Okay, so the stadium is a private entity, correct?
Certainly the potential discharge of firearms in a dense crowd, even by police, can be problematic in some cases. Perhaps a friendly and courteous "check firearms at the door" policy might be an option.
Regardless, the stadium ownership is (or should be) at liberty to set firearms policies as it sees fit.
The market decides the rest...
Many stadiums are public or publicly financed. Teams are private organizations who have contracts with the stadium owner. What do those contracts say?
A private business should be able to set whatever attendance requirements it desires. That is my thought but then I remember that the 2nd us absolute. “Shall not be infringed” seems to cover all the bases.
Yes I agree, but also important to remember that the teams who contract the venue also get a vote. I can't see the NFL agreeing to such terms. They know how Oakland fans are.
I agree, so long as they also agree, if they determine not to allow possession of firearms by CC/OC individuals, that they assume full fiduciary and legal responsibility for the safety of individuals who have been so deprived.
It’s not “a private entity” if taxpayer dollars were used to fund the construction the stadium.