Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
squistion

Colin Kaepernick Thread and related anthem kneeling issues/news

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Limp Ditka said:

Case closed

Case closed that you can't put your thoughts together into a coherent sentence. :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Higgs said:

Did I miss the part where people questioned his Constitutional rights?  This was never about that.  Nobody ever called for him to be arrested.  And who is ok with wife beating or violent crime?  What a bizarre post this is.

Apparently you did as people were saying in this forum and in the SP that he should be prohibited from doing that even though it was his right to silently protest.

And actually some on the right did call for him to be arrested:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/09/03/conservative-group-said-colin-kaepernick-was-breaking-federal-law-over-anthem-protest/#72c7e6e926e3

Conservative Group Said Colin Kaepernick Was Breaking Federal Law Over Anthem Protest

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has created a debate around race relations, how it intersects with racial profiling by some in law enforcement, and protections under the First Amendment due to his making a political statement by not standing for the national anthem WLP +%.

The stance has been a polarizing subject with many believing Kaepernick is unpatriotic.

No one has said that Kaepernick is breaking the law. That is, until today.

Conservative non-profit American Family Association took to Twitter TWTR +0.96%, and somehow got to thinking that not only what Kaepernick was doing  unpatriotic, it was against federal law.

The AFA citied U.S. code for the National Anthem, specifically § 301, off the Cornell Law website, part of which reads:

C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart

There’s a slight problem with the AFA’s rendering of the code. It says “should” not “must”. It’s a guideline. There’s good reason for this as after all saying that it was against federal law not to stand for the national anthem would fly in the face of the First Amendment of the Constitution and with it, the Bill of Rights.

And while the police chief of Santa Clara Co. where the Niners play, has said that, “Many of us in the law enforcement community have been saddened and angered by Kaepernick's words and actions,” he also said that police officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution. Thusly, the American Family Association didn’t quite understand that part and whoever was running their Twitter account, read the U.S. code for the national anthem, put two and two together and got "anyone not being patriotic and standing for the national anthem should get thrown in jail" and with a conviction would wind up with a felony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, squistion said:

Apparently you did as people were saying in this forum and in the SP that he should be prohibited from doing that even though it was his right to silently protest.

And actually some on the right did call for him to be arrested:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/09/03/conservative-group-said-colin-kaepernick-was-breaking-federal-law-over-anthem-protest/#72c7e6e926e3

Conservative Group Said Colin Kaepernick Was Breaking Federal Law Over Anthem Protest

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has created a debate around race relations, how it intersects with racial profiling by some in law enforcement, and protections under the First Amendment due to his making a political statement by not standing for the national anthem WLP +%.

The stance has been a polarizing subject with many believing Kaepernick is unpatriotic.

No one has said that Kaepernick is breaking the law. That is, until today.

Conservative non-profit American Family Association took to Twitter TWTR +0.96%, and somehow got to thinking that not only what Kaepernick was doing  unpatriotic, it was against federal law.

The AFA citied U.S. code for the National Anthem, specifically § 301, off the Cornell Law website, part of which reads:

 

C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart

There’s a slight problem with the AFA’s rendering of the code. It says “should” not “must”. It’s a guideline. There’s good reason for this as after all saying that it was against federal law not to stand for the national anthem would fly in the face of the First Amendment of the Constitution and with it, the Bill of Rights.

And while the police chief of Santa Clara Co. where the Niners play, has said that, “Many of us in the law enforcement community have been saddened and angered by Kaepernick's words and actions,” he also said that police officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution. Thusly, the American Family Association didn’t quite understand that part and whoever was running their Twitter account, read the U.S. code for the national anthem, put two and two together and got "anyone not being patriotic and standing for the national anthem should get thrown in jail" and with a conviction would wind up with a felony.

I never said he should be arrested.  And being prevented from doing it is not a violation of his Constitutional rights.  The NFL would have been well within their legal bounds to discipline him or even fire him.   You know this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

Second, this is a terrible choice, because the most noteworthy aspect of this guy's protest was that it was NOT influential in any way, either for or against. The biggest reaction I saw was a loud collective yawn- nobody really cared one way or another. 

The biggest reaction you saw is not what a lot of other people saw.  This was discussed on many platforms and caused a lot of emotion on both sides of the argument. A lot of people cared then and a lot of people care now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about you guys, but I'm pretty shocked to see Higgs having trouble keeping up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell me, where in the Constitution would it be a violation of his rights if his employer prevented him from protesting while on the job?  I'll hang up and listen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Limp Ditka said:

I don't know about you guys, but I'm pretty shocked to see Higgs having trouble keeping up.

Better job there.  I actually understood that one.  :thumbup: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Higgs said:

Tell me, where in the Constitution would it be a violation of his rights if his employer prevented him from protesting while on the job?  I'll hang up and listen.

Sure you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Higgs said:

Better job there.  I actually understood that one.  :thumbup: 

I kept the big words to a minim.... wait......a small amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Higgs said:

Tell me, where in the Constitution would it be a violation of his rights if his employer prevented him from protesting while on the job?  I'll hang up and listen.

It wasn't a violation of his rights as any private employer can do that and even those who supported his kneeling acknowledged that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Higgs said:

I never said he should be arrested.  And being prevented from doing it is not a violation of his Constitutional rights.  The NFL would have been well within their legal bounds to discipline him or even fire him.   You know this.

Is there an explicit rule in the NFL that players must stand?  

Hint: No there isn't. 

Does the CBA allow for teams to discipline players for not standing?

Hint:  No (at least as I can tell)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

Quote

5 minutes ago, squistion said:

It wasn't a violation of his rights as any private employer can do that and even those who supported his kneeling acknowledged that.

You just said a couple of posts up:  

"Apparently you did as people were saying in this forum and in the SP that he should be prohibited from doing that even though it was his right to silently protest."

:mellow: Um, well yes...

It was his right to silently protest and it is also his employer's right to prohibit that in the workplace if they wished or to punish him for it if he does not comply with a policy prohibiting such a public display. These rights can co-exist.

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reg Lllama of Brixton said:

Is there an explicit rule in the NFL that players must stand?  

Hint: No there isn't. 

Does the CBA allow for teams to discipline players for not standing?

Hint:  No (at least as I can tell)

Are you serious?  You really think there needs to be an explicit rule dealing with something like this?  :lol:

Hint: Conduct detrimental to the league (which is very much in the CBA)

Don't quit your day job chief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Higgs said:

Are you serious?  You really think there needs to be an explicit rule dealing with something like this?  :lol:

Hint: Conduct detrimental to the league (which is very much in the CBA)

Don't quit your day job chief.

Please explain how his actions were detrimental to the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Higgs said:

Are you serious?  1. You really think there needs to be an explicit rule dealing with something like this?  :lol:

Hint: Conduct detrimental to the league (which is very much in the CBA)

Don't quit your day job chief.

1. Yes

2. Nope

3. I won't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Higgs said:

Are you serious?  You really think there needs to be an explicit rule dealing with something like this?  :lol:

Hint: Conduct detrimental to the league (which is very much in the CBA)

Don't quit your day job chief.

NFL Players Association would disagree with you and your creative solution of using conduct detrimental to the league:
 

Quote

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/02/players-cant-be-disciplined-for-not-standing-for-anthem-but/

However, as one source with knowledge of the situation explained it to PFT, the NFL Players Association firmly believes that the league and its teams lack the power to discipline players who refuse to stand for the anthem.

Unlike the NBA, the NFL has no rule requiring players to stand. And while it’s possible individual teams have (or may adopt) such a rule, the Collective Bargaining Agreement does not authorize teams to impose fines or otherwise discipline players for not standing during the anthem.

As a practical matter, however, the NFLPA realizes that players can be cut for refusing to conform, if the teams are smart enough to avoid saying or doing anything that would suggest that the move has anything to do with not standing for the anthem. That’s surely one of the reasons why the 49ers have made it clear that quarterback Colin Kaepernick can do whatever he wants to do during the anthem. If/when they release him, anything other than a firewall between respect for the flag and football ability will invite a grievance based on the claim that the team cut him because of his activism.

 

 Which is probably why Goodell made this statement re Kaep:
 

Quote

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/09/07/goodell-doesnt-agree-with-kaepernicks-actions/89958636/

There is no rule in the NFL saying players must stand during the national anthem.

Goodell’s comments, according to NFL Network, were as follows:

"Well my personal thoughts are... I support our players when they want to see change in society, and we don't live in a perfect society. We live in an imperfect society. On the other hand, we believe very strongly in patriotism in the NFL. I personally believe very strongly in that. I think it's important to have respect for our country, for our flag, for the people who make our country better; for law enforcement, and for our military who are out fighting for our freedoms and our ideals.

"These are all important things for us, and that moment is a very important moment. So, I don't necessarily agree with what he is doing. We encourage our players to be respectful in that time and I like to think of it as a moment where we can unite as a country. And that's what we need more, and that's what I think football does - it unites our country. So I would like to see us focusing on our similarities and trying to bring people together.

"Players have a platform, and it's his right to do that. We encourage them to be respectful and it's important for them to do that.

"I think it's important if they see things they want to change in society, and clearly we have things that can get better in society, and we should get better. But we have to choose respectful ways of doing that so that we can achieve the outcomes we ultimately want and do it with the values and ideals that make our country great."

 

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Now you clowns are actually saying that the NFL can't discipline or fire him.  Brilliant. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Higgs said:

:lol: Now you clowns are actually saying that the NFL can't discipline or fire him.  Brilliant. :lol:

Yep. That's exactly what's being said. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Higgs said:

Now you clowns are actually saying that the NFL can't discipline or fire him.  Brilliant. 

No, not for that, according to the NFL Players Association. It didn't come down to a court test or arbitration, so we will never know for sure, but if it could have been handled so simply by the NFL, one would think that they certainly would have done so to avoid all the negative publicity. And this was within the NFL's power to discipline him, why didn't they or the 49ers do this easy fix before the season began?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Scoundrel said:

Stupid, sexy facts.

The facts are that the anthem protests were detrimental to the league.  Ratings were down and polls showed that the anthem nonsense was partly to blame.https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2016/10/05/confirmed-nfl-losing-millions-of-tv-viewers-because-of-national-anthem-protests/#6f52b556226c  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Higgs said:

The facts are that the anthem protests were detrimental to the league.  Ratings were down and polls showed that the anthem nonsense was partly to blame.https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2016/10/05/confirmed-nfl-losing-millions-of-tv-viewers-because-of-national-anthem-protests/#6f52b556226c  

Rasmussen? Please. People on land line surveys saying they are less likely to watch games because of Kaep means nothing if it wasn't factored in how much they watched before and then followed up with figures showing those same people actually did tune out.

And Correlation does not imply causation. No proof that Kaep's kneeling was behind the drop in numbers as there were other factors (election year, debates, market saturation) that were also attributable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, squistion said:

No, not for that, according to the NFL Players Association. It didn't come down to a court test or arbitration, so we will never know for sure, but if it could have been handled so simply by the NFL, one would think that they certainly would have done so to avoid all the negative publicity. And this was within the NFL's power to discipline him, why didn't they or the 49ers do this easy fix before the season began?

 

Are you really this dense?  The NFL didn't want to wade into the controversy for fear that it would become an issue with Lefties, perhaps even a racial issue.  What they didn't foresee was that it would become an issue with the Right.  It had nothing to do with not having the right to fine or discipline Kaep.  

The League has very wide latitude with the "conduct detrimental" clause as evidenced by Deflategate.  It is unarguable that the Oeague wasn't harmed by the Kaep protest.  Please don't be foolish enough to try and argue otherwise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squistion said:

Rasmussen? Please. People on land line surveys saying they are less likely to watch games because of Kaep means nothing if it wasn't factored in how much they watched before and then followed up with figures showing those same people actually did tune out.

And Correlation does not imply causation. No proof that Kaep's kneeling was behind the drop in numbers as there were other factors (election year, debates, market saturation) that were also attributable.

You are hopeless.  How about a Seton Hall survey?  You going to dismiss that one as well?  Maybe because their nickname is the Pirates?  You tell me, Squigeon.  I'm sure you'll come up with something.  https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/si/nfl/2016/10/27/national-anthem-protest-nfl-ratings-poll%3Fsource%3Ddam

You're nothing but a partisan hack in here.  I don't think I have ever seen you once deviate from far Left talking points.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Higgs said:

Are you really this dense?  The NFL didn't want to wade into the controversy for fear that it would become an issue with Lefties, perhaps even a racial issue.  What they didn't foresee was that it would become an issue with the Right.  It had nothing to do with not having the right to fine or discipline Kaep.  

The League has very wide latitude with the "conduct detrimental" clause as evidenced by Deflategate.  It is unarguable that the Oeague wasn't harmed by the Kaep protest.  Please don't be foolish enough to try and argue otherwise.

Sorry it is arguable. Under the CBA, per the NFL Players Association, they did not have the right to discipline Kaep. And the NFL could have cared less about what the left thought if they could have stopped the kneeling protests before the season began. And from the initial reaction in the preseason, it was obvious to everyone this was issue with those on the right.

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, squistion said:

Sorry it is arguable. Under the CBA, per the NFL Players Association, they did not have the right to discipline Kaep. And the NFL could have cared less about what the left thought if they could have stopped the kneeling protests before the season began. And from the initial reaction in the preseason, it was obvious to everyone this was issue with those on the right.

:lmao:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Higgs said:

You are hopeless.  How about a Seton Hall survey?  You going to dismiss that one as well?  Maybe because their nickname is the Pirates?  You tell me, Squigeon.  I'm sure you'll come up with something.  https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/si/nfl/2016/10/27/national-anthem-protest-nfl-ratings-poll%3Fsource%3Ddam

You're nothing but a partisan hack in here.  I don't think I have ever seen you once deviate from far Left talking points.  

A new poll conducted by Seton Hall found that 56% of fans believe NFL television ratings are down due to players protesting the national anthem.

Sorry, that asks about people's perception, that is not actual proof that TV ratings were down because of the protests. Still you have nothing that Kaep and the kneeling actually caused the drop in ratings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HellToupee said:

What is the take on twitter about this?

Reaction has been mixed as one might imagine, but since you asked:

The Daily Dot‏Verified account @dailydot 10m10 minutes ago

Colin Kaepernick named to Time’s most influential list, but some on Twitter mock his unemployment:

http://trib.al/Q5PJPsK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, timschochet said:
4 hours ago, The Commish said:

Aren't you a fan of Jim Mora Jr's UCLA Bruins? :oldunsure: 

The Bruins, yes. Mora not so much.

Well, think about it this way Tim.  Harbaugh could be worse...he could be Mora Jr.  Maybe that will help you, though I'm not exactly sure of the sorts of events you're talking about or what sorts of things he's said that illicit that sort of comment about him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Higgs said:

You are hopeless.  How about a Seton Hall survey?  You going to dismiss that one as well?  Maybe because their nickname is the Pirates?  You tell me, Squigeon.  I'm sure you'll come up with something.  https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/si/nfl/2016/10/27/national-anthem-protest-nfl-ratings-poll%3Fsource%3Ddam

You're nothing but a partisan hack in here.  I don't think I have ever seen you once deviate from far Left talking points.  

Yeah...... "people's perception" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Maybe that will help you, though I'm not exactly sure of the sorts of events you're talking about or what sorts of things he's said that illicit that sort of comment about him.

:loco:

The Great Communicator :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, timschochet said:

Second, this is a terrible choice, because the most noteworthy aspect of this guy's protest was that it was NOT influential in any way, either for or against. The biggest reaction I saw was a loud collective yawn- nobody really cared one way or another. 

You've got to be kidding. The old, white guys went ballistic. Kaepernick influenced a hell of a lot of people. Maybe not the way he wanted. But to say all he did was elicit a yawn is ignorant.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Christo said:

You've got to be kidding. The old, white guys went ballistic. Kaepernick influenced a hell of a lot of people. Maybe not the way he wanted. But to say all he did was elicit a yawn is ignorant.

With one notable exception. 

:cstu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reg Lllama of Brixton said:

Do it 

I'll even ignore the easy ones like all the QBs that likely got overlooked on this list that have been donating millions for years.  Suddenly he donates a couple hundred thousand after he gets called out for it. :lmao:

Let's see, how about I start with every legit school teacher in the country. Is that enough or should I move on to military, doctors and scientists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I'll even ignore the easy ones like all the QBs that likely got overlooked on this list that have been donating millions for years.  Suddenly he donates a couple hundred thousand after he gets called out for it. :lmao:

Let's see, how about I start with every legit school teacher in the country. Is that enough or should I move on to military, doctors and scientists?

None of those "influential people" are talked about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I'll even ignore the easy ones like all the QBs that likely got overlooked on this list that have been donating millions for years.  Suddenly he donates a couple hundred thousand after he gets called out for it. :lmao:

Let's see, how about I start with every legit school teacher in the country. Is that enough or should I move on to military, doctors and scientists?

No one likes teachers 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I'll even ignore the easy ones like all the QBs that likely got overlooked on this list that have been donating millions for years.  Suddenly he donates a couple hundred thousand after he gets called out for it. :lmao:

Let's see, how about I start with every legit school teacher in the country. Is that enough or should I move on to military, doctors and scientists?

 I want 1000 names

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Reg Lllama of Brixton said:

 

Quote

 

18 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I could name thousands of people more influential than this clown. 

 

Do it 

:popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squistion said:

:popcorn:

 

7 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I'll even ignore the easy ones like all the QBs that likely got overlooked on this list that have been donating millions for years.  Suddenly he donates a couple hundred thousand after he gets called out for it. :lmao:

Let's see, how about I start with every legit school teacher in the country. Is that enough or should I move on to military, doctors and scientists?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I could name thousands of people more influential than this clown. 

And how many of those challenged systemic racism in this country? Maybe that is why Kaep made Time's list but none of your cast of 1000s did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.