Major League Baseball stadiums are “gun-free” zones. In fact, the league has started deploying metal detectors at the gates. Why? Because they don’t respect Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Their parks, their choice. Yes, well, to paraphrase the Prevaricator-in-Chief, gun control laws have consequences. For example . . .
A man [ex-LAPD officer Alex Arredondo] is in critical condition after being beaten in the Angel Stadium parking lot after the team lost Friday night’s playoff game.
At around 10:30 p.m. on Friday, the 43-year-old man and a relative were walking in the lot when they were attacked without provocation by three individuals, Anaheim police said.
The man was severely beaten and is currently in critical condition, officials said.
There was no evidence to suggest fan rivalry or an argument inside the stadium, police said, adding that there were no apparent weapons used.
Of course, there should have been a weapon used. The defenseless fan chronicled by nbclosangeles.com should have had a firearm with which to defend himself. But he couldn’t, could he? Not if he wanted to see the game.
Now you could say that he should have boycotted the game for that very reason. Knowing that potential – in this case actual – attackers no doubt knew that the chances that their victim would be able to defend his life by force of arms were about nil. And I wouldn’t disagree.
But I’m also coming ’round to the idea that businesses banning guns in areas with a known risk of violent assault should be held liable when disarmed patrons are attacked. Especially if those patrons are gun owners. Legally, the odds of prevailing in any such lawsuit are about the same as the Diamondbacks winning next year’s pennant race. Still, someone should try. [h/t mister3d]
“This facility does not permit the carry of any weapons on the premises.
Per US Code 42.3141569 this business accepts responsibility for the safety of all patrons, and liability for any failure to ensure a safe environment. This liability includes, but is not limited to:
1. Any injuries sustained.
2. Any emotional trauma incurred.
3. Any spilled drinks caused by an altercation that might have been prevented.”
I live in Spokane WA. Although I’m not what you’d call a “fan,” I’ve been to a few Indians games over the years.
TIP: Minor league venues don’t appear to use metal detectors. 😉
Yeah Frank, and here’s the problem. There is such a fine line from getting your skull caved in and jerking your pistol too soon. If someone starts in on you, especially around Spokane, and you pull your gun too soon, the bad guys are going to call the cops and cry like little girls, and YOU are going to get busted.
If you pull too late, you’re already brawling and pulling your gun may be a big mistake. Around here, cops shoot first and say they wet their Depends and were scared and it’s all OK. If you’re a citizen, it’s a different story.
We walk a very fine line around here as you and I know. Yes, I’m over here near 26th and Pines.
I wouldn’t want to be the guy that shot someone at the fair grounds out in the parking lot because I was about to get beat up, getting beat up or wetting my panties. Remember that military guy that shot someone at the Deja Vu under similar circumstances? He went through a lot of BS because of it.
I carry all the time and hope to god I never have to use it.
I never lived in Spokane (only visited once for MEPS) but I lived in Chelan county for a number of years and never had an issue with the cops as far as carrying went. Idk what it’s like on that side of the state but the state laws are in favor of personal defense.
Former cop had nothing? He of all people should know better. Or not…
The last baseball game I attended was at Braves Field in Boston. I fell asleep in the first inning.
“But I’m also coming ’round to the idea that businesses banning guns in areas with a known risk of violent assault should be held liable when disarmed patrons are attacked.”
I would love to see this lawsuit. LOVE.
Another money saving venture for me.
If I want to take a nap. Ill watch baseball on TV. Go to a game never well almost never.
Last game I went to was an opening day game at Yankee Stadium some 20 years ago.
My brothers seasons tickets. Not mine Im poor.
The announcer is giving the starting lineup., I look at my business partner and we both have blank stares.
The announcer says Now starting at short stop. Derrick Jeeter……………….we look at each other and say “who the hell is he???
Mind you we both were armed that day.
Only a moron would go that part of the Bronx even in the day time unarmed.
To hell with the Sullivan laws back then. I was legal he was not.
Who is John Galt?
I suppose a 6″ long ceramic knife would get through the metal detectors.
I had the same thought. I’m going online to see if I can find just such a dandy as that.
A similar incident happens near me. In Santa Clara, CA at an NFL game. Bob Costas, is this the culture of violence you speak of?
Bare fists, Bob.
Police said that the victim tapped the shoulder of 27-year-old Amador Rebollero to let him know that a bathroom stall was open, but Rebollero responded by sucker punching the man in the head. The attacker’s brother, 34-year-old Dario Rebollero, also attacked a fan during the scuffle.
The initial fan attacked was knocked unconscious, hitting his head on the hard bathroom floor.
I’m also coming ’round to the idea that businesses banning guns in areas with a known risk of violent assault should be held liable when disarmed patrons are attacked.
Since the police generally have no duty to protect you under the same circumstances and will have no liability if they don’t, there is no chance, none, that private businesses will be stuck with any such general obligation or liability in the event of criminal acts.
All it takes to fix that is for the state to pass a law stating that if a “Public Accommodation” wishes to forbid citizens who possess a carry license from concealed carry at their location they accept strict liability for anyone harmed by any violent act by any person on their property. By specifying concealed the business can not complain that the person carrying would scare their wall flower, fainting goat, patrons. Public Accommodation laws are the reason a black person or other protected class person can not be denied service at a business open to the public.
Baseball (and most other team sports bore the socks off me) so I would never go to a game anyway.
Being a Twins fan I have two reasons to skip the games.
Being a Braves fan, I am scared to go to the game unarmed.
Being a Red Sox fan, there is no darn way I am going to the game.
Being a Cubs fan, I won’t go if I can’t bear arms.
Being a Mariners fan, I harbor bad feelings about going to the game.
Being a Giants fan, I have a big reason not to go.
Being a Dodgers fan, I will avoid going to the game.
Being an Athletics fan, I have a strong suspicion that I will stay home.
Being a Royals fan, my safety is king.
brave and scared are dissimilar.
I see what you did there.
No. Not “Businesses in high risk areas.”
See, it has been held by both the Supreme Court AND Common Sense that the police cannot be held responsible for your safety… not before they show up, not after they show up, not ever. and it really makes sense. No matter how much anyone thinks their motto is “To serve and protect” it’s not feasible or reasonable for the police to be held responsible for your protection. The only person who can really afford to be there 24/7 is You. And this means being tactically aware, not going down an obvious choke point and ambush site sometimes, watching out for crazy violent animals of the four AND two legged variety, and CARRYING THE TOOLS YOU NEED TO PROTECT YOURSELF.
Now, insofar as some facilities are by their nature sensitive areas and others are private property where the owners are not comfortable with the idea of firearms on the premises, IT IS THEIR RIGHT to prominently post signs and bar the carriage of weapons on their property, or into government buildings.
But when they do so IT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD that they are accepting full financial responsibility for the safety of their guests, patrons, employees and all other persons on their property in regards to violence and criminal activity.
How long will the Gun Free Zone signs stay up when the property owners have to pay for proper security AND somewhere around $8,000,000.00 for anyone who dies due to criminal activity on their property? Because that’s the current government estimated value of a human life, according to the feds. Think a school’s going to be prosecuting pop tarts when some fruit loop can come in and shoot them into a $260 million dollar debt to be paid?
You know what is really sad about this situation? I see absolutely no basis in fact or reality for their move to ban firearms. How many good people carrying concealed handguns have ever used their firearm illegally or negligently at a major league baseball stadium? I know of no such events.
For the life of me, though, I cannot understand how alienating 20% of the population is good for their bottom line. Remember, while only 5% or so of the population wants to carry concealed in public, losing their ticket purchase means also losing the ticket purchases for their family. If a typical family has four people, then major league baseball has eliminated 20% of the potential market. Talk about a stupid business move. I know of no other business that would voluntarily eliminate 20% of their potential market.
I have been to both the Angel stadium and Dodgers recently…neither had metal detectors as of July.
Heck both times I carried in my EDC knife without a second thought…and an ice chest of food and drink.
I’m all for the lawsuit idea:
Yeah that caught me earlier this year at a Ray’s game. I’d done the research, previous seasons had no wanding, no patdowns, just a bag search and off you go.
This season they broke out the metal detectors and wands, turn out your pockets, full TSA treatment.
I had to take the shuttle back to my car and drop off the G19, 21″ASP, and knives. They didn’t say a thing about my leatherman squirt and pepperspray.
Luckily we’d set things up that the garage we parked in was literally right next to the shuttle stop, so there wasn’t much undefended walking on either end. All the same, I’m now in the market for a Combat Umbrella and a grivory “knife”.
no umbrellas allowed in soldier field. ever. at a rainy game there will be thousands of abandoned examples being scooped up into shopping carts and sold by industrial entrepreneurs after the game.
Can you imagine the families of the first settlers and later the minutemen and other pioneers to our country agreeing to or accepting any organized entity REQUIRING you to NOT to be armed for your own personal safety in the hope and understanding that everybody will play fair and be nice to one another???? The very entity establishing that rule would have been viewed suspiciously and rightfully so. In all actuality, the entity probably would be attacked for fear of condoning tyranical oppression. I can picture myself and children having fun at an MLB game, the flag flying high in the air on a sunny day. We’re listening to the umpire on a full count at bat. All of a sudden an ISIS Sympathizer or cell operator unleashes hell on innocent families and children and all I can do is watch my kids die! Horseshit!!!! Fortunately, we haven’t been truly scared or threatened in a long time in this country sans 911 and we still think that our “gubment” is going to really be the security net we require as free individuals?! The minute we COMPLETELY rely on anything other than ourselves as free individuals, we have become a DEPENDENT not an INDEPENDENT nation, vacated of faith and as sterile about true individual freedom(s) as a castrated market hog eating its last grain meal.
“Still, someone should try.”
-I would. For sure.
This is why my wife and I no longer attend twins games. We used to go to a game a week. But this year we decided we are going we going to give money to a league that dliesnt recognize our personal rights.
Hold the business liable for the illegal actions of individuals? Capital idea!
Can we start with holding TTAG accountable for any reg. reader who leaves here psyched up, hitting the streets with an “I wish a MF’r would…..” attitude and whatever illegal actions might ensue?
Businesses (by which we mean the real life flesh and blood people who own them, because, you know, a “business” is even less than an inanimate object, it’s an intangible concept) don’t owe you any duty to protect you from criminals. It’s their property, their rules. Don’t like it? Don’t go!
Geez, what a bunch of titty baby hypocrites looking to hold anyone, anyTHING, responsible for the criminal actions of individuals.
Coming around to the idea? Sheesh. Here’s another idea: how about starting up an astroturf organization to advance the cause? Let’s call it Bloggers Demand Action for Stadia Sense. Give Bloomie a jingle, maybe you can apply for a grant. Good grief. Epic fail, TTAG.
I dont post much.
But you a douche
Oh that’s clever. Think up that bon mot all by yourself, or have you been hanging out with 13 year old boys at the skate park, again?
“Businesses (by which we mean the real life flesh and blood people who own them, because, you know, a “business” is even less than an inanimate object, it’s an intangible concept) don’t owe you any duty to protect you from criminals. It’s their property, their rules. Don’t like it? Don’t go!”
You ARE a tool. All that is being asked is that this business stop disarming their customers and leaving them to the “mercy” of whatever criminal wants to prey on them. It is no money out of the business’ pocket.
More name calling? No one’s disarming you. Carry whatever you want, on your own time, on your own property, and quit trying to force your personal views, backed by force of law, on other people and their private property. You sound like a certain whiny one we all know and loathe. Grow up.
“… quit trying to force your personal views, backed by force of law, on other people and their private property.”
Our nation already does this on the most basic level: murder is wrong, no matter where it happens, or who “consents” to whatever. Our right to life does not end when we cross some imaginary boundary, whether that boundary is a public street or the surveyed lines of someone’s private property.
We all say that it is wrong for a state to forbid responsible people from being armed. What is the difference whether the state claims title to a piece of land (as public land) or whether a human being holds title to a piece of land (as private property)?
Don’t get me wrong, I am a huge proponent of property rights. The problem with the idea of “infinite” property rights is that a human being has absolutely no inherent rights whatsoever and no inherent dignity whatsoever unless they happen to be standing on a piece of property to which they hold legal title. This was the very notion that enabled the widespread abuse of people who were not “nobles” in Europe. It was wrong and destructive then, it is wrong and destructive now, and it always will be wrong and destructive.
Way off base, UC. A person does indeed have a universal right to his own person, which is why you may not take that life casually. Even if caught on private property illegally, there are STILL rules to obey before you may take that life. That in turn presupposes that, yes, even with something as sacrosanct as one’s life, there are still circumstances where private property rights trump one’s right to one’s own life.
I can tell you’re struggling for profundity, and barely even scraping together relevance, here, so let me make it even more clear so there’s even less wiggle room to remark.
When I say “personal view”, I mean a preference which is shared by some, opposed by others, and probably never even thought of by most. In other words, certainly nothing that rises to the level of major social more, worthy of legislation addressing a constitutional question.
Major issues like murder, or even lesser issues like speed limits or handicapped parking spaces, do reflect the collective will and wisdom of the society. There’s probably no adult who hasn’t considered these topics at some point. But stadium liability for your safety when firearms are barred onsite? You, me, and about five other guys are discussing that. Hardly a monumental question of the day, or any day. Hence, it’s merely a personal view and doesn’t go to the core of anything but a few people’s online posts.
Good grief, you may as well pass a law that every stadium serve B&J’s chunky monkey flavor ice cream, and for free, because that’s your fav and they don’t allow outside food to be brought in.
The totality of your post boils down to “I believe in private property rights, but……”
Now why does that sound so familiar to me?
I do NOT advocate for baseball stadiums to be liable for the security of patrons.
I DO advocate for the inherent sanctity of human life. And I advocate that human life can NEVER be an element of bargaining, negotiations, agreements, or conditions of business.
Before the 2013 season, there was minimal security at Sounders games, just a bag check. Then out of the blue, in the middle of the season, they started using metal detecting wands on everyone coming into the stadium.
Lo and behold, a few months later: http://m.seattlepi.com/local/article/Police-Homeless-man-who-stabbed-Sounders-fan-4818654.php
Guy and his girlfriend leave a Sounders game, go to a train station. They’re attacked by a random schizophrenic and he’s stabbed to death and she ends up in critical condition.
Should have been a DGU.
I don’t think anybody has suggested holding the ball clubs responsible for what some criminal or terrorist might do. Rather they are advocating that when you require people to give up their right and ability to defend themselves you should assume the responsibility for ensuring their safety. When a place like Starbucks puts a sign on the front door that basically says our customers have agreed to give up the right to defend themselves in order to purchase our product, they have not only disarmed their customers, they have told the bad guys
‘ok, these people are easy”. I think they should have to go the extra distance to ensure a safe establishment and pay if they don’t.
You “get it”
Not a douche
That’s a distinction without a difference. If the bad guy acts and the ball club didn’t protect you, the liability falls upon the club, under the proposal here. Whether that’s indirectly from breach of some imaginary duty to protect, or directly from the actions of the criminal, really doesn’t matter. The outcome is the same.
Your premise is invalid, though, because you’re not “required” to disarm. It’s voluntary. Disarming is one of the terms of the agreement offered by the private entity, which you are perfectly free to reject and walk away from.
This shouldn’t even be controversial, and only is because the POTG are so fired up passionate about it. Really, no one here would argue against the PGA “requiring” you to “give up” your right to free speech as the golfers are about to putt, despite free speech also being a civil, natural, constitutional right.
Granted, silence may be more integral to the function of the game of golf than disarmament is to that of baseball. However, the quality of the connection and soundness of the decision are not at issue here. This is a matter of private parties voluntarily consenting to terms of an agreement.
If that agreement entails barring firearms, then the stadium doesn’t assume responsibility for your safety from criminals by way of some external, implicit, jammed in, government fiat. Rather, you and the stadium are the only relevant parties and the terms of the agreement you consent to constitute the totality of the agreement. If that entails barring firearms, then you assume the risk for what you have explicitly agreed to.
Really the issue isn’t the disarming. Because nobody is forcing you to go to the game, etc etc.
What I really have an issue with i the combination of screening before entry and laws that make it illegal to carry at sporting events. Unlike other places where policy is little more than a suggestion and the fact that you’re carrying or otherwise armed just won’t come up, here they are manufacturing a requirement of defenselessness, and even if security in the stadium is good enough to satisfy (It usually is), it requires anyone attending the game to be disarmed in their trip to and especially from the game, where the majority of these sort of attacks seem to occur, at no surprise to anyone.
“If guns were allowed, someone would have died!” -MDA
It is best to avoid areas with large crowds.
Jonathan-Houston,,,, can you hear me Houston?…. Houston?…. can you hear me Jonothan- Houston? Come in Houston!!!!
Wow. I’m going to have to take a knee on that one. Such a staggeringly stupid post like that just knocks the wind out of a guy.
The wise person will avoid stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things.
This means avoiding major sporting events.
And New Jersey.
Those games look pretty good on TV, don’t they?
The last professional game I went to was in Cincy, to watch dah Cowboys beat up on my Bengals. Metal detectors were in use; the wand variety. There were a few police standing around, hands on their belts, shooting the breeze with each other. No situational awareness at all. And the The Black Sunday scenario popped in to my head. A handful of police at the gates could do very little against 5 or 6 guys with semi-autos, especially if they are hit before they know whats going on. And once in to the stadium, the panic would probably do more people in than bullets.
I rarely go to pro games because of the outrageous ticket cost (NFL) or because of boredom (I remember when pro-baseball was fun, before TV timeouts made the games an hour longer). So it’s easy for me to stay away.
The Black Sunday scenario was a massive plastic explosive suicide bomb covered with flechettes attached to the bottom of the Goodyear Blimp.
I noticed them wanding people going into Fenway this year. I was not carrying because I planned to drink, but I did have a 3″ folding knife on me. I was told that i could not bring it into the park. Fortunately, I was parked nearby, so i put it back in the car.
Walking to the car after the game i wished I had my knife.
Prior to this year, I have never seen any signs prohibiting firearms.
Sorry Houston you are out to lunch. A stadium holds an event and tens of thousands of people attend. The people are encouraged to bring lots of cash. Everybody knows this including the bad guys. They disarm everyone or require them to disarm as a condition of entry. This fact is also known by the bad guys. The stadium and team know the bad guys know this. You have a responsibility to ensure a reasonably safe and secure venue, period. It doesn’t matter if people attend voluntarily and it doesn’t matter if they agree to come disarmed. Disarming your patrons only increases your responsibility to ensure your patrons safety, especially when you know they are defenseless. Your logic would excuse shoddily built bleachers that collapse, killing the fans on the basis that they didn’t have to come. Or salmonella contaminated hot dogs because nobody was forced to eat them. Really?