OT: Don't EVER run on the field
My first post guys. Try not to beat me up too much.
The 18 year old who ran onto the field during the All-Star game this week could face up to $6000 dollars in fines and a year in jail. He tweeted that he would run onto the field if he got over 1k retweets. His dad was there and both his parents knew about his idea before he did it.
To make matters worse, the security guard he ran into is trained in mixed martial-arts. He surrendered before he made contact with anybody but that didn't stop the guard from body slamming him.
Moral of the story: Don't run on the field... unless you want to be remembered for a week for being a fool and then quickly forgotten as you fork thousands of dollars to the state and sit behind bars for awhile.
Video? EDIT: Couldn't get embed to work for me. Rats.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ieuah1CSMZQ
Link? Link
Fine plus cleaning the bathrooms at the stadium for a month.
When keeping it real goes wrong.
Since when was doing a dare for Twitter points "keeping it real?" That's the most white bread real keeping I've ever heard.
I think you missed the Chapelle's Show reference.
Of course I caught the reference. Just that doing a twitter dare isn't "keeping it real," according to Dave Chapelle or anyone else. It's a basic misapplication of the phrase. "When keeping it real goes wrong" referred to an outsized and inappropriate reaction to some (often mis-)perceived slight. For instance, a woman tracking down and attacking another woman who dialed a wrong number and therefore was "playin' on my phone."
What was the slight the kid was reacting to? And how was running onto the field a reaction to said slight?
I hope this guy visits a lawyer about the the meathead douche "security" guy. He could at least break even for the fines or even have the stadium/Mets pay him a nice little settlement. (I'd imagine he probably would be banned from the stadium for life) He clearly came to a stop and surrendered and the slam was completely unnecesscary. Might be a tough case to make, but these injury lawyers are sneaky little bastards so I'm sure they'd figure it out.
Why not? There's such a thing as an excessive use of force, even if the person is committing an illegal act. If a guy is jaywalking in a mall parking lot, a mall cop can't just taze him.
That might win in court, but gimme a break. The best way to avoid excessive use of force by security personnel is to not go on the field
Also @Indy Wolverine: I'm Ron Burgundy?
I would say that is moderately-to-kind of racist
You just want to take all the fun of being a mall cop away.
I was thinking the same thing. I'm sure he could get a lot more than 6k for the way that the security gaurd handled it.
he clearly had his hands up, stopped running and then was body slammed. That's assult and the guard was not in eminent danger. He could sue the security guard company.
The body slam was completely unnecessary. That guard should definitely be sued.
this is what is wrong with this country today. No one takes responsibilty for their actions anymore. Someone does something stupid and they can't wait to find someone to sue for something their own stupidity set in motion. Seriously, this is just absurd. The security guy has no idea if the kid is armed, intends to hurt someone, etc. The gaurd's job is to secure the kid and get him off the field. Mission accomplished.
Now, get off my lawn!
The kid broke a law. Society has set forth a set of punishments for those violations, and the kid will suffer those punishments. And a security guard doesn't get to add to those punishments, or to violate other laws/standards/rules/whatever.
It's the same reason the police can't beat the shit out of a suspect following a chase; Rodney King broke laws, but it doesn't mean the subsequent LAPD actions didn't ALSO break the law.
This has nothing at all to do with some arbitrary, antiquated masuculine principle (not quite sure what got you there) and everything to do with not being stupid. The kid was stupid. So was the guard. Lawyers will profit.
I am tired of people whining about potential dangers and the need for our various and sundry law enforcement departments to assault us in order to protect us.
If the kid sustained serious injury from the body slam, then I would say you have a good point. I'll agree that the use of force was excessive, but should anyone be surprised by it, I don't think so.
If that's your view, why don't you think the security guard should be responsible for his actions (e.g., battery)?
Care to explain how this would be an abuse of the legal system? The guy is a dumbass, but there's such a thing as an excessive use of force. The penalty for running onto the field is a fine and possible jail time, not those plus broken ribs.
And we lawyers are the ones with the terrible reputations...
It is not "squeezing dimes" out of stupid actions to sue someone who committed a battery against you. Believe it or not most laws actually exist for a reason.
Here's a maxim you might understand: Two wrongs don't make a right. By your logic, once one breaks a law, a private security guard has every right to do whatever violence he wants to his person. So... is it only the security guard's right? What if I'm a bigger badass than the security guard? Do I get to run on that field, and kick his ass once he tries to bodyslam me? I wouldn't be punished for "winning" the fight, by your logic, would I? Because, see, HE's the dumbass for pickin' on a guy bigger then him, amirite?
Yeah, the kid did something stupid. In my mind, the security guard did something equally dumb, and on camera. Like someone said above, you don't get to beat someone with a bat for stealing a candy bar, private citizen. Also, keep in mind, we're not even talking about a cop exercising his duties as a police officer. We're talking about a private security guard here.
call down Zimmerman!
too soon?
I realize he didnt, but what if the kid had a gun? What if the kid had the intent to harm a security guard or another fan in the crowd? To say, "This kid should sue and be awarded money for this" is part of what is wrong with todays society. And Im not an old man saying that, Im 19. If I ran onto a field during a game and got slammed, I would deserve it because I acted like an idiot. Period. This kid doesnt deserve money for being a dumbass
Two things:
1) You are correct he doesn't deserve any money for being a dumbass. He deserves the money because he was the victim of an intentional tort at the hands of the guard. When you turn 21 in two years I imagine you will go to the bar and drink A LOT (like I did), probably to the point where you will be asked to leave by the bouncers (also like I was). Do you think they should be able to physically beat you as you are peacefully agreeing to leave? You were after all acting like a dumbass to get that intoxicated.
2) It's not the like the kid would get some huge, windfall, lottery-style judgement here. The goal of tort damages is to compensate the victim enough to place him in the same position he was before the incident. Assuming the kid is not seriously inujured, he would get his medical expenses reimbursed, maybe a little compensation for pain and suffering, and maybe some punitive damages to punish the guard for intentionally using excessive force. It's not like he gets to quit his day job and sail the world on his luxury yacht for the rest of his life.
I would have already talked to an attorney.
It's unfortunate but true. When the Phillies fan ran on the field a few years ago, he clearly dove to the ground when he saw the taser, but the dude still zapped him as he was laying on the ground there.
Just because he stopped does not mean he couldn't have been a danger to players or security. Maybe he was told to spread eagle on the ground and didn't. Hopefully the tickets have small print that warns of possible injury/death if you go on the field.
You can't contract out of liability for intentional torts like battery. For example, you can't post a sign saying "trespassers will be shot," shoot a trespasser, and say, "well, I warned you."
Some residents of a certain southern state might disagree with you.
"His dad was there and both his parents knew about his idea before he did it. "
He sounds like an only child or baby whose parents just couldn't bring themselves to ever say no.
His mom pleaded with him before he ran on. And he told his father he was going to the bathroom.
Of course he would be named Dylan.
Who are the five best rappers of all time? Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, an Dylan. Because I spit hot fire.
Mom: Don't do it!
Dylan: I have to mom, I got 1000 RT's
As though that means anything whatsoever.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it was a bad idea from the get go, but it takes a true imbecile to believe that just because 1000 people RT his tweet that it somehow binds him to a promise like that.