NFL Anti Second Amendment

[lobo9er]

sam cade I agree. Its fake sense of accomplishment for millions of viewers. Its entertainment, thats it and yet people have identity and ego wrapped up with teams and players. Kinda sad really.

If I owned a stadium, I would not want folks carrying inside during a game either.

Chuck shumer agrees. And Coumo agrees infact if he had a state he would limit his citizens rights to carry and own firearms. Stadium owners allow drunk unruly morons to run amuck because it makes them money.

 

[larryh1108]

1) Whether by your attendance fees or your TV-watching, you patronize these organizations by watching. That means you SUPPORT them. You give something worth while to PAY them to continue their activities. Some of those activities may be hurting something you (do? SHOULD?) care about more than vicarious entertainments. Of course the activities on the field aren't about guns or gun control. They are the bait that gets your money (or your ratings draw, vis-a-vis advertisements) flowing to those media companies.

Sam, you more than most (as a moderator) realize that we just can't stop "supporting" companies that have views we don't appreciate. Many threads have been written about this.

Your mortgage (not you specifically) may have been with a great bank when you got it but it was sold to a bank that is truly anti-gun. Remortgage? What if you're upside down or had some credit blips? What if the new bank sells it's paper and it's back to square one? Refinance again? Those closing costs add up pretty quick.

The credit cards in your wallet. Chances are the company that owns it or the logo itself has taken an anti-gun stand or supports Obama.

The grocery store you shop in. The owner or corporation may very well be anti-gun or pro-Obama.

The gas you buy for your car. Can you imagine where the profits go and what they support?

If you shop at Wally Mart. You are supporting a communist regime. Same if you shop at an "American" local mom & pop store. Chances are a large part of his inventory is made in a third world company or China.

The truth is if we only spent our money or banked our money at true pro-gun companies, we'd have full mattresses and only grow our food and hunt. Now-a-days, companies are more about perceived ideals instead of taking documented stances. Starbucks comes to mind. They love our money and love our business and actually don't mind our guns but the vocal antis made them squeamish so they took the "safe side" and it blew up in their face. There is no right side any more. Not everybody is a gun fan and we can't choose to only deal with pro-gun people without doing without a lot of life's necessities along the way. We have to accept that not everybody likes guns but those who vocally support the anti-gun side don't realize how big and strong we are. It's smart to remain quiet about your choices if you are a business.

 

[Big_John1961]

Adam, we go from supporting the NFL to supporting Nazi bands? LOL

 

[PedalBiker]

Anyone who thinks you should be allowed to carry at a pro sports venue has probably never been to a game there is no safe way to handle or use a firearm in a crowded stadium. .

All of the police officers I've seen at sporting events have firearms. Why? If there is no safe way to use them at such an event should they leave them at the station?

I can't make much comment on the NFL, I don't watch football. They do seem to do a great job of emptying the ski slopes for me on Super Bowl day, though. I have some friends who are football fans, they don't seem to be brainwashed to me. I think some folks really do just enjoy the sport, and I know lots of ladies who like seeing those guys in tights.

 

[atomd]

Adam, we go from supporting the NFL to supporting Nazi bands? LOL

Hey, you said it's just a game. Why let people spoil your fun? Well their music is just music after all....you don't have to agree with the statement if you like the guitar riff, right?

But seriously....I was trying to relay that even things like music can fall under the same and much more drastic category. At some point you have to draw the line. Where you do draw the line? What would the NFL have to do in a stance against guns or T2A that would make you not watch an NFL football game again? If we didn't let anything "spoil our fun" then we would in some ways be hypocrites in the end, right?

 

[jason41987]

sam cade I agree. Its fake sense of accomplishment for millions of viewers. Its entertainment, thats it and yet people have identity and ego wrapped up with teams and players. Kinda sad really.

Chuck shumer agrees. And Coumo agrees infact if he had a state he would limit his citizens rights to carry and own firearms. Stadium owners allow drunk unruly morons to run amuck because it makes them money.

you know, i bought an AK parts kit and actually left new york state just because i didnt want to neuter it to schumer and cuomos liking?.. i boycotted NY state :-D and if i can boycott an entire state of which ive spent most my life in and where most my family lives over anti-gun sentiments, i can sure as hell boycott a sport ive been losing respect for over the last few years anyway for its change towards flag football and lack of competant officials.. the constant CBA bickering was tiring too

 

[TennJed]

What political agenda is the NFL pushing when they also ban condom and liquor commercials? We all know how that liberal left really hates condoms



Again, this may shock some of you, but some people make decisions in life without bringing guns into

 

[Big_John1961]

Hey, you said it's just a game. Why let people spoil your fun? Well their music is just music after all....you don't have to agree with the statement if you like the guitar riff, right?

But seriously....I was trying to relay that even things like music can fall under the same and much more drastic category. At some point you have to draw the line. Where you do draw the line? What would the NFL have to do in a stance against guns or T2A that would make you not watch an NFL football game again? If we didn't let anything "spoil our fun" then we would in some ways be hypocrites in the end, right

I draw the line at Nazis!

If the NFL took an overt stance against our 2nd amendment rights, or any other Constitutionally guaranteed freedom, that would put the ball squarely in my court, wouldn't it? But, I don't view the NFL's choice not to air the Daniel Defense ad as the league stating outright that they are anti gun. If and when it comes to that, I will have to rethink my position.

I didn't say I won't let anything spoil my fun, I said I wouldn't let a puppet like Art Rooney's stance on Barrycare keep me from enjoying Steelers football, or 49ers football in my case.

 

[Sam1911]

C'mon Sam, of course a game with a ball is more important than social issues I believe in. If it was, I wouldn't frequent this site or be involved as I am in political issues.

You meant to say "ISN'T more important..." didn't you?

You're not allowing for much gray area with that comment.

No, I'm not. I'm not you and I can't tell you what your thresholds are. Nothing is perfect. We all ignore the negative parts of every thing we do, buy, eat, drink, ... whatever. If you are comfortable ignoring what the NFL and/or teams and networks do with your money, that's your choice to make. I'm just suggesting you should have those things in your mind while you're consuming their product.

And I don't have to watch football, I do because I enjoy the sport, as I mentioned above.

Well, uh, of course. What other reason could you have for doing so? No one forces you to, you like football, they sell football. They don't provide it because it's, like "the right thing to do" or as an altruistic social benefit -- they do it to get your money. They know you like it. They want you to watch it. They like money. And they do things with the money they get from (or because of) you.

You say that by paying for tickets and concessions I support the ownership's views on any issues they choose to voice public opinions about. Fine.

Fine? Ok. Well, that's what I was talking about. As long as you know, are conscious of, what your money is going to support, do whatever you feel is best for you to do.

I just don't see it as some grand scheme, a plot in which the game is used as "bait to get my money."

WHAT? Of COURSE it is a "plot" to get your money (or advertisers' money because of you). That's ALL sports business is. If you want to enjoy football purely for the sport, start a pickup game in your neighborhood or ... maybe ... go cheer for the Pop Warner league kids. Pro sports is HUUUUUUGE business and major influence. Those guys are on the field TO GET YOUR MONEY. Those owners own teams TO GET YOUR MONEY (and do stuff with it). The league exists TO GET ... well, you get the point.

Like most other conspiracies, the people who are alleged to have perpetrated them are rarely smart enough or competent enough to actually pull them off. I kind of feel the same way about the owners of franchises, or the leagues themselves (witness the incompetent boob otherwise know as Bud Selig).

Well, this isn't really a big nefarious conspiracy, per se that we're discussing. Just a matter of a company getting your money and doing something with it that you might not like. Some folks will decide that they REFUSE to give that company money, no matter how much they like the product, because they don't like what that company does with their money once they have it. It isn't a cloak-and-dagger, back room deal kind of thing. Just decisions with repercussions.

Like I said, the sports have survived for a century or more in spite of the scandals an idiots who run the games.

Bread and circuses have existed for a lot longer than that...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

 

[TennJed]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the other side if the coin. Daniel Defense did a brilliant job getting free publicity. It worked. This might be the longest thread in THRs history that is centered around them. Also lots of media stories picked it up, especially in the gun community.



Again money moves the dail in everything. I don't think for a second DD thought they would get the commercial approved. They knew the policy of the Superbowl. I doubt they had any desire to pay the millions it would cost to go through with the commercial. I bet they knew, expected, and wanted the commercial to be declined



They get free advertising, they look like the good guys, and we eat it up. Don't get me wrong, I don't blame them, great move IMHO

 

[Sam1911]

Sam, you more than most (as a moderator) realize that we just can't stop "supporting" companies that have views we don't appreciate. Many threads have been written about this.

Your mortgage...The credit cards in your wallet. ... The grocery store you shop in. ... The gas you buy for your car. ... If you shop at Wally Mart. ...

The truth is if we only spent our money or banked our money at true pro-gun companies, we'd have full mattresses and only grow our food and hunt. Now-a-days, companies are more about perceived ideals instead of taking documented stances. Starbucks comes to mind. They love our money and love our business and actually don't mind our guns but the vocal antis made them squeamish so they took the "safe side" and it blew up in their face. There is no right side any more. Not everybody is a gun fan and we can't choose to only deal with pro-gun people without doing without a lot of life's necessities along the way. We have to accept that not everybody likes guns but those who vocally support the anti-gun side don't realize how big and strong we are. It's smart to remain quiet about your choices if you are a business.

Surely -- however, as a CONSUMER, I/you can make a choice about a specific item/business/issue we do stand on, and can try to do some tiny thing to swing the pendulum the way we want it to go. We can add our voice to whatever small chorus tells the NFL (and other big ad sellers) that we are unhappy with this decision and notice, and perhaps even wallet-vote, when such decisions are made.

Will it make a difference? Well? Who knows? After all, as a parallel, mathematically speaking there's no reason to ever vote for the President ... ever. And yet, most of us here still do.

 

[blarby]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the other side if the coin. Daniel Defense did a brilliant job getting free publicity. It worked. This might be the longest thread in THRs history that is centered around them. Also lots of media stories picked it up, especially in the gun community.



Again money moves the dail in everything. I don't think for a second DD thought they would get the commercial approved. They knew the policy of the Superbowl. I doubt they had any desire to pay the millions it would cost to go through with the commercial. I bet they knew, expected, and wanted the commercial to be declined



They get free advertising, they look like the good guys, and we eat it up. Don't get me wrong, I don't blame them, great move IMHO

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

They got a lot more than 30 seconds, huh ?

Hows that for a conspiracy theory.

 

[Sam Cade]

Sam Cade, can you clarify here? I understand some of what you are trying to say, but not all of it. Thanks.

Sure.

Not necessarily kill, but control. Though in modern US America the social constructs of professional sports are mostly concerned with conflict substitution and pacification.

Without trying to teach Sociology 101,Social Identity theory proposes that the way a person defines themselves is based on their perceptual membership in various social groups, arranged in a hierarchy.
Lets look at an average guy, "Bob".
So "Bob" might define himself as: Man>US American>Baptist>Marine>Father>Husband>Plumber>Republican>Gun Owner>Member of Lodge #468>Cowboys Fan>Bass Fisherman>Fox News viewer.
Now in Bob's own view of Himself being a Cowboys Fan is much further down the list than his Citizenship. However, if Bob expends his finite capital (social and fiscal) and time on following the Cowboys instead of being angry and politically agitating, his status as a "Cowboys Fan" has worked in the favor of those who benefit from his political impotence and Bob's very conception of his identity has been smoothly subverted.
I think it was Waylon Jennings who once remarked that "You shouldn't waste your hate." I think that is true in a very real sense. The emotional highs and lows that a "fan" experiences when they watch professional sports serve to dissipate the will to effect real world changes by allowing fans to identify with the teams and psychologically substitute the "conflict" of the game for real political or social confrontation. This is one of the reasons that the most miserable dictatorship will have at least one totally rockin' soccer stadium and a national team.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_stadiums_in_North_Korea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_stadiums_in_Iraq

I've always attributed the surprising lack of politicization of US American sports to the relatively mono-polar nature of our political landscape where a maintenance of the status quo is the most desired social effect

Since US American political parties are so close ideologically and functionally (both Ds and Rs plot center right and VERY close compared to international political parties) both benefit from maintaining the status quo.
Historically, sports, (especially team sports in the 20th century) were used to promulgate various political factions or ideologies. Since politics in the US is flat, we don't get that here.

 

[Weevil]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the other side if the coin. Daniel Defense did a brilliant job getting free publicity. It worked. This might be the longest thread in THRs history that is centered around them. Also lots of media stories picked it up, especially in the gun community.

Again money moves the dail in everything. I don't think for a second DD thought they would get the commercial approved. They knew the policy of the Superbowl. I doubt they had any desire to pay the millions it would cost to go through with the commercial. I bet they knew, expected, and wanted the commercial to be declined

They get free advertising, they look like the good guys, and we eat it up. Don't get me wrong, I don't blame them, great move IMHO

Very good point.


And of course a lot of folks eat it up with a spoon becomes it gives them the chance to get up on their soapbox and rant and beat-their-chests.

 

[jason41987]

i say if we have to listen to the NFL give their personal opinions on politics then we make them pay taxes too

 

[TennJed]

Also I would like to admit as evidence, NASCAR. More proof that money is the reason, not the Government, that these things happen.

NASCAR is not too far behind the NFL in popularity. Talking about Roman gladiators and coliseums, the NFL can not hold NASCAR's jock strap when it comes to massive arenas. Many 100,000+ seat venues all over the country. Large TV audience. Seems like a good place for the Government to push their agenda.

Yet we have a NRA sponsored race. We have the winner of another race (Texas I believe, I don't really follow racing) posing with 2 six shooters after he wins. Why do we have this in NASCAR but not the NFL? Not because the Govt is involved, but because NASCAR knows its target audience and is willing to take on the controversy surrounding guns and the NRA. If fact they think it will help, again because of the target audience.

I am not 100% positive, but I would bet you cannot carry into the NRA sponsored race. You know the one called the NRA 500. Does that mean the NRA is anti 2A? Is the NRA in bed with the government to strip away our rights?

Now there is a question as to weather the NRA will be a sponsor next year. It is (IMHO) because of the negative publicity of the race. A person shot themselves at the NRA race and the media ran with the unfortunate irony. Now it might not be a good business move for NASCAR, but based on NASCAR's history and change they make is obviously business related.

It is about Money people, money

NASCAR is a very popular sport, and I believe if the government wanted to use sports to push an anti gun stance, what better sport than NASCAR to do it? You can get right at fans to be involved with guns.

yet we have this



and this

 

[Sam1911]

Yet we have a NRA sponsored race.

HAD. Not "has." Had.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nascar/...ship-guidelines-stemming-from-nra-controversy

 

[Pizzapinochle]

I'd more ok with the NFL allowing CC in stadiums than college, college fans are nutso.

But, for whatever stupid reason ppl get super emotional/crazy about their sports teams. While there are plenty of ppl who could carry with no problem, there are enough who could not that make me perfectly ok with banning guns inside stadiums.

 

[Agsalaska]

So they are anti second amendment because they banned a TV commercial and wont let you carry a gun into the stadium. Yea right. :banghead:


All they care about is money. And rightfully so. They could care less about your rights. That is not their place.

 

[rbernie]

Sam1911 hit the nail on the head:

“(NASCAR) will disapprove a prospective entitlement sponsor only if such prospective entitlement sponsor’s brand has been tarnished by, controversy, crisis or circumstance such that its association with the event would damage the NASCAR brand or the image of the sport or … it would damage the (broadcasting) network’s ability to sell advertising,” the sanction agreement states.

It is all about money, and selling adverts. When major corporations pull adverts, the sport's sanctioning body listens. Which means that the way that the anti-RKBA guys win is by making guns and gun issues so polarizing that we get banished from polite discourse by businesses reacting to risks in their money-making enterprises.

As Sam Cade pointed out, the RKBA is constantly engaged in a culture war. We need to fight *that* fight smartly, and take that fight to the businesses that whipsaw to the popular consumer trends. I am actually convinced that much of the Goobermint is actually less interested in fighting this fight directly as they are in tracking the trends and appearing supportive of popular attitudes.

When guns are mainstream, then mainstream activities (and politicos) will accept gun-related topics without issue. When guns are marginalized as a polarizing topic, then that's how they'll be handled within mainstream activities.

 

[Pilot]

Professional sports are a tool for social control and pacification of the masses.Panem et circenses.
The NFL is a tool that our Masters use to maintain the status quo though the dissipation of not only capital, but through the dissipation of the very will of the people.
Of course the NFL is anti-gun. Why wouldn't it be? An armed populace isn't conducive to the Statist agenda and the NFL is going to espouse whatever philosophical or political stance the government tells it to.

Truer words were never uttered. While I am a fan of sports for youth as a character, and team builder the current situation with professional sports has grown out of hand. It is just more corporate PC destruction of the American way, and free speech.

 

[Big_John1961]

You meant to say "ISN'T more important..." didn't you

Yes.

 

[Big_John1961]

Fine? Ok. Well, that's what I was talking about. As long as you know, are conscious of, what your money is going to support, do whatever you feel is best for you to do.

Conscious I am, moreso now. There have been some good comments in this thread, food for thought so to speak, and I will treat them as such and ponder them. I will say, however, that if I boycotted every company that spent money in ways I didn't agree with, there wouldn't be much left and I'd probably have to start growing my own food.

 

[Big_John1961]

...We can add our voice to whatever small chorus tells the NFL (and other big ad sellers) that we are unhappy with this decision and notice, and perhaps even wallet-vote, when such decisions are made.

Will it make a difference? Well? Who knows? After all, as a parallel, mathematically speaking there's no reason to ever vote for the President ... ever. And yet, most of us here still do.

Now this is a good idea and something I can get on board with. Anyone ever heard the old adage that the answer to 99 out of 100 questions is money? I don't think anyone in this thread is naive enough to not understand that money drives the world and the NFL is no different.

 

[Big_John1961]

I'd more ok with the NFL allowing CC in stadiums than college, college fans are nutso.

But, for whatever stupid reason ppl get super emotional/crazy about their sports teams. While there are plenty of ppl who could carry with no problem, there are enough who could not that make me perfectly ok with banning guns inside stadiums.

It's stupid to you. You lose people with comments like that because your implication is that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. I'm sure there are things important to you that others would view as "stupid."