NFL endorses criminal-justice reform bill in the midst of anthem debate

[Eleazar]

NFL endorses criminal-justice reform bill in the midst of anthem debate

By Karoun Demirjian and Beth Reinhard
The Washington Post
October 16



The National Football League, still in political crosshairs over whether players should take a knee during the national anthem, is throwing its weight behind another cause in Washington’s debate over racial inequality: criminal justice reform.

The NFL’s spokesman said on Monday that the league has decided to endorse a bipartisan bill to reduce mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenders, eliminate “three-strike” provisions that require life sentences and give judges more latitude to reduce sentences for certain low-level crimes.

“We felt that this was an issue over the last months, as we have continued to work with our players on issues of equality and on issues of criminal justice reform, that was surfaced for us, and we thought it was appropriate to lend our support to it,” NFL spokesman Joe Lockhart said Monday during a conference call with reporters.

The owners appear to be seeking middle ground between football players and their critics during a heated national debate over the growing phenomenon of players kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality and racial inequality. It is not clear what effect the NFL’s effort will have on that debate — or on President Trump, who has fueled much of the vitriol against kneeling players through his personal and official Twitter accounts.

...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/power...=.1f86c6a1bf32

So, hoping to curry favor with the players who are kneeling, the NFL is endorsing a piece of soft-on-crime legislation. The optics of that are amusing.

Goodell's winking and nodding at the kneeling players will probably just encourage them to take it further, not make them respect the country again. The NFL will not be better off for bowing to them. Look at Mizzou.

The NFL doesn't seem to understand what's happening here at all. Fans do not want the NFL to be political. Fans are not going to be amused by Roger Goodell wading into politics. ESPN has already made this mistake by becoming another politicized media outlet... it's fascinating that Goodell thinks the way to resolve the fan ire over this conflict is to make the NFL more political.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

That's true.

How much you wanna bet the fans can make the NFL show respect for the flag?

People forget that the NFL NEEDS the fans more than vice versa.

Sure we hard core fans are almost always going to watch but the fall in ratings and the pissed off people burning season tickets resonates louder than the guys kneeling and refusing to even discuss their reasons.

Kap refused to vote for ****s sake.

The whole narrative is bullshit and the players are playing the fans against a cause that is neither unified or consistent.

Bad ****ing strategy.

Its almost like people forgot about the fallout from the Baseball strike and how long it took to get the fans back.

Meh. Like you said, hardcore fans are going to watch regardless. Let's not forget that the NFL has been dealing with a drop in ratings for many years straight. I don't think the fans angry at the anthem protests have anything close to the leverage they think they do. The majority don't care enough to change their actual viewing habits. Idiots burning season tickets have already paid for those tickets.

In reality, the majority of the NFL's income is through their television deals. A few years ago, the NFL signed deals with networks for the next 9 years. So their income over that time period isn't much affected by the current dip in ratings. They're still by far the most powerful sports entity.

As Forbes pointed out earlier this year, a substantial chunk of the league revenue comes from rights fees paid by television networks. The NFL signed nine-year deals with Fox FOX, +1.14% , CBS CBS, +0.81% and NBC CMCSA, -0.26% at the start of the 2014 season. Together, the contracts pay the league over $3 billion a season. ESPN DIS, -0.48% pays $1.9 billion a year to broadcast NFL games, according to Fox Business.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the...ues-2016-07-01

[bigjosh]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

You don't think there are victims of drug abuse? Seriously?

Do you have any idea the absolute mess that Meth has made of communities?

Are you aware the all time murder rate high in this country was caused by the crack epidemic? Do you think if crack had been legal that wouldn't have happened? Horseshit.

No there are no victims of drug abuse.

There are victims of murder.
There are victims of theft.
There are victims of robbery.
There are victims of assault.

There is no such thing as a victim of drug abuse. One person decided to willingly do drugs.

There are alot of "crimes" on the books that have no victim. "Sodomy" laws. Prostitution laws. Drug use is only one part of the problem.

There is no direct correlation of the "crack epidemic" causing higher murder rates. Perhaps prohibition of the substance lead to the formation of street gangs and organized crime, just like a hundred years ago when they made alcohol illegal on a whim.

If there is a market for something, someone will sell it. If it is illegal, then there will be blood spilled for it instead of it being available in a store.

[bigjosh]

Originally Posted by Fish

Meh. Like you said, hardcore fans are going to watch regardless. Let's not forget that the NFL has been dealing with a drop in ratings for many years straight. I don't think the fans angry at the anthem protests have anything close to the leverage they think they do. The majority don't care enough to change their actual viewing habits. Idiots burning season tickets have already paid for those tickets.

In reality, the majority of the NFL's income is through their television deals. A few years ago, the NFL signed deals with networks for the next 9 years. So their income over that time period isn't much affected by the current dip in ratings. They're still by far the most powerful sports entity.

Not to mention, with the internet boom, these broadcast companies have not been able to keep up with the times.

I live in new england, and because of internet availability, I have not seen a single patriots game aside from the opening night. I dont watch on CBS or Fox anymore. I watch on pirated streaming sites because I would rather watch the chiefs and not the ****ing pats, dolphins, jets, and giants every ****ing week.

I am contributing to the ratings dip, because i refuse to pay directv 300$ a year and be mandated to have sattelite tv to watch my favorite team.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by bigjosh006

No there are no victims of drug abuse.

The cartels say hi. The people killed every day in violence over drug sales territory, distribution, theft say hi. The friends and loved ones of the deceased and incarcerated drug addicts and distributors say hi as do those of the innocents caught in the crossfire.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Cochise

Posturing for the labor agreement or not, it's beyond foolish. Encouraging the players who are kneeling will only cause more disrespect, and the league itself becoming a political body will turn even more people off.

Wade into "social justice" and see what happens, Rog

I agree 100%, but it has become painfully obvious I am no longer in the target market for these ****ers.

Back to my original premise though, there is no doubt in my mind that this was purely a calculated course of action as opposed to a paradigm shifting listening meeting.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by bigjosh006

Yeah, and it is working as well as when the US decided to "free the Iraqi people" or "eradicate terrorism" or "prohibit alcohol" or "stop drug abuse"

All of this shit is a farce.

Mandatory minimum sentencing is a sham.

Neighborhood policing is a sham.

Crime with no victim, by definition, is not a crime.

Ha! Keep putting them in jail I say. If ya can't do the time, don't do the crime!!

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

The reason our prisons are overflowing is because of the countries continuous moral decline.

We have become more liberal and more immoral over time. That's just a fact.

Liberals want to put it all on the justice system and that's bullshit. I'm not saying it doesn't need improvement but that's not the number one cause. Its just another liberal excuse that basically absolves blame.


The absolute decline of the nuclear family and 2 parent households is a much bigger issue.

I never said anything about absolving blame. It's the degree of punishment versus minor offenses and what any involvement in the criminal justice system does that's created a multitude of problems.
I agree that two parent households are the very best way for our society to thrive. The CJS, as it is, has done as much as anything else to create the problem of single parent households living in poverty, off of the system with declining moral guidance.
My god man, we all want two parent household. But we're taking (usually) the father away for minor drug offenses, making it almost impossible to get proper representation due to the cost, and putting them into a system designed to profit from it all. This is the USA, we live for profit. If nothing is changed the the damage to our society will continue to snowball.
You should be outraged, we all should.

[BigRichard]

Originally Posted by vailpass

The cartels say hi. The people killed every day in violence over drug sales territory, distribution, theft say hi. The friends and loved ones of the deceased and incarcerated drug addicts and distributors say hi as do those of the innocents caught in the crossfire.

Drugs are not a victim less crime but if all drugs were legal we would probably have a lot less drug trafficking and by extension a lot less of the violence over drugs I would think. You might be trading one issue for another but I would think the violence would definitely decrease if you made drugs readily available and cheap.

I also don't believe the NFL should be getting into politics. It is just going to piss off more people.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by stumppy

Riiight, because life in the USA was soooo dangerous back in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
Look, the approach you seem to be fine with doesn't work. One conviction for a minor drug offense can ruin lives, tear families apart, removes breadwinners from families and leaves them in ruins. With little hope of climbing out of poverty and having a good life.
The main reason our prisons are overflowing has more to do with the incarceration for profit system we have now than justice.

So don't do the crime. Problem solved.

And if somebody's making a buck by saving many bucks, AND getting shitty people off the streets, I'm all for it. I'm sorry you want shitty people on the streets. And drug dealers are shitty people. Or do you want to argue that point too?

[bigjosh]

Originally Posted by vailpass

The cartels say hi. The people killed every day in violence over drug sales territory, distribution, theft say hi. The friends and loved ones of the deceased and incarcerated drug addicts and distributors say hi as do those of the innocents caught in the crossfire.

Cartels wouldn't exist without prohibition.

drug sale territory wouldn't exist without prohibition.

Murder has a victim, it is a crime. it is not a "drug crime"

Theft has a victim, it is a crime. "not a "drug crime"

People who have lost friends and family members to addiction, albeit sad, are not victims of any crime.

People choose drugs. When people want drugs, drugs are going to be available. If drugs arent available through legal channels, an unregulated black market will be made available. When there are unregulated black markets available, competition between said black markets will drive up the actual crime rates.

The war on drugs is a failure, just like prohibition, the war on crime, the war on poverty, and the war on gangs.

all of these wars on "societal issues" have been an abject failure, and have caused more harm than good.

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

So don't do the crime. Problem solved.

And if somebody's making a buck by saving many bucks, AND getting shitty people off the streets, I'm all for it. I'm sorry you want shitty people on the streets. And drug dealers are shitty people. Or do you want to argue that point too?

Nice try....not really, at projection.
Move the goal posts much? I didn't say a ****ing thing about drug DEALERS.

[bigjosh]

Originally Posted by stumppy

Nice try....not really, at projection.
Move the goal posts much? I didn't say a ****ing thing about drug DEALERS.

yeah, I have noticed that he interjects thoughts that have nothing to do with your original point.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

And drug dealers are shitty people. Or do you want to argue that point too?

Yes, I would actually.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

Yes, I would actually.

By all means, proceed.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by BigRichard

Drugs are not a victim less crime but if all drugs were legal we would probably have a lot less drug trafficking and by extension a lot less of the violence over drugs I would think. You might be trading one issue for another but I would think the violence would definitely decrease if you made drugs readily available and cheap.

I also don't believe the NFL should be getting into politics. It is just going to piss off more people.

I'm going to guess that the street gangs and drug dealers that currently have devoted their lives to running this particular criminal enterprise would not all of a sudden enroll in college if it were gone. They'd simply take to other types of crime.