Tue Feb 27, 2001, 12:36pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 243
|
|
Re: An opposing view
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim Mills
I have written my legislator urging her not to support any such legislation. It is already illegal to physically abuse a sports official in every state--in the same manner in which battery against anyone is generally illegal. If the law enforcement establishment doesn't enforce what is already on the books, what makes anyone think they will enforce a new one with any degree of regularity or consistency? I dislike incidents of battery against umpires as much as you do, but my role as citizen outweighs that of sports official.
This entire crusade by NASO is a waste of legislative time. Jim, your call for studies comparing states that have enacted laws with those that have not is logical, premature, and useless. Whenever a group sees itself as "doing something" to address a problem, that group never lets the facts get in the way. If a study shows the new laws to have little or no effect, or even to be counterproductive, the typical crusader mindset interprets it to mean that even tougher laws are needed, or more money is needed, "if we are truly going to make a difference." See, e.g., the DARE program.
As a result of these new laws that define sports officials as yet another protected class, some new prosecutions will occur, some convictions won, some civil liability established. The crusaders will declare victory and point out to us what wonderful things they've done on our behalf. They will not point out that the exact same ends could be achieved with laws already on the books.
[/B]
|
Here, here, Jim! I admire your courage to say this. Too often legislation makes us feel good without changing the situation.
P-Sz
|