Skip to comments.Court upholds pat-down searches at 49er games
Posted on 07/18/2007 10:38:08 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
A state appeals court swatted down a challenge by two San Francisco 49ers fans to pat-down searches at the team's stadium Tuesday, saying they tacitly agreed to be checked when they bought their season tickets.
The National Football League ordered the searches at all games as an anti-terrorism measure starting in 2005, three years after Super Bowl spectators were first subjected to pat-downs. The policy has survived all legal challenges.
Tuesday's 2-1 ruling by the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco sidestepped the plaintiffs' accusation that the searches were an invasion of privacy. Instead, the court said fans waive their right to privacy when they show up for the games after learning about the searches.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
In most cases I agree. However, I did see one particularly attractive young woman get a lengthy pat down at the airport one time by a security guard. haha!
In San Francisco, the men will love this!
I’m all for this. As a Colts season ticket holder (and Indy 500 attende) I’m more than happy to submit to this given that the second largest Mosque in the country is just 15 miles down the road in Plainfield.
Agreed. But then again, there are people who would say we feel that way because we live in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts...:)
Gonna start at the malls too. And WalMart. Restaurants? Grade school? I mean you consented to being searched by going to these public places, right?
“Gonna start at the malls too.”
And remember the states where the mall managements post signs banning a CCW from carrying in the mall. I will not patronize those malls.
One more reason why I don’t go to this type of stuff much anymore. I hate the presumption of guilt.
Malls are from a legal standpoint completely different than “downtown”. However comma there is no smoking allowed, as it is a “public place”. I have always taken that to mean that a concealed weapon held by an otherwise law-abiding citizen is perfectly fine. It’s a public place, after all.
I thought Tampa Bay shot theirs down. searching ...
The gay security guards get a free shot at finding a potential new boyfriend.
If you don’t like it turn on the tv and stay home. The way around this for the NFL is to make sure private security firms do this. The constitution only applies to searches by government officials.
I wonder if a store could implement a “pat-down” policy and pass this same court challenge? Or is a store “too public” to get away with this?
It’s a good way for a security guard to get a broken nose. When I go to a store that doesn’t allow weapons I ignore the signs, if they don’t like it they can ask me to leave. I’ll gladly leave taking my money with me. If I conceal properly they don’t know I’m carrying.
I have seen these prohibitions in South Carolina.
I believe the SC statutes are written to allow businesses to prohibit CCW. Your state or experience maybe different.
It seems only malls do this as most other single shop businesses want the security from the CCW. The mall management on the otherhand does not endure any of the physical risk, they’re offsite. Only the store merchants face the potential perps. Very unfair.
Hey. I moved to Florida partially for this reason.
I wonder how much this type of situation contributes to online shopping..
I have to find a place to park after wending through cell-phone infested highways and spending way too much on fuel to justify a trip to the mall. Hell, I’ll just sit here barefoot and order what I want and have it delivered to my door.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.