Thoughts on Cardinals vs Phillies

[GTDawg]

If your reasoning is that "he knew it was illegal, so he deserved it", would you be okay with the Police shooting your tyres out the next time you speed in your car?


If I drove my car on to the tarmac at the airport and proceeded to drive around in circles at the far end of the runway while avoiding the cops, I have no doubt they would be ending my joyriding swiftly and in any means necessary.

If I were going 80 in a 55 zone on the highway and a cop began following me with his lights on and I didn't stop and instead continued to speed through Atlanta, I have no doubt they would be using one of several ways to stop my car.

Do you feel that using a tazer after someone has already trespassed and is continuing to avoid being captured is similar to shooting out tires upon being found to be speeding? Because I'd say the situation is more similar to continuing to speed without stopping after a police officer has already pulled behind you with his lights on.

-------
(a) you think the force matches the threat, (b) you think it will act as a deterrent, or (c) fuck him, he knowingly broke the law and should therefore expect to have volts shot through his body?

I think it is a combination of B and C. If I were to trespass and evade capture from the police in my daily life at any place of business everywhere on the planet, I would not expect the police to let me run around until I get tired cause it is obvious I am not a threat.

There are no metal detectors at baseball stadiums (that I know of). It isn't out of the realm of possibilities that this person has a knife or worse.

Looking at the situation KNOW, yes...it is a drunk teenager who did something stupid to be an attention whore. However, at the time, I'm not exactly sure how you are making that analysis.

The person is breaking the law and evading the police while ignoring obvious calls to stop. In, literally, any other situation known to man...he would be stopped in a similar way. But, at a sporting event, there is some leeway given since drunk people running on the field is nothing more than stupid wastes of time.

You are told not to run on the field many times. There are signs everywhere. There are countless announcements throughout games. Players, coaches, umpires have been attacked in the past. And, personally, I'm all for ending the problem as swiftly as possible.

My personal idea is to use snipers with rubber bullets stationed on the roof. Just go ahead and put a few body shots in to the person as soon as they cross the foul line.

[GTDawg]

I am also interested in looking at who considers themselves a "baseball fan" as opposed to someone that is mildly interested in the game.

Do you watch baseball on a regular basis RD or would you rank another sport higher up on your interest scale than baseball? same with SJ and Melioris.

I believe Shabi, TP, JD, and I all view baseball as their favorite sport and we all hold the same view concerning the use of a taser (correct me if I'm wrong about your interest in baseball).

[sjay2k]

Ignoring the analogies, etc. above - I think this is the most important point. Whether it is right/wrong for police to deter people against breaking the law by way of using force that is in excess of what is necessary to detain offenders.

It might seem like a joke question, but why would you stop at rubber bullets? If deterring people is the one and only goal, then surely killing all intruders would be the best solution, no? I can assure you that there would be no pitch intrusions if such a policy was introduced.

If you need to deter people from invading the pitch, then fines/imprisonment should be the deterrent, rather than gratuitous violence meted out by police officers. Punishment is a matter for the courts and not police (for many good reasons).

As for your question about whether we like baseball -- I'm not sure how it's relevant, but I am a big fan of cricket, which is similar to baseball and also commonly involves pitch intrusions. In cricket (as well as AFL, etc.) the intruder is chased by security/police and tackled and then punished according to law.

[GTDawg]

Why would I stop at rubber bullets? Because me drawing the line at a different point of the line concerning what is "excessive" doesn't mean I'm all for shooting people with lethal rounds at the drop of the hat.

I had a similar conversation with someone yesterday and they said crucifying people on the foul poles would stop the running on the field too.

The histrionics are all well and good, but that is a ridiculously simplistic way to frame the argument. Someone advocating that more extreme measures be taken to stop people (as compared to letting him run until he is tired or tackled) is not automatically calling for the death penalty on a minor infraction.

My specific reason for using snipers and rubber bullets is because you avoid the idea of having to "catch" the person. When someone runs on the field, it takes a few seconds before everybody realizes what is going on. Depending on where they enter the playing field, it isn't out of the realm of possibilities that they could reach a player/coach before more than 1 or 2 people notice what is happening. The idea of using snipers and rubber bullets isn't the excess force to deter people in a scare tactics way...it is to stop them the instant they enter the playing field without giving them the opportunity to reach a player/coach/umpire.

I would like the situation to end immediately with little to no injury to players/coaches/umpires/police/security. Using a taser on the person does that in the most effective way possible. Either that or canine units.

I don't look at it as SIMPLY punishment from cops to scare people. I see it as a more immediate ending to the situation. The matter ends quicker and you don't have cops or security guards tackling someone which is ridiculously inefficient (not to mention much more dangerous for the cops and security guards). It isn't like 4 security guards tackling someone is totally safe and crazy effective at ending the situation.

The fact that it can be used to deter people since they see the consequences is an extension of the above benefit. Because, let's face it, people don't see the few hours spent in the precinct under the stadium, they don't see the conviction, the fine, the community service.

I'm not sure if it is relevant either. That's why I asked for the views of you and others.

From what I could tell, the most vocal baseball fans on the forum all held a similar opinion. I felt that was interesting.