PDA

View Full Version : Court Clears the way for Pat-down searches at Games



darin
06-28-2007, 12:30 PM
Good Call, IMO.



TAMPA, Fla. -- A federal appeals court has cleared the way for pat-down searches of fans to resume at Tampa Bay Buccaneers home games when the football season begins in August.

Tampa-area high school teacher Gordon Johnston had successfully challenged the frisking of fans entering Raymond James Stadium, arguing that it violated his constitutional protection against unreasonable searches. Three courts had agreed with him.

But a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision Tuesday, saying Johnston had forfeited his right to challenge the constitutionality of the pat-downs when he consented to them.

The court also noted that Johnston doesn't have a constitutional right to watch a football game, that he was aware of the search policy before entering the stadium and that the Bucs can revoke game tickets for any reason.

"Considering Johnston's ticket was only a revocable license to attend games, there is in the Court's opinion at least a question concerning whether Johnston had a constitutional right to pass voluntarily through the stadium gates without being subjected to a pat-down search, even if he had not consented to one," the court wrote.

At three games in 2005, Johnston accepted the pat-down searches but told security officials he did not consent.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2918345

Hagbard Celine
06-28-2007, 12:40 PM
Great, we're one step (one terrorist attack) away from having to submit itineraries to the police to travel from city to city. Just like in Nazi Germany! It'll be great having guards armed with machine guns at the local Wal-Mart!

darin
06-28-2007, 12:42 PM
Great, we're one step (one terrorist attack) away from having to submit itineraries to the police to travel from city to city. Just like in Nazi Germany! It'll be great having guards armed with machine guns at the local Wal-Mart!

Fallacy of the False Dilemma!! Yay!

The ClayTaurus
06-28-2007, 01:00 PM
As if it didn't take long enough to get into a stadium already... or that ticket prices were high enough already...

Monkeybone
06-28-2007, 01:02 PM
metal detectors cost too much?

nevadamedic
06-28-2007, 01:18 PM
Good Call, IMO.

Ive worked off and on part time as Event Security at Lawlor here in reno since 97. It's a great way to make 10 an hour and watch a concert. :laugh2: We have been patting down since 97 and weve pulled some pretty interesting things off people even a couple gun in 10 years. They are a good idea, the event location has to provide a safe and secure location for their clients/guests and of course the entertainer or sports people.

Hagbard Celine
06-28-2007, 01:18 PM
metal detectors cost too much?

Metal detectors can't detect the really bad stuff. The stuff that scares the hell out of the government...

nevadamedic
06-28-2007, 01:21 PM
metal detectors cost too much?

We have the hand metal detecters and they don't pick up everything.

Monkeybone
06-28-2007, 03:10 PM
just becasue i wanna bring 'fireworks' or 'noisemakers' to concert/football game, i gotta get violated.

no i totally agree with it and have no prob. if you are stupid enough to bring something like that to a game or such event then you are a RE-RE. and if you don't wanna get a pat down, then watch on TV.

diuretic
06-29-2007, 02:30 AM
If the stadium is private property (and I assume it is) then if you want to enter you have to agree to the conditions of entry. If you don't want to enter under those conditions then you have the choice not to enter. This isn't an intrusion by the state, it's protecting the interests of property owners. This doesn't extend the authority of police past the Terry Stop.

I don't know if the same provision applies in the States but here in Australia a store owner has the right to set conditions of entry. One of those conditions of entry is to allow the store to search any bags you may be carrying (obviously to detect shoplifters). Now and again someone refuses to allow a search. They are then, under our laws, treated as a trespasser (the phrase is "trespasser ab initio" which means they were a trespasser from the time they entered the store - important in any civil law considerations). They're then escorted from the store and told not to come back ever. But the point is that this is part of the store's property rights, it has nothing to do with the state.