Guns in Wa. stadiums

[haugenna]

While we're at it, why not ban guns in movie theaters? Farmers markets? Convention centers?

The sky is falling mentality on here is laughable.  You correlate the environment at a stadium to that of a convention center, farmers market, and movie theater?  When was the last time you went to either of the above and saw 1-200 law enforcement officers and security watching the crowd or had to go through a bag check at these locations?  Stadiums are not soft targets. 

Most of us have been to a NFL game and have seen the stupidity of some "adults" in this environment.  There is a lot of alcohol consumed at these games and the last thing the gun community needs is some irresponsible gun owner bringing us all down.  Whether we like it or not, they represent us, especially when slanted by MSM.   

Why would anyone want to give money to an organization like the Seattle Seahawks whose owners are dead against our 2nd Amendment?

I do agree with Bob33 that the danger is outside the stadium but that could be said for your favorite watering hole, which also prohibits firearms. 
 

[EmeraldBullet]

I wasn't talking about a pistol on the hip when I used the words "over-the-top".  I think you've seen some of the firearms in pics that I'm talking about and they have nothing to do with carrying for personal protection.

Fair enough, but my between the lines point I suppose, is that on the wetside, people don't feel comfortable around you when you open carry, holstered. There's no chance this bill passes.

As for weather or not concealed carry should be allowed in stadiums, I would support the bill more if the requirements to get a concealed carry were more stringent. Like if a safety or proficiency test were required. As it is, you pay a fee and if you have a clean record you pass. Not sure that's enough imo to change the way it is now. It is true our gun rights are being violated in a sense, especially when we have to walk back to our vehicles unarmed. But, if the bill passes that's taking away the rights of the people leasing the stadiums. Either way someone will be losing a right. I'm glad this bill is out there because this is an important discussion to be had. I am still figuring out how I feel overall, I see valid points from both sides.

[pianoman9701]

Apparently the level of security has been sufficient to keep shootings out of stadiums.  Unless someone can show evidence to the contrary, the need to protect yourself from others with guns at stadiums doesn't appear to be a problem.

For those who believe their rights are infringed by not being able to carry in the stadium, I'm guessing you're the same people who get rankled about any type of infringements; controls on automatic weapons and high capacity guns, for instance.  You showed that by the over-the-top display of guns in Starbucks a few years back.  Shall we assume you want to make sure your rights are protected from these high capacity and automatic gun infringements in stadiums as well?

If you're concerned about the inability to carry on the way from your vehicle to the stadium and back maybe you should start a business next to the stadium where you check guns in/out for a fee.  How about parking closer to the stadium?  How about staying home if you can't pack inside the stadium?

There have been mass shootings and killings at stadiums in other countries, countries which have stricter gun laws and higher security at the events than we. With ISIS and Al-Shabaab ramping up terror on US soil, I suggest it's not unreasonable to expect such an attack on our soil in the future. We haven't had a nuclear terror attack here in the US either. Does that mean it won't happen? No. I don't carry a firearm anywhere expecting trouble and the overwhelming evidence says it will never happen. I've never been in a gun battle but I ongoingly attend firearms and defense courses if that unlikely possibility becomes a reality.  For the thousands of Americans each day who fend off crime with a personal firearm, they're really glad they had it and used it. There are not thousands of stories each day about defensive shootings that went wrong and you know if there were, we'd hear about it. Concealed carriers are an exceptionally conscientious and law-abiding group of people.

As far as staying home is concerned, I do a lot. I avoid dangerous situations, cross the street when I'm uncomfortable, and don't walk down dark alleys. I rarely go to malls and always disobey their gun policy when I do. I don't go to movie theaters. It's not that I'm scared. I don't want to cause myself to be in a defensive shooting situation. I'm not under the impression my rights are being denied when a private business enacts an anti-gun policy. I may not award them with my business, but that's another discussion. But the stadium is publicly owned. If I'm out in public, I'm carrying and I should be able to carry on any piece of property that the public owns and or pays taxes on to keep and maintain. It also means that I'm able to protect family and me going to or from the event, as well, where there isn't a police presence on the street. Your comment about starting a business next to the stadium is absurd in the least, Band. There are hundreds of large scale events each year all over the country where concealed carry is allowed. There aren't any drunken fights that turn bad or arguments which turn deadly. I will turn your early statement around and say unless you can prove to the contrary, there's no elevated danger level from law-abiding citizens carrying at major crowd events, or anywhere else for that matter.

[huntingbaldguy]

Gosh where to begin.

No law or other rule says that its your responsibility to defend you and mine to defend me.  Simple fact of life, I don't know you from Adam.  Because of that you are just as much an unknown factor as the other shooter in the stadium, therefore my target.  You've already made one mistake by assuming that you were only one carrying a firearm.  What other mistake will you make?  Your assumption is because I don't endorse this change that I won't participate in it.  Again your mistake.  What is your plan, how will you identify yourself to all the other CPLs as a good guy?  How do you identify yourself to law enforcement as a non threat? You are right about one thing, that is that  I give no credit to anyone I don't know personally when it comes to firing into a crowd and defending myself and my family.  Would you be trusting of me in that same scenario considering we've never met?

If i'm your target then you shouldn't be carrying.  It's simple threat evaluation.  Am i posing a threat and firing shots?  Not to anyone but the shooter and not unless i have a shot and no one else is in my line of fire.  You're telling me that you won't be able to judge where shots are coming from and you're going to just start shooting at anyone you see holding a gun?  You're the person you're speaking out about, not me.

And would i trust you? I dunno, did you walk into a stadium, pull your gun out and start shooting people?  Did you fire first?  Are people running away from you?  Do you have a crazed murderous look in your eyes?  Are you hiding and awaiting an opportunity to either flee or defend yourself if need be, like i am, or are you running into the crowd firing shots like a suicidal maniac might be?  Did you pull your gun out as a first reaction and start aiming it at every Tom Dick and Harry that ran past you?  So many factors to me trusting you, but i'd like to think i would if you and i looked around, assessed the situation, and seemed to come to the same conclusion on what was going on, even if we just gave each other a look like, crap, what do we do, and even if i'd never met you... but if you want to judge me and shoot me while my mind is on the real threat, what can i do about it... that's on you.

I can guarantee you i'm not going to be the one shooting into a crowd.  I can guarantee you that my gun won't be pointed at anyone i'm not willing to shoot.

[EmeraldBullet]

The last two posts by HBG and Paino are very convincing to me. But I don't see how you convince the general public that this is the case unfortunately.

[Bofire]

did anyone look up the RCW for defending your self? I bet there are lots of Vets on this site who Have been in "gun fights"

Carl

[pianoman9701]

The last two posts by HBG and Paino are very convincing to me. But I don't see how you convince the general public that this is the case unfortunately.

Lol, this whole discussion is moot. WA will never pass a law like this. Ha! We're just having fun.

[haugenna]

Gosh where to begin.

No law or other rule says that its your responsibility to defend you and mine to defend me.  Simple fact of life, I don't know you from Adam.  Because of that you are just as much an unknown factor as the other shooter in the stadium, therefore my target.  You've already made one mistake by assuming that you were only one carrying a firearm.  What other mistake will you make?  Your assumption is because I don't endorse this change that I won't participate in it.  Again your mistake.  What is your plan, how will you identify yourself to all the other CPLs as a good guy?  How do you identify yourself to law enforcement as a non threat? You are right about one thing, that is that  I give no credit to anyone I don't know personally when it comes to firing into a crowd and defending myself and my family.  Would you be trusting of me in that same scenario considering we've never met?

If i'm your target then you shouldn't be carrying.  It's simple threat evaluation.  Am i posing a threat and firing shots?  Not to anyone but the shooter and not unless i have a shot and no one else is in my line of fire.  You're telling me that you won't be able to judge where shots are coming from and you're going to just start shooting at anyone you see holding a gun?  You're the person you're speaking out about, not me.

And would i trust you? I dunno, did you walk into a stadium, pull your gun out and start shooting people?  Did you fire first?  Are people running away from you?  Do you have a crazed murderous look in your eyes?  Are you hiding and awaiting an opportunity to either flee or defend yourself if need be, like i am, or are you running into the crowd firing shots like a suicidal maniac might be?  Did you pull your gun out as a first reaction and start aiming it at every Tom Dick and Harry that ran past you?  So many factors to me trusting you, but i'd like to think i would if you and i looked around, assessed the situation, and seemed to come to the same conclusion on what was going on, even if we just gave each other a look like, crap, what do we do, and even if i'd never met you... but if you want to judge me and shoot me while my mind is on the real threat, what can i do about it... that's on you.

I can guarantee you i'm not going to be the one shooting into a crowd.  I can guarantee you that my gun won't be pointed at anyone i'm not willing to shoot.

By the time you figured all of that out, the police two sections down has shot you both.

[Band]

There have been mass shootings and killings at stadiums in other countries, countries which have stricter gun laws and higher security at the events than we.

Do you have specific instances to back up the mass shootings at stadiums claim?  And if so, do you have information about physical screening of attendees at the event so we have an apples to apples comparison to the experience in the U.S.?

If I'm out in public, I'm carrying and I should be able to carry on any piece of property that the public owns and or pays taxes on to keep and maintain.

Does that include the courthouse where you might be a litigant in a divorce battle or in attendance at the trial of the guy who molested your child?

[pianoman9701]

There have been mass shootings and killings at stadiums in other countries, countries which have stricter gun laws and higher security at the events than we.

Do you have specific instances to back up the mass shootings at stadiums claim?  And if so, do you have information about physical screening of attendees at the event so we have an apples to apples comparison to the experience in the U.S.?

If I'm out in public, I'm carrying and I should be able to carry on any piece of property that the public owns and or pays taxes on to keep and maintain.

Does that include the courthouse where you might be a litigant in a divorce battle or in attendance at the trial of the guy who molested your child?

Not in a courthouse, but you can check a firearm in before you go in and take it when you leave. There's a much higher level of security in a courthouse than a stadium.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2011/08/stadium-shooting-mexico-soccer-futbol-panic-game.html
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/shots-fired-lakewood-stadium/137231817

I mistakenly thought people were shot in the Paris stadium a year ago. That was a bomb and if you can get a bomb in, you can get guns in. I think an attack at a stadium is every bit as likely as one in a movie theater or a mall.

[Band]

There have been mass shootings and killings at stadiums in other countries, countries which have stricter gun laws and higher security at the events than we.

Do you have specific instances to back up the mass shootings at stadiums claim?  And if so, do you have information about physical screening of attendees at the event so we have an apples to apples comparison to the experience in the U.S.?

If I'm out in public, I'm carrying and I should be able to carry on any piece of property that the public owns and or pays taxes on to keep and maintain.

Does that include the courthouse where you might be a litigant in a divorce battle or in attendance at the trial of the guy who molested your child?

Not in a courthouse, but you can check a firearm in before you go in and take it when you leave. There's a much higher level of security in a courthouse than a stadium.

There will always be a few people in a courthouse who are full of hatred for the opposition in the case they are part of so I would never lobby for the right to carry there.  Not sure it is much different in a sporting event where a number of folks are amped up with hatred for the other team and fans of that team, who are easy to identify with their team's apparel.  Doesn't seem to matter whether the people know each other or not, simply the act of wearing the wrong jersey will get some folks into angry, physical scuffles, which could be enough to begin a gun battle that leaves dead people in the crowd.  Add drunkenness to the equation and the odds increase substantially more.

I've seen some very ugly occurrences between opposing team fans at Seahawks games and I don't trust that everyone in the stadium with a gun has enough sense to keep it holstered when stupid arguments get elevated.  Anyone who can't be trusted to keep their fists away from the face of someone in an argument is suspect for being able to keep their firearm holstered when tempers flare.  My position is that, with the exception of cops on duty, firearms in stadiums is inherently a bad idea.

[pianoman9701]

Again Band, there are plenty of events around the country year round where lots of people are armed. Law-abiding carriers are polite. They understand the consequences of their actions and you just don't see these incidents happening anywhere.

[Band]

Actually, I would submit that you see a fair number of these instances (shootings), many of them unprovoked, happening on a pretty regular basis all over the country.  One of the few places I have not seen them happening is in sports stadiums, where firearms are not allowed and where some amount of screening is in place in an attempt at enforcement, which apparently is working.

Am I willing to promote the right to bring firearms into the mix, knowing that it's just a matter of time before the once shooting-free event is going to have a shooter who wants to make a name for himself by taking out as many people as he can, knowing that thick crowds mean at least one person hit (and potentially killed) per bullet?  No.

If I feel unsafe without my gun in a place where guns are not allowed I might choose not to go to that place.  But my sense tells me it's wrong to allow guns anywhere and everywhere simply to appease those who don't want to be infringed.  Restrictions, wisely applied, can be a good thing.

[Special T]

@Cougartail
I've never been involved in a shooting. I imagine most of the people on this forum never have. Have you?
Are you asking me or Campmeat? I don't think I was spewing any Rambo jargon.
 

Not meaning to single out anybody in particular. Yes, and I hauled tail. The "fight or flight instinct" is huge. Believe me when I say, "You won't lie to yourself about your true capabilities.". Everyone I know who packs a gun and has never been in a actual shooting situation has a "Hollywood" attitude.

Outside of protecting myself or loved ones I personally would never shoot another person. That is what the police are paid to do. It ruins many peoples life to kill someone. Police Officers included.

Numerous times I took people who claimed they would have no problem shooting someone out on the trapline (back when footholds were legal!). I'd handed them my .22 and told them to put a bullet in the head of a trapped coyote. Not one just grabbed the gun and shot it. Looking a coyote in the eyes and shooting it is easy..

I think you have the best handle on this as explained so far.

If you understand your right AND RESPONSIBILITIES  of discharging your personal weapon you would be wise to only shoot it in defence of yourself or loved ones. Even if you are legally justified it would likely cost you a bunch of $ to defend your self from a civil lawsuit. Unfortunately people do not associate shooting a bad guy with costing a MINIMUM  of $20k. If you put it into a dollar context  I think anyone remotely responsible with family would exercise all manner of restraint.  This doesn't even take into account the fight or flight responce you have experience with.

[Scvette]

I don't know what the big deal is on here. Laws do not pertain to criminals, never have, never will.

In a crowd active shooter situation, unarmed people tend to lie flat, get behind cover, or run away from the shooter. In the video's I've watched, clear lanes of fire open rather quickly.

Does a 10 year old know to do that?
Hopefully people are able to move faster than bullets can fly?? Especially the ones who can't see that someone is about to pull a trigger.
I don't like it.

No, but the parent who's with the 10 year old does. Whether it's a cop or an armed citizen, an active shooter needs to be stopped before he kills possibly scores more people. Either the cop or the armed citizen may miss and shoot, even possibly kill a bystander. But killing the shooter ASAP will ultimately save way more lives than standing around waiting for everyone to be safe and out of the way. We're not talking about an armed robbery or a car jacking where killing the perpetrator is a judgement call and may be an unnecessary risk to bystanders. We're talking about lots of people being killed if the guy isn't stopped. If someone's sitting right next to him with a firearm, it stops really fast.

Not sure if you have kids or had kids, but keeping a 10 year old within immediate range to grab/push/shove/whatever towards a safe location is virtually impossible. I guess I don't trust 90% of the people who might be carrying to be educated and trained as to what the right thing to do is in that scenario. That's not the same as an intruder in your house or a carjacking or some other less populated situation. Everybody has all the training they need when they're talking about it via their keyboard. When the crap hits the fan, not many people actually know what to do. That is a real life fact.

So you'd feel more comfortable knowing there's no one in the area that could legally have a gun to try and stop someone who want to kill as many people as they can! So you'd cower down and hope they would let you live....not me,if I wasn't carrying,which won't happen.,I'd be wishing someone else was. I guess that's why the world has sheeple

I think you're missing my point. The concern I have is you've got the bad guy and you've got some amateur hour gun owner start shooting and bullets are flying everywhere. Random casualties in that situation are pretty much guaranteed to happen in those crowds. As of now, if you go to Safeco field, you get wanded or through the metal detector. You have a gun. You can't go in with the gun. Now we have a new law that says you can. Some nutcase with a CWP now walks into Safeco field with his now legal gun and decides to shoot up the place. They let him in with it because it was legal.  Obviously someone could sneak a gun in probably, but now it's pretty much legal to walk in with one as long as you have a CWP.
I can't tell you the last time I went to a mall. I might go to 1 game at a big stadium per year....maybe... I don't like crowds. With all the crap going on in the world, I'd much rather stay out of the city and the malls, etc.  I like to stay in my small town. Friday night lights and all. You know. I am a gun owner, handgun owner, I carry at times, I'm not anti-carry or anything like that.

How many rounds are shot at a bad guy until the threat is done by LEO's ? 10, 20,  64 and how many rounds fly around not hitting the target ?

I guess I feel like if it's legal to have guns in the stadiums, there's more potential for bad stuff to happen, thus increasing the odds of more random bullets flying around. I don't believe that you or I or most people posting in this thread would be able to handle an active shooter situation any better than a cop. Sorry. I just don't.
Maybe I'm wrong, but if it suddenly becomes legal to bring them in, there's more potential for some nutcase jackwagon to bring one in.

So your ok with it then if a bad guy does sneak one in,that you'll rely on a police officer to come save you,instead of having a chance to protect yourself? Stadiums are the perfect place for mass casualties and it'll be just a matter of time,look how many people were killed in France,just think if one person could have had a weapon and at least tried to take the bad guys out,I'd rather die trying than just sit and wait.