Minn. police associations sue NFL over stadium gun ban

[Penoe Hunter]

NFL :First Daniel Defense now off duty cops.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/

 

[steve4102]

Interesting issue.
In MN a private business can post a No firearms sign at each entrance. These signs carry no weight of law and carrying past one means nothing according to the law. The Business owner or it's managers can ask you to leave their property if they wish. The permit holder must leave immediately when asked. Failure to do so can result in a $25 misdemeanor trespassing charge.

If these off duty cops wish to carry at the game, go ahead, the worst that can happen is you will be asked to leave.

The question I have is does the NFL have the right to dictate firearms policy in a Publicly owned Stadium. MN has Preemption law and individual Cities and counties cannot enact their own Gun Control laws. The New MN football Stadium is funded with mostly Tax dollars, so would it not be Public Building?

 

[NavyLCDR]

If the NFL is paying for the use of the stadium, then state preemption will not apply during the period of time the NFL has control under it's lease agreement. The preemption statute only applies to municipal governments:

471.633 FIREARMS.

The legislature preempts all authority of a home rule charter or statutory city including a city of the first class, county, town, municipal corporation, or other governmental subdivision, or any of their instrumentalities, to regulate firearms, ammunition, or their respective components to the complete exclusion of any order, ordinance or regulation by them except that:

(a) a governmental subdivision may regulate the discharge of firearms; and

(b) a governmental subdivision may adopt regulations identical to state law.

Local regulation inconsistent with this section is void.

It is not a local government that is banning firearms, it is the private organization that is paying to rent the facility. Let's say I rent a city owned convention center for a big wedding. Since it is city owned, does that mean that I must allow the entire general public into the convention center for the wedding? Does it mean that I cannot require every person invited to wear a TUX or Formal Dress or they can stay out? Does it mean that I have to legally allow firearms, if I would choose to prohibit firearms, just because the city cannot ban firearms in the convention center?

Last time I checked, off-duty police officers had no RIGHT to attend football games any more than Joe Civilian has the RIGHT to attend a football game. If they don't want to agree to the terms and conditions associated with the admission ticket to the football game - nobody is forcing them to buy one.

In addition, the Federal LEO Safety Act does not offer a basis for a lawsuit either because:

18 U.S. Code § 926B - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers

(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property

 

[Red Wind]

The No Fun League continues its dreadful bias. Bob Costas is the perfect spokesman for this league from Hades. Concussions, ACL'S and broken hips and spinal cord nasties are cool.

But any mention of those evil weapons are verboten. Roger Goodell, is a 30 million dollar a year hypocrite.But we keep tuning in to watch the players destroy themselves. The average NFL player life span is 59. Major League Baseball is 78.

What does make us, the fans?

 

[steve4102]

If the NFL is paying for the use of the stadium, then state preemption will not apply during the period of time the NFL has control under it's lease agreement. The preemption statute only applies to municipal governments:

Gotcha.
I could be wrong, but I don't think the NFL is paying to rent the New Stadium, I think the MN Vikings are the renters.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

The NFL is being dumb, very dumb. That said, the MN law bars prosecutions but does not force admission. Are they using metal detectors?

Mike

 

[mnhntr]

First I am no football fan and would never go to a Viqueens game because we all know they will lose anyway. I just find it funny that the chief of police in Minneapolis wants his off duty officers to be able to carry there but does not want the citizens of his city to carry anywhere period. He is a jack wagon and I could care less what his department wants.

 

[vamo]

Not this discussion again.

So someone attacks you at a stadium and you're armed how are you going to safely defend yourself? By safely I mean insure that no one but the target is harmed. These places are absolutely packed for big games and wanting to carry inside just isn't a realistic request. Arguing about a place like a stadium only makes us look crazy and does nothing to further our rights to carry in the places we should be able to carry.

I'm all for carrying at most venues but c'mon people there's a very small number of places that its just a bad idea.

 

[mnhntr]

Not this discussion again.

So someone attacks you at a stadium and you're armed how are you going to safely defend yourself? By safely I mean insure that no one but the target is harmed. These places are absolutely packed for big games and wanting to carry inside just isn't a realistic request. Arguing about a place like a stadium only makes us look crazy and does nothing to further our rights to carry in the places we should be able to carry.

I'm all for carrying at most venues but c'mon people there's a very small number of places that its just a bad idea.

Not in the parking lot of restroom or walk ways? I bet the guy who is has thousands of hours of rehab ahead of him from the attack in the parking lot wishes he was carrying that day.

 

[steve4102]

I was thinking the same thing. I think the chances of a SD situation in an open stadium with thousands of screaming fans all around is about Nill.
In the restroom or in the hallway, big difference.

 

[Charlie Horse]

Just because you are carrying in a place where it might be inadvisable to fire doesn't mean you shouldn't be carrying. I've been on duty in several places where i could not open\return fire without risk to innocents. This does not mean I secured my duty weapon and went unarmed. Its all about discipline and tactics.

There are 2 reasons that came to mind as to why the NFL takes this position. First, they realize they have an image problem thanks to people like good ole Plaxico "I'm not a common criminal" Burress and his ilk. (I still maintain that his mother was trying to name him after plexiglass.) Second, I would bet the farm that when the subject came up,m somebody asked a lawyer what to do. Knowing that executives and insurance companies have a certain phobia of ANY kind of liability, they came up with this.

 

[pretzelxx]

Wait people actually watch the Vikings play football???
On a serious note, they banned that one commercial about guns, now this? I didn't think they hated guns that much but wow. This is ridiculous

 

[NavyLCDR]

Arguing about a place like a stadium only makes us look crazy and does nothing to further our rights to carry in the places we should be able to carry.

You do understand it is not "us" making the argument to carry, right? It is police officers. Statistics show that you are more likely to be shot as an innocent bystander by a police officer than you are by regular Joe Civilian defending themselves. I vote no on allowing police officers to carry where regular Joe Citizen is not allowed to.

 

[vamo]

You do understand it is not "us" making the argument to carry, right? It is police officers. Statistics show that you are more likely to be shot as an innocent bystander by a police officer than you are by regular Joe Civilian defending themselves. I vote no on allowing police officers to carry where regular Joe Citizen is not allowed to.

Sorry I was mainly disagreeing with everyone complaining about the NFL being anti-gun for not allow guns in a stadium. I actually agree with that sentiment completely, an off duty cop should be no different than you and me.

 

[razorback2003]

If it isn't against the law to carry at a stadium in Minnesota, then why worry about it? If those guys were smart, they would discreetly carry.

 

[Jeff White]

If those guys were smart, they would discreetly carry.

NFL policy is to wand and pat down people at the gate. So discreet carry even with a badge just puts you in a bad position.

Major League Baseball is adopting the NFL rules for the 2014 season so I guess the playoff games I attended last year were the last professional baseball games I will ever attend. Lost an activity I have enjoyed my whole life....

 

[USAF_Vet]

First of all, the NFL didn't ban the Daniel Defense commercial. I honestly believe it was a publicity stunt. No way could DD invest $6m for a 60 second commercial when their annual profit margin voters around $8m. Propaganda is propaganda, regardless if it comes from friend or foe.

Second of all, Texas just told the NFL to get bent, state law over rides their corporate policy. Texas off duty law enforcement can carry inside the stadium. The NFL isn't the property owner.

I've given up on the NFL, so being able to carry or not being able to carry makes no.difference since I'm not.going to pay $100+ for bad seats to watch the Lions lose.

 

[steve4102]

Second of all, Texas just told the NFL to get bent, state law over rides their corporate policy. Texas off duty law enforcement can carry inside the stadium. The NFL isn't the property owner.

That's great, got a link to pass on?

Edit:
Never mind, found it.

 

[mnrivrat]

First I am no football fan and would never go to a Viqueens game because we all know they will lose anyway. I just find it funny that the chief of police in Minneapolis wants his off duty officers to be able to carry there but does not want the citizens of his city to carry anywhere period. He is a jack wagon and I could care less what his department wants.

If I understand the issue correctly I certainly agree with the above statement. One rule for police, even when off duty, and another for the citizen. is BS.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Hey, did anyone see the Manchester United shutout today? Great game. Should be a world sport! Oh, wait...it is!

 

[Glocktogo]

I have no problem with the NFL banning off duty law enforcement from their stadiums (FWIW, my sheriff expects us to carry off duty in public at all times and some departments mandate it by policy). I just have a problem with their hypocrisy. If you don't want off duty law enforcement to attend your games, then man up and say so. Don't sit there and pretend that it's "unnecessary" for them to carry, when you know darn good and well that they're expected to.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I just have a problem with their hypocrisy. If you don't want off duty law enforcement to attend your games, then man up and say so. Don't sit there and pretend that it's "unnecessary" for them to carry, when you know darn good and well that they're expected to.

I think it is a big stretch to say that the NFL is against LEO because they refuse to accommodate them more than Joe Civilian. Although I think that we have a huge problem overall with LEOs expecting and even demanding special treatment.

 

[Penoe Hunter]

I was wondering were you got your stats :

NavyLCDR Statistics show that you are more likely to be shot as an innocent bystander by a police officer than you are by regular Joe Civilian defending themselves

 

[NavyLCDR]

I was wondering were you got your stats :

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/police-officers-likely-to-murder-than-concealed-carry-permit/

and

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.2/gun-facts-6-2-screen.pdf
page 19:

Myth: Citizens are too incompetent to use guns for protection

Fact: About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000 despite American citizens using guns to prevent crimes almost 2,500,000 times every year.

and

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3919678&postcount=4

 

[Glocktogo]

I think it is a big stretch to say that the NFL is against LEO because they refuse to accommodate them more than Joe Civilian. Although I think that we have a huge problem overall with LEOs expecting and even demanding special treatment.

Says the guy who feels it necessary to profess in his sig line that he's not anti-cop?

I happen to be very pro-Constitution also. I believe in property rights, but also believe in self-determination. I'd prefer that anyone not consuming alcohol be allowed to CCW there as well.

That said, you focused on the part of my post that interested or concerned you and ignored the rest. Some departments MANDATE that their LEOs carry off duty. If your agency says carry off duty and the NFL says "not in my house", that means they DON'T want off duty LEO's in their stadiums.

As a LEO, I also have an OBLIGATION to intercede if a significant threat to life or limb presents itself. Without the requisite tools, I cannot do that effectively. As a CCW permit holde, you have a right to self-defense and defense of others, but no obligation to intercede on behalf of others you do not know. In my state, you are instructed by law that your permit does not give you the authority to intervene on behalf of someone you don't know. If you do so, it is at your own legal peril.

So my statement stands on its own merits. It is disingenuous of the NFL to state they don't NEED off duty LEO's armed in their stadiums "because they are safe without it", then turn around and DENY off duty LEO's the option to do so. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other and they're just trying to put a positive spin on a negative action. Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

They have a right to deny it, but they don't have a right to put their own spin on it and expect us to agree with them or their decision. I have a right too, it's called BOYCOTTING the NFL!