all_about_da_packers
14 years ago


We have rules.
We have consequences.

Rule is, no running onto the field.
Consequence is, getting tased.


Seems pretty simple to me. Can't handle being tased? don't run your ass on the field. again its a taser, not a bullet.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:




Well, why not use a gun next time? Hell, dude broke the rules, there should be consequences!

By your line of thinking the would be justified at shooting at your should you speed. That... makes no sense.


Edit: I'm... echoing NSD. Not sure if that's good or bad.... 😛
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

Well, why not use a gun next time? Hell, dude broke the rules, there should be consequences!

By your line of thinking the would be justified at shooting at your should you speed. That... makes no sense.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



What part of ... its a taser, not a bullet do you fail to understand? By saying that, I'm saying, a bullet would be too much, but a taser is not.

You're right, it makes no sense and I appreciate you never trying to predict my line of thinking with asinine perceptions.


But what if someone decides that the consequence IS a bullet? That's the point. Where is the line drawn and who draws it? And how much flexibility are security personnel to be given over how flexible it is?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



If the consequence WAS a bullet, that's too far. I think a tase fits the 'crime' of running onto the field if they are unable to apprehend the individual with the guards.



I'll try to paint this picture a little more clear for those who feel the need to take one comment and make it completely different than it's intended.


IF someone runs onto the field I feel they should first try to apprehend the person with manpower. If that fails, then subdue the individual with a taser. I would cautiously say a bullet would never suffice, but then again, if they are armed, a bullet might have to be the means of apprehension.








Was a taser out of line here? They tried to capture him with the guards, they failed. So they used the taser. I think that was fine.
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
14 years ago


We have rules.
We have consequences.

Rule is, no running onto the field.
Consequence is, getting tased.


Seems pretty simple to me. Can't handle being tased? don't run your ass on the field. again its a taser, not a bullet.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:




Well, why not use a gun next time? Hell, dude broke the rules, there should be consequences!

By your line of thinking the would be justified at shooting at your should you speed. That... makes no sense.


Edit: I'm... echoing NSD. Not sure if that's good or bad.... :P

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



I'd imagine common sense would factor in when deciding a consequence. You know.. like taser < 9mm gun. Not to mention the rule of thumb for a police officer firing their weapon at a suspect is to be fired upon first. I know that's not ALWAYS the case, but in the majority of them, it is.

I'd imagine it's safe to assume that a lowly security guard at a sporting event not only wouldn't have access to a gun, much less fire it at a moron running in circles.

The line is drawn with common sense. The same common sense that says, "Don't jump the fence at a professional stadium."

Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
all_about_da_packers
14 years ago


You're right, it makes no sense and I appreciate you never trying to predict my line of thinking with asinine perceptions.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



I got what you were saying.

Thank you, though, for missing the implication in my words (which echo NSD's line of thought): at what point, and more importantly how, do you draw the line? Note, I stated: "I'm echoing NSD" for a reason...

I can be much more literal and explicit, if you prefer.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
all_about_da_packers
14 years ago

I'd imagine it's safe to assume that a lowly security guard at a sporting event not only wouldn't have access to a gun, much less fire it at a moron running in circles.

The line is drawn with common sense. The same common sense that says, "Don't jump the fence at a professional stadium."

"Formo" wrote:



That's the thing though, what is "common sense" to you is not common sense to me; case in point: it's common sense for me not to stun a damn kid that acts stupidly in running onto the field with no intention to hurt anyone.

Common sense, despite the appeal it's semantics may hold, is in fact not common at all. By that I mean that any qualification of common sense is going to vary person to person.

That's why I have an issue with drawing the distinction of going too far by appealing to common sense; the vagueness of the term limits any potential usefulness it may have in deciding the appropriate form of punishment.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
IronMan
14 years ago

I suggest they use fluffy bunny launchers to subdue the attention whore fans that run onto a field. Because, golly gee willickers.. we wouldn't want to hurt anyone's psyche. BTW, the fluffy bunnies I'm suggesting are stuffed toy rabbits.. Not the real animals. So you can put away your PETA pitchforks now.

That is all.

"Formo" wrote:

Seriously LMAO

+1
IronMan
14 years ago

it's common sense for me not to stun a damn kid that acts stupidly in running onto the field with no intention to hurt anyone.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:


How do you know what his intentions were? Exactly. You don't. Neither did the police officers. ANYONE who runs on a field at a sporting event, and is running from the police, should be considered a threat. Remember when the Royals first base coach was attacked by a father and son in Chicago in 2002? Security was slow to react, and by the time they did, the father/son had already punched the first base coach several times.

And after they apprehended the two guys, they found a pocket knife near first base where the attack occured. The son was 15!

The police did NOT use excessive force in this situation. Had they tased him AFTER he had been in custody, then THAT would have been excessive. He was running from police, they couldn't catch him, so they dropped him. Exactly how it should have been done.
Rockmolder
14 years ago

The police did NOT use excessive force in this situation. Had they tased him AFTER he had been in custody, then THAT would have been excessive. He was running from police, they couldn't catch him, so they dropped him. Exactly how it should have been done.

"IronMan" wrote:



That's exactly what I thought. You might not get tazered or dropped when you're speeding, but you will if you then run off. He was obviously running away.

Was it totally necessary? I don't know. Was it justified? Totally.
Zero2Cool
14 years ago


You're right, it makes no sense and I appreciate you never trying to predict my line of thinking with asinine perceptions.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



I got what you were saying.

Thank you, though, for missing the implication in my words (which echo NSD's line of thought): at what point, and more importantly how, do you draw the line? Note, I stated: "I'm echoing NSD" for a reason...

I can be much more literal and explicit, if you prefer.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



So if I understand this correctly (and thats not likely) you took my comment, exaggerated the shit out of it and then grouped it as stating it was 'my line of thinking'. Why does that seem really moronic to me?

Where do you draw the line you say? Umm, again, what part of 'its a taser not a bullet' don't you get? Anyone who can think surely could understand I believe there is line in the sand and it stops before a bullet is used.

Just because Rourke and you both were mistaken, it doesn't mean it's right. Should I use some outlandish foolish analogy to prove that point like you did?


As Rourke stated ... the question is ... was the taser the proper method to remove him from the field? I say this, again for those who continue to miss it.
I feel, first using manpower (meaning the guards), if they fail to apprehend him, then use the taser. How long do they pursue him before tasing? That's another debate. I think with 5 guards, they should be able to capture said person within a few minutes tops.
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

The police did NOT use excessive force in this situation. Had they tased him AFTER he had been in custody, then THAT would have been excessive. He was running from police, they couldn't catch him, so they dropped him. Exactly how it should have been done.

"Rockmolder" wrote:



That's exactly what I thought. You might not get tazered or dropped when you're speeding, but you will if you then run off. He was obviously running away.

Was it totally necessary? I don't know. Was it justified? Totally.

"IronMan" wrote:



OMG WHATS NEXT ROCK, SHOOTING SOMEONE FOR JAY-WALKING? WHAT KIND OF PERSON ARE YOu!!


There, AADP I took care of him for ya!!!
Fan Shout
Martha Careful (34m) : The site is operating much faster...tyvm
Mucky Tundra (28-Feb) : It's the offseason and the draft is still nearly 2 months away, what can ya do?🤷‍♂️
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : NFL teams were notified today that the 2025 salary cap has been set at $279,200,000 per club.
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : sssllllooooow
Martha Careful (27-Feb) : is it just me, or has the website been slow the last couple of days?
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Damnit 2026 2nd rnd pick!
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Packers get Myles Garret and Browns 2926 2nd rnd pick.
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Browns get Jaire, + Packers #1 2025 pick and 2026 3rd rnd pick.
beast (26-Feb) : Rams trying to trade Stafford and Kupp, then signing Rodgers and Adams? Just speculation, but interesting
Zero2Cool (26-Feb) : Packers shopping Jaire Alexander per Ian Rapoport
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst and Jaire Alexander’s agent, John Thornton, are meeting this week in Indianapolis to determine the future of the Packers’ 28-year-
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst says Mark Murphy told him he can trade their first-round pick despite the draft being in Green Bay.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : Packers. 🤦
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team petition NFL to ban Brotherly Shove.
beast (23-Feb) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter
beast (23-Feb) : Campbell is right, he's rich and he doesn't have to explain sh!t... but that attitude gives teams reasons to never sign him again.
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I have some doubt about all that
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I read De'Vondre Campbell's tweet this morning (via the New York Post) Florio says that if he invested his earnings wisely, he will be good
beast (20-Feb) : I haven't followed, but I believe he's good when healthy, just hasn't been able to stay healthy.
dfosterf (20-Feb) : Hasn"t Bosa missed more games than he has played in the last 3 years?
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : He hasn't been too bad when healthy but I don't feel like I ever heard much about when he is
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Felt like he was more interested in his body, than football. He flashed more than I expected
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : When he was coming out, I thought he'd be flash in pan.
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : Joey seems so forgettable compared to his brother for some reason
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : NFL informed teams today that the 2025 salary cap will be roughly $277.5M-$281.5M
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Los Angeles Chargers are likely to release DE Joey Bosa this off-season as a cap casualty, per league source.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : If the exploit is not fixed, we'll see tons of "50 top free agents, 50 perfect NFL team fits: We picked where each should sign in March" lo
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Issue should be solved, database cleaned and held strong working / meeting. Boom!
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : It should be halted now.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : usually spambots are trying to get traffic to shady websites filled with spyware; the two links being spammed were to the Packers website
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : you know when you put it that way combined with the links it was spamming (to the official Packers website)
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yep. You can do that with holding down ENTER on a command in Console of browser
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : even with the rapid fire posts?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I'm not certain it's a bot.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I've got to go to work soon which is a pity because I'm enthralled by this battle between the bot and Zero
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, I see what that did. Kind of funny.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : now it's a link to Wes Hodkiezwicz mailbag
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Now they're back with another topic
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : oh lol
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I have a script that purges them now.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : 118 Topics with Message.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : what's 118 (besides a number)?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : They got 118 slapped in there.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : that's why it confused the hell out of me
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, but this is taking a headline and slapping it into the Packers Talk
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Wasnt there a time guests could post in the help forum?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : lol good question, kind of impressed!
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : So how is a guest posting?
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Tell them its an emergency
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
35m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

42m / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Feb / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

27-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

27-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

24-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

24-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.