Shooting match

Greg Sankey isn’t happy, people.

Greg Sankey made the SEC’s official position on a potential new Mississippi gun law very clear on Wednesday.

According to a letter Sankey wrote to the leadership of Mississippi State and Ole Miss on Wednesday, league opponents likely “will decline opportunities” to play at each school  if proposed gun legislation turns into law for the state of Mississippi.

More specifically,

Given the intense atmosphere surrounding athletic events, adding weapons increases meaningful safety concerns and is expected to negatively impact the intercollegiate athletics programs at your universities in several ways. If HB 1083 is adopted to permit weapons in college sports venues, it is likely that competitors will decline opportunities to play in Oxford and Starkville, game officials will decline assignments, personal safety concerns will be used against Mississippi’s universities during the recruiting process and fan attendance will be negatively impacted. When similar laws have been introduced in the past, the SEC office has received clear statements of concern from our member universities due to safety concerns associated with the passage of such laws intended to allow weapons at our athletic events and sports venues.

You may think that means the SEC is anti-Second Amendment.  You’d be wrong.  Sankey’s not making a political statement.  Sankey’s anti-liability.  He’s making the only kind of statement college sports administrators make seriously.  He doesn’t want his league getting sued by a shooting victim.

Arkansas backed down in the face of similar pressure.  It’ll be interesting to see if the Mississippi legislature does, too.  It’ll be even more interesting if they don’t.

Advertisements

70 Comments

Filed under Political Wankery, SEC Football

70 responses to “Shooting match

  1. Former Fan

    Wonder if they can get sued if alcohol is allowed when a drunk throws a punch.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hogbody Spradlin

      Ask the guy who got clocked at the Panthers game last year, or the folks jumped by the drunk “lady” at an SEC game a year or two before that.

      Like

    • gastr1

      Funny thing about a drunk throwing a punch is that it very rarely causes scores of deaths, say like a guy shooting from the top of a hotel or stadium could.

      Like

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        All a drunk guy needs is car keys to become lethal. And that happens much more often than some nut with a gun, whose homicidal plans would be thwarted by a “gun free zone.”

        Like

  2. Dawgxian

    Remember how antigun legislation stopped the Va Tech shooter?

    Like

  3. PharmDawg

    In 2004, a couple of gun nuts murdered a Marine lieutenant and a businessman at a tailgate outside NC State’s football stadium. The state of NC paid $25,000 each to the estates of the murder victims to settle wrongful death claims, and the parking lot company paid confidential settlements to the victims’ families.

    Like

  4. Jt (the other one)

    Great point about liability. On one hand I think its an AWFUL idea to allow firearms into a stadium. On the other hand why doesn’t the SEC (Sankey) and the two schools visit with the governor and legislators to express why its a bad idea. Don’t play this out in the news. It comes across as political jockeying…now if the SEC can govern its own conference…but I digress.

    Like

    • Tony Barnfart

      people have been playing out important points in the news since newspapers began. Getting public opinion on your side is often the only way to get a stubborn hard head to come off a foolish position.

      Like

  5. I don’t know the law because I have never had a carry permit, but isn’t it a violation of the law to possess a gun (concealed or not) if you are intoxicated? If I had a permit, I wouldn’t carry it into a stadium, but I have been to games with off-duty officers who have brought a gun into Sanford.

    I agree with JT. If Sankey and his members don’t like it, lobby the legislature and the governor.

    Like

    • I think it’s a safe bet that Sankey was asked to produce that letter at the request of the school presidents. It’s a form of lobbying, if you think about it.

      Like

    • Former Fan

      It would be interesting to see how many concealed permit carriers have been convicted of violating gun laws in the state the permit was granted.

      Like

    • Hill Billy Dawg

      I’m probably late to the party with this, but off duty cops typically carry anyway. Its a non issue. But even as a CCW holder and a pro gun guy…very pro gun in fact…carryon in a stadium is a “no go” in my opinion. Just leave it in the car.

      Like

  6. Mg4life0331

    But how can we pay the athletes and the gun victims PAWWL?……Ill see myself out…..

    Like

  7. Uglydawg

    I’d bet that if we knew how many firearms are taken into games already, we’d be surprised…
    …on the other hand, the fact that a shooting war didn’t break out at the last Egg Bowl says “maybe not”.
    Just because we have the right to do something doesn’t mean we have to do it. We don’t need guns at college football games.

    Like

  8. Just Chuck (The Other One)

    Could a state allow guns at college (and high school) stadiums and ban them at pro games? In Georgia, I can’t imagine the Falcons being too happy about guns at their games. How about the Braves? Same in Florida with several pro football and baseball teams. Should I also mention the NBA? Is it just states like Mississippi where it’s all about college sports that legislation like this would even be proposed? Why is that?

    Like

  9. Ben

    You’ve got to be a five star moron to think guns in a sports venue are a good idea.

    Like

  10. JCDAWG83

    I’m as pro Second Amendment as anyone but guns at sporting events at any level are a bad idea, period.

    Like

  11. Got Cowdog

    Leave it in your truck, Bro.

    Like

    • Macallanlover

      Yeah, I have driven to Athens with a gun in my console but never thought of taking it into the stadium. Don’t see why campus stadiums couldn’t just set up metal detectors if they want to exclude guns on their campus facility, that is their right. If that concerns them about slowing down the entrance time for fans, I feel sure they have enough influential alums to get the law amended.

      Sankey/SEC have no justification for getting involved in telling states how they should govern themselves, we have more than enough interference without adding that. I agree no one other than law enforcement should be armed at games, but some fans are already carrying weapons. Now that this has become a focal point, add the detectors Mississippi, you started this.

      Like

      • Sankey/SEC have no justification for getting involved in telling states how they should govern themselves…

        Of course they do. They don’t want to get sued. Are you saying that nobody outside of a state has the right to lobby local government? I doubt the NRA would agree with you there, Mac.

        By the way, Ole Miss and Mississippi State are part of the SEC, as well as part of state government.

        Like

      • Raleigh St. Claire

        “Sankey/SEC have no justification for getting involved in telling states how they should govern themselves, we have more than enough interference without adding that.”

        Says who? They represent a constituent body who will be massively impacted by the proposed legislation.

        They have a responsibility, much less a right, to weigh in.

        Its fundamentally undemocratic to say that citizens and citizen groups shouldn’t be weighing in on legislation that will necessarily impact the citizenry.

        Like

        • ChiliDawg

          That’s the new right wing for you. Anyone not under the umbrella of their radical belief system has no business getting involved. Naturally the NRA throwing millions of dollars in lobbying for gun companies is okay, though .

          Like

          • Macallanlover

            LMAO, the number of attempts to limit free speech in the past few years in the US by the leftists would fill the bandwith of the interwebs. And not just the peaceful attempts in schools, media, etc., the violent protesters hired to disrupt our society come from your side, komrade. That bastion of freedom in the Bay Area is one of the scariest. It is the radical left, led by Dim leaders and their band of thugs, that you had better be afraid of. Although, I guess the sheep are safe since they have already surrendered to the anarchists. If you consider living on your knees a good, and safe, life we can never have this discussion, that is a line I have drawn and I don’t back down from my lines in the sand.

            Like

            • HirsuteDawg

              Sounds like the Russian influence at work.

              Like

            • Can we agree that there are people who favor the state over the individual on both sides of the political spectrum?

              For every example of political correctness, redistribution of wealth, supposed gun confiscation, I can match with:

              “show us your papers” to vote or even be present in the US
              you will bring that fetus to term or you will go to jail
              of course we can have state employees recite and lead the class in Christian prayer in schools every morning
              no you can’t burn a flag and call it political speech
              police use of force is always justified unless its unfortunate enough to have been caught on tape
              no municipality you will not raise the minimum wage OR control monuments in your jurisdiction because the state legislature says so.

              I could go on and on.

              The fact of the matter is that people on both sides of the political spectrum have little clue as to what the American experiment is supposed to be about. We’re not going to lose our country to one side or the other. We’re going to lose it because no one respects the values the Revolution fought for any longer. What we need to get away from are ideologies, short sightedness and reconstruct a paradigm that respects everyone’s basic and shared freedoms and values.

              In short, if I can, as someone who recognizes their views as being left of center reject Bernie, why can’t reasonable people on the right not reject someone who has been roundly criticized by every living GOP nominee as unfit to serve? I think Code Pink people protesting in front recruitment centers in Berkeley are a bunch of unpatriotic fools. I don’t argue “well, what about those Alex Jones fans” as if somehow fighting stupid with stupid is a winning argument.

              At some point, you have to be responsible for what you support and not see everything through a lens of whether my political opponents hates something or not. Nor is it much of an argument to say: “sure I was pro-Hitler but what about that Stalin guy?” Aren’t they both unacceptable?

              The anti-dote to leftist idiots isn’t right wing idiots. The center needs to hold or we’re all fucked.

              Like

              • Erk's Forehead

                Damn good post.

                Like

              • Got Cowdog

                I’ve typed about six responses to this and none seemed worth saying. Well said Derek. The only thing I have to add is people who define themselves by whichever cartoon they voted for and are vindicated by the lack of success of their opponent are the height of selfishness. IMO it is this very thing that will do us in as a society, if not a nation.

                Like

            • ChiliDawg

              “attempts to limit free speech in the past few years by the leftists…”

              Like the NRA openly advocating violence against journalists who dare seek to criticize the president they paid for? That kind of attempt to limit free speech?

              You have absolutely zero criticisms of “leftists” that I can’t turn around and put squarely on you, exposing your hypocrisy. You live in an alternate reality, komrade, where “violent protestors hired to disrupt our society” actually exist and aren’t just a fairy tale told by the White House propaganda network to justify their overreaches and abuses of civil rights. You’ve inhaled the kool-aid. You align yourself with a side that pretends to be “for the people,” and “smaller government,” but you find yourself taking sides against “the people” in favor of “the government.” Like the good little nationalist lemming that you are.

              Furthermore, “my side,” isn’t what you think it is. I am firmly entrenched in the center. You’re just so far to the right that anyone that’s more reasonable than you looks to you like a COMMIE.

              Like

            • ChiliDawg

              You’re the worst sort of person, Mac – the kind that is equally as bad as everything you hate about “the other side” but too blinded by tribal instinct to see it. You bleat just as loudly as they do.

              Like

              • AthensHomerDawg

                Goodness Chili….chillax. The worst sorta person? That is soooooo over the top. The worst sorta person is that person that wont allow someone else to speak. Have you ever complained about Derick’s tribal inclinations. No I dont think you have.
                Gooodness he goes full bore Duh’Bama and gets applauds. You think he is “transparent” and we can all “have our own view” . Take off your costume. You bleat as loudly as anyone else with that rhetoric.

                Like

            • “Put the piece away, Walter…”

              Like

  12. “There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”
    – Ronald Reagan

    Like

    • Napoleon BonerFart

      Every Communist must grasp the truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party.
      – Mao Tse-tung

      Like

      • Normally my policy is to ignore you because I regret it later when I don’t.

        I would simply retort that:

        1) if you are meeting with another person to discuss the armed overthrow of the government in the middle of a cornfield in Kansas, you’re talking to a federal agent.

        2) if you think any band of homegrown patriots could form to make change happen in this country today, you are a fool.

        3) if you can’t group together and you can’t win, you and your guns have exactly zero political power.

        The last group of armed people that took on the federal government was in waco, Texas a couple of decades ago. Didn’t work out real well for them.

        Personally I don’t like to see schools and concerts and movie theaters spattered with high volume high capacity rifkes because someone has a fantasy that 1776v.2 requires it. It’s not happening and you’re a moron to think otherwise.

        The United States government could turn off all counter revolutionary capacities and give you a two year head start. The end result is that you’ll make the Iraqi army look like a formidable opponent.

        Just as John Camdy’s character in JFK said: “Jimbo the gubmit gonna jump all up and down on your head and sing twiddly dee! Good day to you sir.”

        Like

        • Napoleon BonerFart

          Normally my policy is to ignore you because I regret it later when I don’t.

          Education, logic, and maturity will help you acquit yourself better in our exchanges.

          1) if you are meeting with another person to discuss the armed overthrow of the government in the middle of a cornfield in Kansas, you’re talking to a federal agent.

          Agreed. Especially if the other person was the one to bring it up.

          2) if you think any band of homegrown patriots could form to make change happen in this country today, you are a fool.

          Perhaps. However, after Ruby Ridge and Waco, federal agents appear to have less enthusiasm for killing citizens with anarchist politics.

          3) if you can’t group together and you can’t win, you and your guns have exactly zero political power.

          Not exactly true. Poor farmers in Vietnam and Afghanistan have held up quite well against the greatest army the world has ever known. While the United States is in no danger of being invaded and ruled by the Taliban, those folks can certainly make the notion of foreign wars in pursuit of American empire seem mighty foolish.

          The last group of armed people that took on the federal government was in waco, Texas a couple of decades ago. Didn’t work out real well for them.

          True. Law enforcement could always murder people. Of course, the people having guns makes it harder for law enforcement to murder them. Cliven Bundy had some success withstanding federal law enforcement officials.

          Personally I don’t like to see schools and concerts and movie theaters spattered with high volume high capacity rifkes because someone has a fantasy that 1776v.2 requires it. It’s not happening and you’re a moron to think otherwise.

          Sure. Similarly, it’s ridiculous to think that vehicles need over, say 250 horsepower. Excessive horsepower simply means cars capable of greater speeds, which means greater danger on highways. It’s simply not necessary. It’s inarguable that our highways would be safer with a single line of government-approved engines in cars that are incapable of creating such carnage. But, most people would simply argue that it’s not the government’s place to dictate which tools its citizens can own.

          Of course, it’s also convenient that the Second Amendment also protects gun ownership for self-defense against non-tyrannical threats. So every citizen who owns and/or carries guns need not be an anarchist.

          Liked by 1 person

      • ChiliDawg

        I don’t think that quote means what you think it means.

        Like

    • Got Cowdog

      Do you remember why RR said that? Bonus points if you can name the happenstance of it and the legislation that followed in the State of California.

      Like

      • I got all the points.

        The black panthers waltzed into the California state House armed.

        The act banning loaded weapons in municipalities in CA was called the Mulford Act.

        I’ve always said that if you got a bunch of black Muslims with assault rifles talking about their second amendment rights the NRA would dwindle in influence very quickly. That historical example underscores the point.

        There is a reason that the civil rights movement was non violent. Had it been otherwise they would have been terminated with extreme prejudice and no one would have cared less.

        If you don’t believe me look into what they did to Fred Hampton. Cold calculated murder with zero consequences to the murderers.

        Like

  13. Cojones

    Where are you, Mac? You have an opinion on carry that would be interesting to the SEC and college football in general, don’t you? Can’t see why anyone finds it necessary to carry loaded weapons among other unsuspecting people except those given responsibility for upholding the law.

    Carry cookies, not guns.

    Like

    • Macallanlover

      We are on the same side about needing one at games, as things stand now. But you have to be a damned fool to think the problems with guns in this country is with law enforcement and registered gun owners. You also have to be naive to think those of us who see guns as a necessity to protect our families and property will give them up. Save your breath with your advice, I am not the problem.

      Like

      • Cojones

        Who in hell mentioned giving them up? It’s nice to know that you now don’t want to carry in a crowd (or didn’t you imply that?), but at one time you advocated that, if you and I met in a public place like a restaurant, you reserved the right to be packin’.

        I’m sure that I’ve told you that I have guns and have been around them all my life, but the fear of killing another human being accidentally was placed in my young mind by my father before he let me operate alone with a gun or handle one unsupervised around other people. I was 10 yrs old at that time, but had fired many guns under supervision before that. I possess trophies that I won shooting competitively and have burned more caps than you would ever think possible before you were born. I have no burning fear of my fellow man that would ever want me to obtain a carry license with the only resultant of possibly shooting another person. Since I grew up in the country, there was more opportunity to shoot, but always with a legitimate target in mind. For years after I turned 13, I wore a sidearm in Sowega gator country when fishing (used whenever a gator too large to handle by hand [over 3′] would hit my Jitterbug lure in the dark. My father had a .38 sidearm he bought for law enforcement purposes (GBI), but he never wore it in public and would carry it only for a specific arrest purpose. You don’t have the faintest idea of what other people’s experiences are with weapons or how they even think.

        Don’t be using your skewed perception of others as your excuse for supporting paranoid thoughts about your need for a loaded weapon among your fellow man. Have to go now, son, as I have a rifle and a shotgun to clean before the dirty hordes get here.

        Like

    • Former Fan

      How many people with concealed carry permits have been arrested due to violent gun crimes in the state they were granted the permit to carry? I would imagine that those citizens are probably very careful with their permits and their guns.

      Like

      • Macallanlover

        They know damn well who causes the overwhelming number of gun problems, they simply can’t get over how wrong they are about it. It hits them between the eyes every evening on the local news. Ain’t no way to live, and most the nutcases here don’t live like that, they just can’t face up to the growing problem. An answer like limiting guns for law abiding citizens actually gets supported because they just spout the policy of their leaders giving no thought to how dumb that is. Yeah, let’s turn ours in and leave the arms to the gangs and drug dealers. That sounds brilliant.

        Again, this isn’t an argument about carrying guns into sporting events. Probably 95%+ of the posters here support restricting guns in stadiums, but they divert to the mantra of what the propaganda manuals give them, even though it isn’t relevant. Left, right, left….march on boys, there is much left for you to do to bring down American Satan. That One World idea of komrade soros won’t come easy, every one isn’t like the brainless Tinman.

        Like

        • DawgPhan

          Since the majority of gun deaths are suicides, can’t we assume that most gun deaths are a result of a careless gun ownership?

          Like

    • Napoleon BonerFart

      Many people want to be able to defend themselves and their loved ones. In a life or death situation, law enforcement officers will gladly step in and draw chalk outlines around the bodies of those killed after the fact. But they are almost never involved in time to prevent the violence in the first place.

      I suppose you could throw cookies at someone threatening you with violence. Good luck with that.

      Like

      • Cojones

        And you would prevent it by carrying? No, I’m sure you wouldn’t have any fear of firing back at someone shooting in public and create more innocent bodies for law enforcement to draw chalk outlines around.

        Like

  14. steve

    Something more destructive than a firearm and should also stay in place….red panties….right Damon?
    And BTW, Isaiah Crowell wants his Glock back. Yeah, the one without the serial number.

    Like

    • Got Cowdog

      You want to ban red panties? Screw that. You can have my red panties when you pry my cold, dead fingers from around them.

      Like

  15. Legatedawg

    If these Mississippi wingnuts think that carrying firearms everywhere is such a wonderful idea, then why in hell don’t they allow it inside their State Capitol and on the floor of their legislature?

    Like

    • Cojones

      At one time, that was true in America. Read “Profiles in Courage” to get a couple of stories when everyone could carry them wherever they pleased without thought of regulation. Death by gunshot was a frequent visitor to early Americana and it doesn’t seemed to have flagged at all, just the target has changed color.

      Like

  16. Go Dawgs!

    I wouldn’t have hurt anybody else, but it’s good for my own sake that I didn’t have a weapon at the end of the national championship game. Also, it was good that I was sitting on the bottom level and didn’t have anyplace high enough from which to jump.

    Like

  17. PTC DAWG

    I have a permit, I have a gun in my vehicle, I wouldn’t dream of carrying it inside a stadium full of people, I’m just not that trusting of my aim to hit AU fans in a crowd.

    Like

  18. Tony Barnfart

    There will be a lot of people that fail to get re-elected if Mississippi’s two (already lucky to be here) football programs get booted from the cash cow that is the SEC. In the world of TV eye balls and other demographic based metrics, those two are net-takers as it is.

    Like

  19. Hal Welch

    Awe c’mon… Alcohol, testosterone, and guns… What could possibly go wrong?

    Like