California legislator proposes banning violent fans

[threelittleturds]

California legislator proposes banning violent fans from pro sports games - San Jose Mercury News

It's a good move, although I'm not really sure why it has to go this far. I was under the impression that the teams already banned fans and revoked their season tickets if they were caught committing violent acts.

I guess the point of this is that if they try to ignore the ban and have relatives buy them tickets, they could get thrown in jail for a year and get a $10,000 fine if they are discovered.

This only covers felony assaults and such, like the Giants fan that got beat up and the 49ers fan who got shot, the guys who made Saints fans cry by yelling at them wouldn't get prosecuted under this.

This was interesting too..

Gatto's measure would charge each professional sports team $10,000 to create the ban list and a rewards fund for crime witnesses. Teams would supplement the fund if it fell below $180,000.

Not sure the teams are going to be too happy about having to pay for the rewards system.

 

[fordman84]

Again, keep gov't out of stuff that can be regulated on its own. If teams don't do their part, fans will stop coming out. Then each team that has a problem will have to provide their own security.


Damn, just let the market work people. Stop trying to regulate everything.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Parents aren't even allowed to talk to their kids anymore in this country.

Now this? GTFO.

 

[threelittleturds]

Parents aren't even allowed to talk to their kids anymore in this country.

Now this? GTFO.

You talking about that Michael Madsen thing? Getting arrested because he fought with his kid for smoking weed... that is pretty ridiculous.

 

[threelittleturds]

BTW, I don't support this dummy trying to push this into law. I mean, you already get thrown in jail for putting someone in a coma or shooting them... teams already ban you... it's completely redundant. I just meant that the sentiment was a good move, but I think it is pointless.

California has way more important things to worry about than making sure people get thrown in jail for coming back to the scene of their crime... years later, after they get out of jail for beating up or shooting someone at a Pro game.

 

[wartyOne]

Leave it to California. That state has more nonsense laws than the entire rest of the country combined. I think this legislator ought to focus a bit more on California's stagnant economic situation, and less on worrying about forcing the owners of sports teams to set up 6-figure neighborhood watch programs in the stands.

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

California's stagnant economic situation

Compared to whom? California still has easily the best economy of any state. Unemployment problems, but that was because of the housing/construction bubble, which wasn't exactly the government's fault. A mega-deficit, but what is new.

If California didn't have to *donate* so much to the federal govt., this state would have more money than it can spend. Its economy dwarfs any other state. I believe the stat is something like California gets .70 in federal spending for every $1.00 it contributes......this state, along with 5 or 6 others, is basically subsidizing the rest of the country.

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

BTW, stupid law, probably just a legislator that is trying to look busy.

 

[NinerSickness]

Again, keep gov't out of stuff that can be regulated on its own.

I agree 100%. But the punishment of criminals isn't a private issue; that's the 1st and most important role of the government: to keep its citizens safe from physical danger. People who commit violent crimes should have their privileges (like going to football games) stripped away.

 

[RedneckNiner]

... Be shiney happy people or go to jail. Soon they will hand everyone Thorazine to everyone. I mean violence happens some people are assholes. But a felony is a felony at a ball game or at the beach. And who makes the determinanation of violent? What will the limit be until you get banned? Until you throw the first punch? When you scream your first obscenity? When you throw your hat down when your team fumbles? Or is it just idiots realizing they have a team in the Raiders who they can milk for money for their fans in an attempt to steal more money to waste on failed policies In California. And Hell will any Raider fans not be banned from the games?

 

[NinerSickness]

Hold on. I didn't read the part about a "rewards fund" and a bunch of money to impliment it. That's stupid. That's basically stealing from NFL teams. Just make a list of people who are banned. Why does California have to make a slush fund for everything they want to impliment? Jerks...

I think the best way to prevent this crap is by registering your name & photo ID with the team at the gate. Just swipe your ID and they'll know exactly who's sitting where. Add the names of any minors an adult has with him, and they'll know it all (minors aren't really the problem, it's drunk a-holes). That way if they do something during the game it'll be etremely easy to fine 'em, and they'll know it. It wouldn't be too hard to get a name & photo at the gate.

This woudl go especially smoothly at Raiders games because, like I've said before, they're so used to being photographed (and fingerprinted), they'll get through in no time.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Leave it to California. That state has more nonsense laws than the entire rest of the country combined. I think this legislator ought to focus a bit more on California's stagnant economic situation, and less on worrying about forcing the owners of sports teams to set up 6-figure neighborhood watch programs in the stands.

It's ridiculous. People aren't even allowed to smoke cigarettes outside anymore over here.

 

[wartyOne]

It's ridiculous. People aren't even allowed to smoke cigarettes outside anymore over here.

Not a fan of smoking. Inside or outside. Just me. Not trying to start a smoking argument here.

I do think, however, that California is mostly ridiculous with regard to legislation.

 

[NinerSickness]

I do think, however, that California is mostly ridiculous with regard to legislation.

It's gotten out of control. They pass like 2 new bills every day. That's why all these businesses are leaving for other states.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Not a fan of smoking. Inside or outside. Just me. Not trying to start a smoking argument here.

I do think, however, that California is mostly ridiculous with regard to legislation.

I'm not a fan either, but I don't understand how anyone can argue for banning it OUTSIDE. It's absolutely nuts. There was way too many rules/laws. Freedom my ass.

 

[clyde_carbon]

It's gotten out of control. They pass like 2 new bills every day. That's why all these businesses are leaving for other states.

As they should. They've put a chokehold on almost everything with their nonsensical regulations.

 

[wartyOne]

I'm not a fan either, but I don't understand how anyone can argue for banning it OUTSIDE. It's absolutely nuts. There was way too many rules/laws. Freedom my ass.

I'm okay with banning it everywhere. What's the positive?

Not picking a fight. Maybe this is the ex-smoker in me coming out, but I don't see why eliminating smoking is a bad thing.

 

[wartyOne]

As they should. They've put a chokehold on almost everything with their nonsensical regulations.

Word.

 

[Southern9er]

Leave it to California. That state has more nonsense laws than the entire rest of the country combined. I think this legislator ought to focus a bit more on California's stagnant economic situation, and less on worrying about forcing the owners of sports teams to set up 6-figure neighborhood watch programs in the stands.

You nailed it...

My parents ask me if I'll ever move back and every time they do I just bring up the most recent ridiculous law the state passed and leave it at that.

Restrictions on everything from BBQs, to fireplaces, to window sizes, light bulbs in your kitchen (but not the rest of the house), TV sizes, education requirements (wow), emissions requirements forcing people to sell vehicles and motorcycles, copper ammunition, you could go on and on...lots of them are local ordinances and start in the Bay Area, like the Happy Meal law, that toys had to be removed from meals that violated certain amounts of fat and sugar...they were also going to ban goldfish, not sure if that happened, fitted sheets only for hotel workers, circumcision to be banned (not sure if it passed)...

If you don't like it or its not good for you ...BAN IT!

What is Latin for "I have banned it"? Should replace Eureka! as the state motto...

 

[Southern9er]

Compared to whom? California still has easily the best economy of any state. Unemployment problems, but that was because of the housing/construction bubble, which wasn't exactly the government's fault. A mega-deficit, but what is new.

If California didn't have to *donate* so much to the federal govt., this state would have more money than it can spend. Its economy dwarfs any other state. I believe the stat is something like California gets .70 in federal spending for every $1.00 it contributes......this state, along with 5 or 6 others, is basically subsidizing the rest of the country.

Absolutlely not...CA is very well on the brink of taking down the rest of the states because of its debt situation. If you are a Californian you need to look to your state assembly and legislators...it is perhaps the most crushing anti-small business environment save for New Jersey which combined has the worst income, sales, and corporate tax rates...(actually New York is a step below CA and a step above New Jersey in being business friendly).

CA can't pay its debts, pensions, and bond holders without making someone else suffer...the axe is going to fall hard and that's why Moon Beam is now trying to undo much of what he "did" in his first term...