing Derrek Lee over a parking spot in a fit of road rage. Didn’t know who he was and then DLee got out of his car and revealed his 6’5 chiseled power hitter build and the guy backed down and then to make it worse realized who it was and asked for an autograpH!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.