Guns in stadiums, good idea or bad?

Some Washington state legislators have decided it would be a good idea to allow guns in sports stadiums, such as Century Link Field and Safeco Field. Current laws allow the operators of such stadiums, the Seattle Seahawks and Seattle Mariners, to ban all weapons from such places. These dimwits, just my opinion anyway, are proposing a law that would ban the operators from having such bans.

I am sure that most that would take advantage of this are responsible gun owners and nothing bad would happen. But one idiot or disgruntled member of some type of radical group and there would be bad news. I have been to a number of Mariners games and for the most part, everything is rather calm. I’ve only seen one person require assistance out the gate because of over imbibing. But the crowd at the one Seahawks game I attended is another story. The number of drunk people is amazing and I saw at least 8 or 9 fights in the stands. This would be the last place that would need anyone with a gun.

Is this a good idea or bad?

Seriously? How can this be anything but bad?

It stinks on its face to me, but just look at the Black Live Matter peaceful demonstration that became a shooting of police in TX by damaged individual. The actions of police responding were complicated by the presence of open carry counter protesters walking around.

The police do NOT want the help.

Do you really think that such a person is going to respect the current ban?

Certainly no more than such a person is going to respect the current ban on carrying guns onto an airplane, right?

I’m ok with banning guns inside buildings if EVERYONE is checked entering that building.
I have season college football tickets and there is a minimal check being done at each gate.

What I have a problem with is when some lazy person puts a “Gun Free Zone” sign up and does NOTHING to ensure someone with bad intent isn’t carrying.

I believe any place that puts a “Gun Free Zone” sign up and does no checking for compliance should be sued for all they’re worth if a shooting occurs within.

This positively oozes “bad idea.”

Bad idea, but for the reason that a private property owner should certainly have the power to regulate whether weapons are carried by his patrons.

Sports fanatics + alcohol + guns. Seriously, what could go wrong? Aside from drunken fights, people thinking there’s a shooter and just shooting randomly in his general direction… what about all the jerks shooting into the air when their team wins? And then the losers retaliating? Anyone going into such a stadium would be nothing less than suicidal.

But yeah, private property… if the owners are not interested in selling tickets.

You go through metal detectors at both stadiums. Heck, I had to go through a metal detector just to get into a Christmas show at the Tacoma Dome. My fear would be a crazy with proper credentials getting a gun into a stadium.

I hate how some people yell “the sky is falling” whenever something like this is proposed and then are silent when disasters from said proposals never happen.

Over the past 2 decades numerous states have passed concealed carry laws, switchblade prohibition repeals, increased highway speed limits, etc., all to screaming of the Chicken Littles who proclaimed blood would flow in the streets.

Years later when there are little to no major problems with those laws the CLs’ don’t have the honor to admit they were wrong.
Now one of you will post cites showing terrible things that have happened because of those laws, ignoring that if those terrible things happened in large magnitude the laws would have been changed back.

It appears that guns are allowed in restaurants that serve liquor in Washington, and “No guns” signs don’t have any force of law.

Guess what? You’re already around people every day who are carrying. In the grocery store, on the street, in a restaurant. Someone who is going to go off their nut is going to do so regardless of the law or where they are. Gun free zones have never ever stopped that.

The “private property” objection doesn’t hold because the stadiums are on public property,. Indeed that seems to be the proponent’s main in on this. If this goes forward, there’d have to be some logistical concessions (at least) on the part of concealed carriers, so as not to gum up the process for everyone else. For example, they should be required to present their arms prior to entering and have them quickly inspected to verify that they meet the criteria for concealed carry. They should also have to present their permit and an additional piece of ID to verify the permit is valid and current and they are who they say they are. All of this would take time and money, so there really, to be fair, should be an added fee tacked on for those who wish to carry, as well as a separate entrance.

If someone crazy carries a gun into a stadium, it is perfectly allowed, and there is nothing that anyone can do to even question their right to have a lethal device surrounded by thousands of people until after they start killing people.

If guns are banned from the stadium, then anyone carrying a gun into the stadium would be stopped, and the gun removed, or the person ejected from the crowd.

Do you not see how these two sceanrios play out differntly?

I say the same thing to the fire marshal when he comes around. He’s just a chicken little, telling me that overloading my outlets, having extension cords strung across the room, blocking doors, and storing flammable liquids next to my water heater is “against fire code.”

Over decades, I have seen all of these fire code violations and more, and never seen a fire, and yet, even still the fire marshal doesn’t have the “honor” to admit that he is wrong.

I agree with several, ‘private property’ isn’t the answer here. A bar or restaurant is ‘private property’ and the public tells the owners they must serve everyone without racial discrimination. And no that’s not different in terms of the basic right of private property, it’s only different in how people feel about one policy (non-discrimination) v the other (guns). In restaurant or stadium the ‘private property’ is deemed to be offered as a public accommodation, and the long established legal principal is that gives the public a say in how the private owners operate it.

So I wouldn’t accept ‘it’s private property’ as the answer if the stadium owners insisted they can prohibit guns and the authorities say ‘no you can’t’, or if it’s the other way around.

I go with the answer saying it’s valid to ban guns from specific places where
a) they actually screen guns out
b) carrying guns is basically banned in public anyway (eg. this isn’t much of an issue with the MTA in NY saying you can’t have a gun on the subway, you basically can’t have one up on the street either).

The problem as mentioned is if there’s a ‘gun free zone’ policy that’s just a policy or a sign, in states/localities where plenty of people can legally carry guns outside those nominal zones.

Yeah, it’s not like anybody has ever been killed in a public shooting.

But the fire marshal can show cause and effect with examples where you can’t. There are oodles of places in Washington State where people are carrying guns, alcohol is present, there are crowds, etc. and shootings aren’t happening. You have no example to show guns in a stadium=disaster.

Yes, but those shootings happened regardless of whether the shooter was legal to carry the weapon, in a “gun free” zone, etc…

Once again, cause and effect has not been shown.

Yeah, but guns are only dangerous if you don’t have a gun of your own to deflect incoming fire.

Is the reverse also true? People have been attending events at these stadiums for decades; added up, the numbers must be in the millions. And yet, I don’t hear about vast numbers of threats, robberies, rapes, any of the things a person might need a concealed weapon to defend against. I’m sure there are the occasional fights, but I’ve never heard of someone being seriously injured in one.

At the present time when there have been no major problems with banning guns from stadiums, do you have the honor to admit you are wrong?

Sure, people of strong opinions of either side of every gun debate often have in common wanting to ignore how tenuous the evidence is more/less gun control affects violence in a meaningful way, within a given society and set of circumstances otherwise.

That said again IMO it’s OK to ban guns in stadiums if you really do, it’s plausible you can, and just as you say there don’t seem to be a lot of incidents demonstrating that this is a problem.

Where the pro-gun side has a point IMO is where there are ‘gun free zones’ which aren’t really enforced, in the midst of states/localities where it’s easy to buy and carry a gun outside such nominal zones, and police etc have to follow rules of probable cause to check people even inside the zone. In that case allowing guns in really might make the population of the zone safer on net, and I think the absolute refusal of some people to consider that possibility (which I’m not claiming is 100% certain or immune from solid contrary evidence) is based on emotion and/or a doctrine of ‘don’t give an inch’ in any polarized political debate.

I’m getting tired of all these terrorist attacks in sports stadiums. They re becoming so commonplace, the news media doesn’t even report them amymore. What is needed is thousands of people in the crowded concourses firing shots with handguns, to put a stop to this epidemic of stadium terrorism, and at the same time send a message to people who root for the wrong team or otherwise rankle the nerves of touchy and frustrated fans right after a million dollars in alcoholic beverage sales…

It brings a whole new meaning to “Kill the umpire!”.