1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Code of fan conduct comes under legal attack

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by Carlsbad_Bolt_Fan, Jun 15, 2011.

  1. Carlsbad_Bolt_Fan

    Carlsbad_Bolt_Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    6,981
    Ratings:
    +1,581
    Code of fan conduct comes under legal attack | ProFootballTalk
     
  2. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,291
    Ratings:
    +4,401
    Oh good........ saved me the trouble. ;)
     
  3. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,108
    Ratings:
    +2,928
    Only thing might make this case semi interesting is that the Q is owned by the City, so it's public land. Still this is pretty stupid
     
  4. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,291
    Ratings:
    +4,401
    I'll say....... I don't think the original concept of "freedom of speech" was to protect people's right to give the finger to opposing fans. :D
     
  5. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    What happened to applying common sense to the first amendment? Like yelling fire in a crowded theater? Doesn't being a belligerent idiot fall under that same concept?
     
  6. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,291
    Ratings:
    +4,401
    You should apologize to Conc before he reads that....... #imjustsaying ;)
     
  7. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,630
    Ratings:
    +2,072
    I wonder how all of this applies when the Raiders come here? I told a biatch to sit down, she flipped me off. Then when I got into it with her husband, well when I had to leave the "Q" there were four Raider fans leaving also. I got high fives from everyone that next game.
     
  8. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,032
    Ratings:
    +4,976
    Baaaahlow me! #imjustsaying ;)
     
  9. HEXEDBOLT

    HEXEDBOLT Don't like it, lump it!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,278
    Ratings:
    +1,886
    Is the commish going to start handing out fines to fans along with game suspensions without beer???????
     
  10. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,032
    Ratings:
    +4,976
    I doubt the commish cares about the fans below the corporate boxes.
     
  11. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,108
    Ratings:
    +2,928
    Well the freedom of speech as with all freedoms enshrined in the bill of rights are not limitless (see famous example of 'you can't scream fire in a crowded theatre'). This I think would seem more of a time place manner restriction - on private land you don't have any freedom of speech. In public land you have freedom of speech (this is why alot of protests take place in a public park or on a sidewalk). the Q is technically owned by the city so it's public land, so you would have freedom of speech. I'm wondering where this case would be going
     
  12. Joy Division

    Joy Division Slightly-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +542
    Freedom of speech in public is fine until it becomes personal...like when you give someone the finger and expect no retribution/retaliation. If you are just throwing the finger at the general public...then so be it, no harm no foul. When you aim your "freedom of speech" finger at an individual why would you not expect a confrontation? Someone flips me off...they are saying "eff you" directly at me. I might take offense, I might not..depending on the circumstance.
    So lets see...being the instigator of a group by offending others and "fueling the fire" in my eyes is very much past the freedom of speech right. You lose freedom of speech when you start something that puts others in danger. I don't want my 7 year old son anywhere near profanity laced violence that could have been avoided if one person (adult) had just restrained themselves.

    So in the end...I'm judging the judge..and the jury is out...Judge Gale Kaneshiro is wasting my time.
     
  13. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    I would imagine that even in public land I can't go yell "fire" in a large crowd and cause unnecessary commotion.

    I would like to think that even if the Q is "public land" being belligerent and causing a ruckus still wouldn't be protected by 1st amendment rights.
     
  14. turbo_turtle

    turbo_turtle In Disguise

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,685
    Ratings:
    +890
    Where I disagree is who is to decide what is Belligerent or not? I could be by just sitting in my seat and not cheering for the Home team or even the opposite is Cheering my lungs and self off. That can be considered Belligerent.

    So I think that no one should go to a Sporting event because of possibly considered being Belligerent even if a person is cheering.

    In my opinion belligerent is way too interpretive from person to person. One person Belligerent is another persons calm cool and collected.

    Now for the Fire thing is something similar, the What if here: If there were an actual fire in a Crowd of people I would rather have the person yell his or her head off and inform me about it than have no one inform me of the fire and the danger again if there is a dangerous situation of an uncontrollable fire. On the other end is if the fire is controlled then someone Yelling Fire would be unacceptable.

    I know my Stupid opinion.
     
  15. FCBolt

    FCBolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,355
    Ratings:
    +606
    What!!???!!!

    That's the best use of BOR #1. That's right, #1. What better way to express the number 1 than with your middle finger?

    You're way way off base on this one blue, sorry.;)
     
  16. FCBolt

    FCBolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,355
    Ratings:
    +606
    Yelling fire = giving the finger is a weak weak argument.
     
  17. Buck Melanoma

    Buck Melanoma Guest

    Ratings:
    +408
    Absolutely. In no way are the two equivalent.
     
  18. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,032
    Ratings:
    +4,976
    What is I yell fire WHILE giving you the finger? Hmmmm....
     
  19. Buck Melanoma

    Buck Melanoma Guest

    Ratings:
    +408
    A match?
     
  20. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    I'm pretty sure common sense should come into play here.

    Some fan running around cheering for his team in ways that are possibly more boisterous than other fans' likings shouldn't be prosecuted.

    Some douchebag flipping people off and instigating arguments and fights, however, should not be protected by the 1st amendment.

    I'm not saying people should be arrested for altercations that aren't physical, of course. I'm just saying the 1st amendment shouldn't come into play for that type of matter.

    I'm pretty sure whenever the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" scenario is mentioned the implication is that there really is no fire and some douchebag is just yelling fire because he/she thinks it's funny.

    At least that's how I've always interpreted it.
     
  21. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    I didn't say they were the same actions, but the same concept still fits.

    Someone is using his "freedom of speech" to create unnecessary commotion. In one instance, some idiot is yelling fire creating panic. In the other instance, some idiot is flipping other fans off instigating a fight.
     
  22. HEXEDBOLT

    HEXEDBOLT Don't like it, lump it!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,278
    Ratings:
    +1,886
    A match would be a horses *** and his face.
     
  23. turbo_turtle

    turbo_turtle In Disguise

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,685
    Ratings:
    +890
    My opinion again. If again: If the Chargers fan at the Q would Give the Finger to all the Raider fans for instance, the Chargers fan would be thrown into jail quicker than the Raider Fan doing the Same thing at the Q. To me there is a double standard and should not be what so ever, treat both the same way. Devils Advocate here, Any Rival Fan going to a Game at the Q can have the Chargers fan be considered being Belligerent due to them Cheering for the Chargers at their home Stadium. It can be interpreted as inciting Violence against them. I know stupid but it is possible.

    The fire thing you said here I agree with 100%.
     
  24. socaldelmar

    socaldelmar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Ratings:
    +20
    Forget everything else that was said, it's really not worth the time, but what kind of man bites another man? A motion should be filed to have his 'man card' removed.

    I bet he has pet badgers, too :eek:
     
  25. Pointyearedog

    Pointyearedog I only put idiots on ignore...

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,341
    Ratings:
    +1,729
    What if you were on fire and giving the middle finger salute, would that count?
     
  26. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    I agree with this, but this isn't really the issue I'm arguing. Obviously whatever rules are in place should be enforced equally whether it's a Chargers fan or the other team's fan.

    Again. Common sense should come into play and it's not (or at least shouldn't be) the call of the other fan. I can't go to court and sue you off "he said/she said" so I agree that a fan shouldn't be ejected for that same reason.

    That being said, if Qualcomm security determines that somebody was instigating fights via middle fingers and derogatory insults then that shouldn't be protected by the 1st amendment in my opinion.

    That's not to say it shouldn't be able to be thrown out if Qualcomm security cannot prove their case that the fan being thrown out was warranted (because they can't prove that his/her actions truly incited any commotion or fight)....I just don't think it should be thrown out on the grounds of 1st amendment rights.
     
  27. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    I rarely, if ever, fight. If I'm fighting I'm fighting in self defense. If I'm defending myself I'll do whatever it takes to protect my health. That includes, but is not limited to, biting and kicking another guy in the balls.

    **** all these unwritten rules. If I'm defending myself all gloves are off.

    That being said, as I said, I only fight if I'm backed into a corner and have absolutely no other choice. Because I'll also violate the so-called "man rules" and run away from a fight if it's an option. There are precious few things in this world worth fighting over.
     
  28. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,108
    Ratings:
    +2,928
    Technically what your suggesting is that INCITEMENT can not be protected. And the courts have carved an exception for this out of the first amendment. However its a very very limited exception, much the same as obscenity is not free speech (but that's even harder to prove that its obscenity). I don't think the bird constitutes incitement but I'm not sure. And the claim its fine until it gets personal is a dangerous standard that could not be followed. Let's not forget that repugnant assholes like the Nazi Party and the Westboro Cult have had their right to free speech protected, so it takes something more then being offended or even speech that's offensive to constitute incitement
     
  29. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,291
    Ratings:
    +4,401
    Does that include hair pulling?.......... #imjustasking ;)
     
  30. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,200
    Ratings:
    +2,407
    If necessary, yes.

    That being said, I can think of many things more effective than hair pulling so that would probably only occur if it's needed to get the attacker's head away from my body or maybe better position it for a punch.
     

Share This Page