NFL Advises Players to Not Own Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dallas did sign Tank Johnson as well. I miss him already.

Tank wouldn't be a "criminal" if his house was in Texas! (from what I've read of the incidents).

Sad to say, looks like Mr Taylor brought a machette to a gun fight. Not sure he could legally own a firearm because of past transgressions.

--wally.
 
Sean Taylor was a convicted felon, so he couldn't have a gun. One of the times he got in trouble with the law was being a felon with a firearm. That and his habit of beating people to a pulp. He was lucky that they let him off light with a plea deal otherwise he would have been in prison for the next forty years, only to get gun downed. Then there is the various DUIs, arrests for armed assault, and general thug douchery. He is hardly a role model.

The one I feel sorry for is his highschool girlfriend and their 18 month child.
 
So, the NFL would rather have its players own knives instead? The fellow who was just murdered would have had a better chance if he had a gun instead of that machete.
 
The NFL ought to stop drafting thugs instead.


NFL is highly anti-gun btw.


They're another mega corporation that believes they can prohibit you from owning a gun because you work for them. I know of a particular home improvement store that tells its employees they are not suppose to own guns even at HOME if they work for the store!!!

It's not that these mini-Hitlers have any kind of legal authority or power to enforce these ridiculous anti-American, anti-Freedom, anti-humanity policies....it's the fact that they espouse such ideas and actually try and put them forth. It is the fact that they do not know or respect any boundaries. It is an admission, either intentionally or by consequence that they intend to go as far as they can and push the limits of how much they can control you and your life. It speaks volumes of their mindset. Sickening.

What is next? Are we to be made to share our wives with our corporate lords?
 
Quote:
yeah i don't think it would have mattered either way if i he had a gun. from what i just heard on the news sean taylor had a machete under his bed and after locking his bedroom door he went to get it. at that point the bedroom door burst open and the lead started flying. it sounds like this guy was caught off guard and unprepared.

LOL, you are kidding...right?

He had time to lock the door, but yet he didn't have time to grab a semi-auto rifle or shotgun and be waiting for the intruder to kick the door in?

no i am not kidding what part of unprepared doesn't get you killed? i guess being unprepared with a gun though is better then unprepared with a knife. :neener:
 
Some of these responses are acting as if this guy deserved to be gun downed in his home because he was trying to turn his life around once he realized (with the birth of his daughter) that the way he was going wasn't a good one. It is not like he was in a knight club at an ungodly hour (which is never a good idea). I am sure that his 18 month old child will be happy to see this is the high road.

Let us try not to become so callus in this up hill battle we are in right now...

God rest Sean Taylor's soul, as well as everyone else who has passed away needlessly today.
 
From NFL.com

After Taylor was drafted, problems soon began. Taylor fired his agent, then skipped part of the NFL's mandatory rookie symposium, drawing a $25,000 fine. Driving home late from a party during the season, he was pulled over and charged with drunken driving. The case was dismissed in court, but by then it had become a months long distraction for the Redskins.

Taylor also was fined at least seven times for late hits, uniform violations and other infractions over his first three seasons, including a $17,000 penalty for spitting in the face of Tampa Bay running back Michael Pittman during a 2006 playoff game.

Taylor endured a yearlong legal battle after he was accused in 2005 of brandishing a gun at a man during a fight over allegedly stolen all-terrain vehicles near Taylor's home. He eventually pleaded no contest to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to 18 months' probation.


Sean Taylor doesn't seem like such a bad guy to me, and we know how the media can negatively impact the truth. I'm not sure this incident had anything to do with his lifestyle or associates, etc. An intruder broke into his house and shot him dead! He apparently did not have a gun to protect himself. If there is anything the NFL should say at this time, it is for players to take all necessary precautions to protect themselves and there families. If a gun is necessary for that, than so be it.
 
The NFL prefers their players to own attack dogs......

Just to clarify, was this the NFL or the players union?

The NFL.

Athletes and Guns
By Arty Berko, Steve Delsohn and Lindsay Rovegno
Special to ESPN.com
.
.
.
New England Patriots wide receiver Jabar Gaffney, a gun owner himself, said he thinks 90 percent of NFL players have firearms.

"Lots of guys I know have weapons either in their house or, in places where you can carry it, they have a permit to carry it," Gaffney said.

Some athletes own guns for hunting, but most athletes who carry guns do so for self-protection.
.
.
.
Another armed athlete is former NFL player Jay Williams.

"I carry a gun every day of my life. When I get up in the morning and get dressed it goes on my hip, and when I go to bed at night it comes off my hip," said Williams, who played 10 years in the NFL, most recently with the Miami Dolphins in 2004. "I would rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it."

Williams is now a gun dealer, selling weapons mostly at gun shows and over the Internet. He says some clients are athletes.
.
.
.
The NBA and NFL have similar policies regarding players and guns, each noting that even if players are licensed to carry a gun, they cannot carry them into stadiums and arenas, practice facilities or on team planes.
.
.
.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?id=2691043&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1
 
They have a right to not allow athletes to carry on their property (the sports teams property that is). If the athletes don't like that then they don't have to play in the pros.

What they don't have any right in doing is telling someone that they cannot use firearms to protect their loved ones while at home or out on the town.

There is one thing I am wondering about, and maybe it is just because I am always a little paranoid, but how many people here wouldn't (along with your guns of course) have a high tech security system and possibly security patrols on your property if you were a celebrity in the public view, and made enough money to be able to easily afford it?
 
I wonder how many more worthy people passed away the same day that got zero press coverage?

Rome didn't have any trouble replacing used-up gladiators. Doubt this will be any challenge.

No kidding. I don't like football, or most organized sports for that matter - I'm not a team player. I respect that they're good at the game, and that's fine. I respect that people like the game, and for some reason feel the need to get worked up over whether "their" team won or lost, like they have some sort of vested interest in the competition. But c'mon, do we really need to pay these guys millions of dollars to run back forth on a field chasing a ball? Ahhhh, thought not.

Really, though, a gun would certainly have helped here. This is like poster-child (poster-man?) for self-defense:

the NFL advises players to not own guns

Because clearly if there is someone breaking into your house where you, your girlfriend, and your 18 month old daughter are sleeping you should make sure you are incapable of doing anything about it.
 
More proof that the elitists are idiots.


But c'mon, do we really need to pay these guys millions of dollars to run back forth on a field chasing a ball? Ahhhh, thought not.

I disagree, they need their share of the pie. If they don't get paid oodles and oodles of cash, the owners get it instead. I'm in the "not a fan of sports in general" club myself, but there are people making a lot more money than the players of the game, and that would be the owners. I think the players deserve all that money, however, I am not one to contribute much, if any to their income pool.
 
Tank wouldn't be a "criminal" if his house was in Texas!

EXCEPT (maybe) for:

1) The narcotics (canabis) in the house
2) The (now deceased pal) who had and was using the narcotics and acting as 'security' w/ ready access to Tank's weapons although he was a convicted fellon.
3) The weapons he owned being in the same home as the narcotics, minor children, and above mentioned pal.
4) The more-than-several police complaints about Tank and pal shooting
weapons in a resdiential area (I don't know that Texas has a law on that, in fairness).

I'm sorry to ramble on--I really don't have a personal issue with folks using canabis if that is their choice but there are laws against doing so.

I wish Tank all the best. Being here in Illinois I followed the story pretty closely because of the RKBA element to it--not trying to just be a smart alec toward Wally in Houston by re-hashing some of the 'other' elements--they got glossed over in favor of the 'he had big guns' factor here. Tank is supposed to be a pretty avid shooter and I hope he sticks with it in a positive way.

I'm very sorry for Sean Taylor's family. Hindsight is 20/20.
 
That depends. Is she hot?

Best regards,
Bob

Yes, and she carries and knows how to use a Sig 239. ;)


As for the topic, there's another thing. This is a classic flawed thinking process found in our society. I believe this thought or reasoning pattern is created via propaganda and programming in the public education camps. But I won't go that far.

What is happening is we have problem, reaction, solution. Some NFL player gets assassinated by a hitman, and their reaction is to blame guns and notify all players that they shouldn't own guns.


Extremely illogical and dysfunctional thinking. Now, the NFL isn't run by dummies. These are shrewd businessmen. They are educated (although, possibly miseducated as a mentioned above). I have to believe then, based on these facts, that their policy is intentional. That is, it isn't based on irrational fear which would imply a non-sinister motive. Like your typical soccer-mom watching Oprah.


So, I have to believe that the NFL are a group of shills for the anti-gun elite. It isn't that they do not have the mental capacity to come up with logical and reasonable policies and positions, it is that the elect to persecute the concept of gunownership by essentially using their podium to publicly place the blame on guns. Millions of children and fans who follow the NFL are hearing the message that guns kill. Not some murderous assassin hitman.
 
Please,Please stop sending us your football owners,they have no clue about our football.Hey,what's with all this body armour in your game.
 
I know of a particular home improvement store that tells its employees they are not suppose to own guns even at HOME if they work for the store!!!
I have the choice of Lowes & Home Depot here. If it is one of these please say and I will dang sure use the other one. I will also inform the offending corp HQ as to why I will no longer patronize their chain. Thanks.
 
The NFL's probably warning them because it's a 5 year prison sentence for a felon carrying a gun and half the league would be playing prison ball.
Oh boy, would they be disappointed. We only have volleyball, basketball, and softball in prison...sorry. We do have some Monopoly card games, and checkers in the rec department, for the wild at heart.
 
no i am not kidding what part of unprepared doesn't get you killed? i guess being unprepared with a gun though is better then unprepared with a knife.

He had time to lock the door, and foresight and time to grab a defensive weapon. Sounds like he was far more prepared than the vast majority of the population to me. Unfortunately he brought a knife to a gunfight. If he'd grabbed an AR instead of a knife, and it was 30 rounds of 5.56 going through that door as it was being broken down, well, this incident might have ended very differently.

In fact, I think this is one of the most decisive incidents in recent memory illustrating why a gun would be the *best* weapon for home defense. The only real big shortcoming to his plan, as reported, is that he didn't have a gun.
 
Just playing devil's advocate here, but I do too see that he would have been "safer" if he had a gun. However, from what I have heard he was a convicted violent felon. I was reading the "should felons lose RKBA" thread, and alot of people seemed to agree that most felons shouldn't lose it, but the violent ones should. Even if this man was turning his life around, he still hadn't "proved" he was a good guy, by being "clean" for a number of years. So my question is, should he actually have been allowed to own a gun? Especially considering the element he used to hang with, he probably had a better reason for it than I do.
 
My feeling is if you cannot trust the released felon to have all the rights of a citizen, then he should still be in prison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top