all_about_da_packers
15 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.... šŸ˜›
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Zero2Cool
15 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.
UserPostedImage
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
15 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."
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
all_about_da_packers
15 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
15 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
15 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
15 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
15 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
15 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.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
15 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!!!
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (3h) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (4h) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (4h) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (4h) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (4h) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (5h) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (5h) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: ā€œA great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.ā€
Mucky Tundra (5h) : *years
Mucky Tundra (5h) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates ā€œmany Packers gamesā€ being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (5h) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (5h) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (5h) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (5h) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (5h) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (6h) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (8h) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (8h) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (9h) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hulk Hogan gone too.
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Oh, it's toe injury
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hope it's not serious. that would stink
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Sounds like an ankle not a knee for Fields
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Ya Flaccp on Browns
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Maybe Tyrod Taylor instead
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : He's on Browns, right?
dfosterf (24-Jul) : They would probably go with Flacco is my guess if Fields out
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Fleece 'em again!
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Malik Willis might be someone Jets come after
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Packers introduce 1923-inspired classic uniform, leather-look helmet
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Both LB Quay Walker and Rookie DB Micah Robinson have passed their physicals
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Happy to see site feels more snappy snappy
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : No sir. I did not.
dfosterf (23-Jul) : You didn't get free childcare when you were at work?
wpr (23-Jul) : These guys make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Pay for their own childcare.
dfosterf (23-Jul) : 2nd issue. Number 1 issue was no gameday childcare. 1 of 3 teams not providing it
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Suppose if locker room is main issue, we sitting pretty
wpr (23-Jul) : I thought so Mucky. In those useless player polls GB always rates high overall. Locker is a part of it.
Mucky Tundra (23-Jul) : Wasn't the locker room just updated like 6 or 7 years ago?
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I have forum updated on different site. We'll see how this one goes before going to that
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Elgton Jenkins has a back injury, is expect to end contract dispute
wpr (23-Jul) : It's funny the PA complained about the locker room. It wasn't that long ago it was top shelf. Things change in a hurry.
wpr (23-Jul) : The site is much more better.
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : NFLPA report said Packers lockerroom needed upgrade. Whining bout where you change?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
4h / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

20h / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright Ā© 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.comā„¢. All Rights Reserved.