|Elflocko| Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Done. And that was surprisingly easy to do with the mobile app... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Then stay home. What about Richard Reid? Should we all wear sandals now? Pretty much proves my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Pretty much proves my point. If you say so.. Didn't realize that your point was that absolute safety is simply not possible, particularly in the times we live in, so perhaps we should concern ourselves with addressing the cause rather than the result? Or was it more that the entire purpose of terrorism is to sow enough fear to cause the enemy to change their way of life, since terrorists have neither the weapons nor resources to successfully confront us directly? Then again, maybe your point was that the price of trying to maintain a free and open society is accepting that at times that very freedom may allow bad things to happen, but if we decide those occasional bad things are valid excuses for those who would profit from removing the freedoms we enjoy, that would be far. far worse? Maybe you could clarify this point of yours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 If you say so.. Didn't realize that your point was that absolute safety is simply not possible, particularly in the times we live in, so perhaps we should concern ourselves with addressing the cause rather than the result? Or was it more that the entire purpose of terrorism is to sow enough fear to cause the enemy to change their way of life, since terrorists have neither the weapons nor resources to successfully confront them directly? Then again, maybe your point was that the price of trying to maintain a free and open society is accepting that at times that very freedom may allow bad things to happen, but if we decide those occasional bad things are valid excuses for those who would profit from removing those very freedoms, that would be far. far worse? Maybe you could clarify this point of yours... Some people (ie you) are more concerned about what you want and what's convenient for you than the greater good and want to bitch about trivial shit like this even though in the end it is designed to help keep you safe. You'd rather people stay home so you can keep your backpack, rather than make the experience safer for everyone. This change, in the grand scheme, is extremely minor and affects very few. To bitch about it, when its designed to be a positive for you, just comes off petty and selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 This change, in the grand scheme, is extremely minor and affects very few. To bitch about it, when its designed to be a positive for you, just comes off petty and selfish. I would counter that continually imposing further restrictions on what people are allowed to do in the name of providing you an illusion of safety, even though you're never going to be truly safe, is completely misguided. I've carried a soft-side cooler into several stadiums and the security guy looked inside, noted that it was sandwiches etc and not, in fact, a nail bomb and waved me through. Easy peezy. Your contention that I should not be able to do this because YOU don't feel safe with your family unless everyone is getting strip-searched is the very definition of "selfish". I am all for scanners at airports, but when the private contractors are allowed to grope your crotch in order to board an airplane it's my belief that something a hell of a lot worse than safety is being compromised. This "for your own good" argument of yours is weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 I would counter that continually imposing further restrictions on what people are allowed to do in the name of providing you an illusion of safety, even though you're never going to be truly safe, is completely misguided. I've carried a soft-side cooler into several stadiums and the security guy looked inside, noted that it was sandwiches etc and not, in fact, a nail bomb and waved me through. Easy peezy. Your contention that I should not be able to do this because YOU don't feel safe with your family unless everyone is getting strip-searched is the very definition of "selfish". I am all for scanners at airports, but when the private contractors are allowed to grope your crotch in order to board an airplane it's my belief that something a hell of a lot worse than safety is being compromised. This "for your own good" argument of yours is weak. I've never said I don't feel safe or don't feel comfortable taking my family to the stadium. I'm not, however, going to have a problem with REASONABLE measures taken to help make my experience continue to stay safe. This is a very minor deal, completely reasonable, and honestly pretty lame to bitch about. When you enter inside the gates of the stadium, you don't have the same rights as you do walking down the street. You're freely stating that you will adhere to the rules set forth. No one's forcing you to go inside, and no one's infringing on your everyday rights. It may be a publicly funded building, but its not a public space where anyone can come and go freely. They have the right to impose any rules they choose. Perhaps you are the one who should stay home if you're not happy with the rules in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 They have the right to impose any rules they choose. Sure they do, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with them. Do you really think limiting people to clear plastic bags like a bunch of wayward children is going to prevent a terrorist attack? There was just this article about some jihadi hiding a bomb up his ass: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/world/asia/attacker-in-afghanistan-hid-bomb-in-his-body.html?_r=0 Same point with Reid's shoe bomb; I think we should be questioning these kinds of security measures instead of just shrugging our shoulders and falling in line because we're scared and don't want anyone to question our patriotism. Stay home? Nah man, maybe I will be at sports bar or Fountain Square or maybe a block party instead, where there's probably little if any security, and everyone's having a good time and if some sorry SOB blows us all up, well, at least we didn't submit to having our junk fondled by some rubber-gloved mall cop on the way in. Different priorities, I guess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Fuck the bombs, how am I going to get my girlfriend to smuggle in a fifth of bourbon in a tiny, clear plastic bag? THAT'S what this is about, make no mistake. Aramark has been bitching to Mike Brown about lost profits! Well, you know the rest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Sure they do, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with them. Do you really think limiting people to clear plastic bags like a bunch of wayward children is going to prevent a terrorist attack? it's certainly not going to help the chances of it happening, and is a very minor inconvenience. How many people bring in bags to games to begin with? Less than 5%? And it'll speed up the lines in the security check for those who don't bring bags in anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Fuck the bombs, how am I going to get my girlfriend to smuggle in a fifth of bourbon in a tiny, clear plastic bag? THAT'S what this is about, make no mistake. Aramark has been bitching to Mike Brown about lost profits! Well, you know the rest... Pretty much. Its kinda funny anyone thinks its about safety, its what its always about, profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Pretty much. Its kinda funny anyone thinks its about safety, its what its always about, profit. its kind of funny anyone thinks its not. The NFL is actively trying to make the stadium MORE attractive to people. Adding a rule like this doesn't help accomplish that. Curtailing people sneaking in alcohol may be a happy byproduct (to them), but its incredibly short-sighted to think that's the main purpose. This seems to be a result of the Boston Marathon bombing. Besides, the people I know who sneak alcohol into games, use far better places than simply sticking it in a bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 How many years has it been since 9/11 and they are only NOW doing this then? It took the Boston Bombings huh? Because that saftey issue wasnt there before then? Naive to think its about saftey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 How many years has it been since 9/11 and they are only NOW doing this then? It took the Boston Bombings huh? Because that saftey issue wasnt there before then? Naive to think its about saftey. 9.11 wasn't the result of a bomb in a backpack. The Boston Marathon was, and just a few short months later the NFL is restricting the types of bags being brought into their stadiums. It's pretty much common sense if you take a minute to set aside your blinding hatred for big business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 9.11 wasn't the result of a bomb in a backpack. The Boston Marathon was, and just a few short months later the NFL is restricting the types of bags being brought into their stadiums. It's pretty much common sense if you take a minute to set aside your blinding hatred for big business. The Point. You Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 But you know I have no valid reason to have any hatred of a segment of society, I mean no valid reason at all, there is no reason to believe that some people are only concern with profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Skins Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Off topic, but at Kings Dominion in Virginia, they have metal detectors and Busch Gardens in VA has bag searches but no metal detectors. Do you think NFL games will get to that point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Even if profits are the primary goal, potentially reducing the amount of drunk assholes at the game isn't a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Off topic, but at Kings Dominion in Virginia, they have metal detectors and Busch Gardens in VA has bag searches but no metal detectors. Do you think NFL games will get to that point? didn't they used to have metal detectors at PBS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted June 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Even if profits are the primary goal, potentially reducing the amount of drunk assholes at the game isn't a bad thing. another good point. It's silly to think its just about alcohol sales though (not that you're saying that). People have been sneaking alcohol into sporting events for decades. The NFL didn't just decide to do something about it now. It's clear this is in response to the Boston Marathon incident. A bomb in a backpack at an American sporting event. So the NFL, America's biggest and most popular sport, makes a change in their policy about the types of bags you can bring into stadiums. I like that they're being proactive about it so that it doesn't happen to them, rather than making changes after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 uh huh, you go ahead and believe that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Even if profits are the primary goal, potentially reducing the amount of drunk assholes at the game isn't a bad thing. But then Bunghole can't go to games anymore! What fun is a football game if I can't drunkenly curse and ridicule the opposition, the refs, fans of the other team near me, some guy's five year old kid, get arrested...I ask you, where's the fun in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted June 15, 2013 Report Share Posted June 15, 2013 But then Bunghole can't go to games anymore! What fun is a football game if I can't drunkenly curse and ridicule the opposition, the refs, fans of the other team near me, some guy's five year old kid, get arrested...I ask you, where's the fun in that? How would BJ be able to torture Jaguars fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted June 15, 2013 Report Share Posted June 15, 2013 How would BJ be able to torture Jaguars fans? I've got it! Mushrooms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted June 15, 2013 Report Share Posted June 15, 2013 I've got it! Mushrooms! Can you get those in England? :ninja_star: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Skins Posted June 17, 2013 Report Share Posted June 17, 2013 didn't they used to have metal detectors at PBS? I have never been to Cincinnati, so I couldn't tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.