... BANNED! - No live World Series coverage in Boston bars

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - ... BANNED! - No live World Series coverage in Boston bars (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 10/22/2004 4:56:41 PM EDT

... What kind of fvcked up sh|t is this?

Posted: 10/22/2004 4:57:35 PM EDT

[#1]

haha. they finally get there and now they cant enjoy the game.

makes sense.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:02:31 PM EDT

[#2]

Thank God someone is protecting us from ourselves!!!!

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:02:56 PM EDT

[#3]

Now they are banning sports on TV? What is the fine? Did this go through the legislature or will the .gov threaten to "come down hard" on anyones liquor license if they do not obey der liberal fuher?

WTF, over?

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:03:41 PM EDT

[#4]

Assinine! Absolutely assinine!!

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:03:50 PM EDT

[#5]

Thank You Socialism

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:04:30 PM EDT

[#6]

I heard that alcohol sales were banned too at the game...

The Curse of the Bambino stikes in many different ways?

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:04:45 PM EDT

[#7]

I...smell...LAWSUIT!

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:05:26 PM EDT

[#8]

Hmmm... banned in bars? How did this happen and how can it be allowed? Bars are a private establishment and TV isn't alcohol or food.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:05:59 PM EDT

[#9]

No no no no! You got it all wrong. What they are doing is banning news crews from doing live shots inside bars to get fan reaction. They feel it just encourages people to act up and could cause injuries inside crowded bars.

Menino meets with bar owners about liquor ban near Fenway
By Associated Press
Friday, October 22, 2004

BOSTON - Alcohol will be sold at Boston bars around during the World Series.

But Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and local bar owners have agreed to concessions to try to prevent rowdiness.

Police will be inside bars to stop overcrowding and overserving.

No long lines outside bars will be allowed.

And there's a ban on television live shots inside the bars. Networks use the shots to get fan reactions to the game.

Today's agreement covers bars in the Fenway, waterfront and Faneuil Hall areas.

Menino met with 25 bar owners after suggesting a ban on liquor sales to prevent violence.

Menino was reacting to the death of Victoria Snelgrove. The Emerson College student was killed when police fired a pepper spray-loaded projectile into an unruly crowd after the Red Sox won the ALCS.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:06:45 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
... What kind of fvcked up sh|t is this?

The the MLB having the government do what it alone can not... boost stadium ticket sales...

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:06:47 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Hmmm... banned in bars? How did this happen and how can it be allowed? Bars are a private establishment and TV isn't alcohol or food.

hmm...how exactly can they enforce this.

sounds to me like they're inviting more civil disobediance.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:13:30 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
... What kind of fvcked up sh|t is this?

The the MLB having the government do what it alone can not... boost stadium ticket sales...

It's a safe bet the games are already sold out, try again.

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:27:34 PM EDT

[#13]

What are Norm and Cliff going to do????

GunLvr

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:28:51 PM EDT

[#14]

I hate Nazis.

Posted: 10/22/2004 10:18:25 PM EDT

[#15]

WTF, over?

Posted: 10/22/2004 10:28:47 PM EDT

[#16]

I"m confused, is this the USA? If not, I want to go hme.

Posted: 10/22/2004 10:31:58 PM EDT

[#17]

i dont think they can do that. I dont see how they can.

If anyone gets fined for doing it.. they will take them to court.. and the person being fined will win.

Posted: 10/22/2004 10:57:07 PM EDT

[#18]

flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

Hey, you didn't gripe about Martial Law during the Rodney King riots, did you?

Besides, WTF, let them stew in their own liberal do-good juices!

Posted: 10/22/2004 11:03:06 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

Hey, you didn't gripe about Martial Law during the Rodney King riots, did you?

Besides, WTF, let them stew in their own liberal do-good juices!

Interesting perspective.....

Posted: 10/22/2004 11:11:20 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
[
Interesting perspective.....

Hey, they keep voting these Nanny State do-gooders in. Let it come home to roost!

Posted: 10/22/2004 11:22:27 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Now they are banning sports on TV? What is the fine? Did this go through the legislature or will the .gov threaten to "come down hard" on anyones liquor license if they do not obey der liberal fuher?

WTF, over?

City Ordinance, after the riots

No, wait, VOLUNTARILY ENTERED COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT to head off a city ordinance...

'Penalty' would probably include yanking the bar's booze ticket...

Posted: 10/23/2004 3:23:40 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
No no no no! You got it all wrong. What they are doing is banning news crews from doing live shots inside bars to get fan reaction. They feel it just encourages people to act up and could cause injuries inside crowded bars.

Correct, they are not banning tv in the bars.

Hoppy

8420

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:12:19 AM EDT

[#23]

Wait a second. So because a cop negligently fired a "non-lethal" weapon into a crowd at eye-level, killing a girl, they are taking measures "to reduce rowdiness"??? What kind of twisted logic is that???

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:25:10 AM EDT

[#24]

WHO CARES !

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:41:23 AM EDT

[#25]

Boston the birthplace of Liberty!

Tj

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:46:55 AM EDT

[#26]

Bar Owners must be a little pissed.

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:53:53 AM EDT

[#27]

Prohibition didn't teach em nothin.

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:55:14 AM EDT

[#28]

Curse of the Bambino.... STILL ALIVE!

Posted: 10/23/2004 4:56:14 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Bar Owners must be a little pissed.

The bar owners in the affected areas worked with city officials to keep TV news crews out of the bars, not to ban showing the game on TV in those establishments. If I was a bar owner I would most likely want to keep out anything that may increase the ruckus and potential damages.

Again for those not reading the entire thread: there will be beer ($3.50- $5.00 for a draft Bud) and plenty of TVs showing the game in Boston. THere just won't be any TV crews allowed in the bars for live coverage of the fan reactions.

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:05:49 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Bar Owners must be a little pissed.

The bar owners in the affected areas worked with city officials to keep TV news crews out of the bars, not to ban showing the game on TV in those establishments. If I was a bar owner I would most likely want to keep out anything that may increase the ruckus and potential damages.

Again for those not reading the entire thread: there will be beer ($3.50- $5.00 for a draft Bud) and plenty of TVs showing the game in Boston. THere just won't be any TV crews allowed in the bars for live coverage of the fan reactions.

Ever been in the bar business?

Ruckus = Entertainment = $$$$$$$

That is why they hire bouncers, lots of em, not just to check ID's, but to make sure everybody gets their "entertainment" (Like WWF), then they are booted while you swallowed $10.

They aint stupid.

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:16:47 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Wait a second. So because a cop negligently fired a "non-lethal" weapon into a crowd at eye-level, killing a girl, they are taking measures "to reduce rowdiness"??? What kind of twisted logic is that???

Did you miss the news reports on burning cars and other property damage?

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:20:55 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Bar Owners must be a little pissed.

The bar owners in the affected areas worked with city officials to keep TV news crews out of the bars, not to ban showing the game on TV in those establishments. If I was a bar owner I would most likely want to keep out anything that may increase the ruckus and potential damages.

Again for those not reading the entire thread: there will be beer ($3.50- $5.00 for a draft Bud) and plenty of TVs showing the game in Boston. THere just won't be any TV crews allowed in the bars for live coverage of the fan reactions.

I feel most on this thread are tad more upset about the loss of 1st admendment rights than if they can get beer and watch a game.

Hey it's not like they are banning your hunting gun.....................

Give an inch you lose a mile!

Tj

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:21:41 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

I'm going to have to agree with your sentiment.

Freedom doesn't give you the right to act like a bafoon and destroy property. Freedom gives you the right to be a free person, and with that freedom comes the responsibility to act like a human being.

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:34:05 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

I'm going to have to agree with your sentiment.

Freedom doesn't give you the right to act like a bafoon and destroy property. Freedom gives you the right to be a free person, and with that freedom comes the responsibility to act like a human being.

Then make the bafoon responsible for his actions and not punish others in order to control the bafoon.

I mean you guys really don't see that banning TV coverage on and in private property as being a violation of YOUR rights?

Why not just make a law that puts a bar owner in jail if his customers get rowdy? Afterall it's the same mind set. Why not just ban television coverage of the entire game for people will be less likely to riot if they read it in the paper the next morning?

I am by no means a supporter of unlimited news coverage especially in a war zone but violating the rights of both news people and private business in a vain attempt at mind control is just wrong on so many levels. Not even taking into consideration that the news cameras only have to wait outside the bar now to get reactions which would probably be worse.

Forgetting the constitution for the good of the majority is the path to communism.

The mayor is a liberal idiot that is taking away freedoms to try to control the people. It's that simple.

Tj

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:38:04 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

I'm going to have to agree with your sentiment.

Freedom doesn't give you the right to act like a bafoon and destroy property. Freedom gives you the right to be a free person, and with that freedom comes the responsibility to act like a human being.

Then make the bafoon responsible for his actions and not punish others in order to control the bafoon.

I mean you guys really don't see that banning TV coverage on and in private property as being a violation of YOUR rights?

Why not just make a law that puts a bar owner in jail if his customers get rowdy? Afterall it's the same mind set. Why not just ban television coverage of the entire game for people will be less likely to riot if they read it in the paper the next morning?

I am by no means a supporter of unlimited news coverage especially in a war zone but violating the rights of both news people and private business in a vain attempt at mind control is just wrong on so many levels. Not even taking into consideration that the news cameras only have to wait outside the bar now to get reactions which would probably would be worse.

Forgetting the constitution for the good of the majority is the path to communism.

The mayor is a liberal idiot that is taking away freedoms to try to control the people. It's that simple.

Tj

I stand beside the Wise One.

(for you morons: +1)

Posted: 10/23/2004 5:53:46 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
No no no no! You got it all wrong. What they are doing is banning news crews from doing live shots inside bars to get fan reaction. They feel it just encourages people to act up and could cause injuries inside crowded bars.

So in other words the government is going to restrict the freedom of the press?

I personally think its wrong to have any restrictions on stuff like that, or alcohol, or watchign the game.

However its apparent that there are alot of

s up there.

Still I think the darwinism that occurs at riots and such should be the proper way to deal with the sitution, rather than restricting freedoms.

Posted: 10/23/2004 6:00:17 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
flame suit on:

having grown up in that neck of the woods and having experienced the savegery of the Boston Sports Crowd, the mayor is simply trying to keep the mayhem down.

Hey, you didn't gripe about Martial Law during the Rodney King riots, did you?

Besides, WTF, let them stew in their own liberal do-good juices!

I like this thinking.

So we really ought to ban all sprorts and alcohol forever then - if only to be safe. We should allow soccer for those under say age 18 but only if no score is kept so nobody feels bad afterwards. And following that same judgement we ought to ban the public from knowing about trials either - secret ones would be just so much safer.

Liberals

Posted: 10/23/2004 6:07:15 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Then make the bafoon responsible for his actions and not punish others in order to control the bafoon.

The bafoon is already responsible. The problem is, when people get drunk, or are in a crowd mentality, they forget they are responsible and commit crimes. Property ends up getting damaged, people end up getting killed.

So, how do you prevent the transition from human to bafoon?

I mean you guys really don't see that banning TV coverage on and in private property as being a violation of YOUR rights?

Yes, I do, and it sucks. It also is a violation of someone's rights to get killed or have their property damaged.

So, what's the solution?

Posted: 10/23/2004 6:11:10 AM EDT

[#39]

More .gov baby sitting it's children

GM

Posted: 10/23/2004 6:22:27 AM EDT

[#40]

Forgetting the constitution for the good of the majority is the path to communism.

The mayor is a liberal idiot that is taking away freedoms to try to control the ~~people~~sheeple. It's that simple.

Tj

Fixed it for you Tj.

wganz
¶

Posted: 10/23/2004 7:27:37 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:
No no no no! You got it all wrong. What they are doing is banning news crews from doing live shots inside bars to get fan reaction. They feel it just encourages people to act up and could cause injuries inside crowded bars.

So in other words the government is going to restrict the freedom of the press?

I personally think its wrong to have any restrictions on stuff like that, or alcohol, or watchign the game.

However its apparent that there are alot of s up there.

Still I think the darwinism that occurs at riots and such should be the proper way to deal with the sitution, rather than restricting freedoms.

I should have edited that statement. The mayor did not ban live shots. He worked with area bar owners to come up with methods to reduce the potential for problems. A fight or injury inside a licensed premise (establishment that serves alcohol) results in a violation that could lead to suspension/revocation of their liquor license and/or restricted serving hours. And NO bar owner wants that! Plus if someone gets hurt inside or in front of a bar because of overcrowding or "excessive rowdiness", watch out for the incoming lawsuits! I'm sure the owners are more than willing to reduce their potential liability.

Edited to add: "Mumbles" Menino is still an idiot!

Posted: 10/23/2004 7:29:03 AM EDT

[#42]

I don't believe this!

Hell, they're contemplating restricting alcohol sales altogether!

Tell me again how the American Revolution began in BOSTON?

Posted: 10/23/2004 7:32:45 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
I feel most on this thread are tad more upset about the loss of 1st admendment rights than if they can get beer and watch a game.

1st Amendment doesn't guarantee a news crew the right to enter private property, though. If you want to express your freedom of expression in front of a TV camera, simply exit to the street, and I'm sure you'll be able to find one.

Sports fans & drinkers: no need for a knee-jerk reaction. This does not affect you. Move along.

Posted: 10/23/2004 7:33:34 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Thank God someone is protecting us from ourselves!!!!

Sadly, it's apparently necessary.

Posted: 10/23/2004 8:11:36 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
I heard that alcohol sales were banned too at the game...

The Curse of the Bambino stikes in many different ways?

I hear you on this one!

Posted: 10/23/2004 8:37:01 AM EDT

[#46]

Sad to say the revolution started in Massachusetts. Maybe it is time for another one!

Stuff like this is what made me move to NH

Posted: 10/23/2004 8:42:45 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Yes, I do, and it sucks. It also is a violation of someone's rights to get killed or have their property damaged.

So, what's the solution?

First of all I would have to ask, "whats the problem?"

Its already illegal to murder and damage property. Have the police enforce the laws, and if they are unable/unwilling to then armed citizens should do what they need to to protect themselves and thier property.

Posted: 10/23/2004 8:59:35 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I feel most on this thread are tad more upset about the loss of 1st admendment rights than if they can get beer and watch a game.

1st Amendment doesn't guarantee a news crew the right to enter private property, though. If you want to express your freedom of expression in front of a TV camera, simply exit to the street, and I'm sure you'll be able to find one.

NO it doesn't gurantee them the right to enter property. I have no idea where you got this from. The property owner should have the right to decide who comes into his business not the government make the decision for him.

Sports fans & drinkers: no need for a knee-jerk reaction. This does not affect you. Move along.

The loss of freedom in this country impacts everyone. The constitution isn't just about guns and any loss of freedom just paves the way for more losses

Tj

Posted: 10/23/2004 9:18:26 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Then make the bafoon responsible for his actions and not punish others in order to control the bafoon.

The bafoon is already responsible. The problem is, when people get drunk, or are in a crowd mentality, they forget they are responsible and commit crimes. Property ends up getting damaged, people end up getting killed.

So, how do you prevent the transition from human to bafoon?

I mean you guys really don't see that banning TV coverage on and in private property as being a violation of YOUR rights?

Yes, I do, and it sucks. It also is a violation of someone's rights to get killed or have their property damaged.

So, what's the solution?

Your question is so loaded that I don't hardly know where to begin. I guess it's at birth by quit rewarding parents with welfare by being single parents or getting divorced. Then re-enforce moral and ethical standards by rewarding famillies that stick together. Enforce the laws that are against such behaviour and not give someone a free ride because liberals think violent protesting is a natural thing. You see it wasn't the ballgame, boose, or the TV camera that caused these people to go nuts like a magical pyshcotic drug that turns normal people insane, it is their upbringing and the knowldege that they can get away with it. Rioting mobs consist of anything but normal people.

There are no quick fixes and violating the constitution simply let's the liberals know they can do it in other areas. It stinks of punish the innocent because of the actions of the quilty.

Ban, ban, ban never solved anything ever for to ban something to be effective one must believe that the people respect the governments wishes. Guess what, a criminal doesn't by definition. In this case to ban the root cause of a riot would mean ultimately you should ban the ballgame.

Tj

Posted: 10/23/2004 9:33:56 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:
[
Interesting perspective.....

Hey, they keep voting these Nanny State do-gooders in. Let it come home to roost!

Amen!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - ... BANNED! - No live World Series coverage in Boston bars (Page 1 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us