Fan thrown out of Rupp (sign)
- Thread starter Jamal Mercer
- Start date
People dont abhor the fabric of our country , they are totally ignorant to it .. you quit teaching history you are bound to repeat it. .
How much longer before people start going to games wearing a paper bag over their head?
I wear one while browsing this forum.
Policy for all Rupp events say they can take a sign or you have to leave. They were within their rights to ask him to hand it over, he was within his to bring it and then choose to leave. They had no rights to ut hands on him, but suing for that would be weak, just like kicking him out was.
They'll be more at every home game going forward. You can guarantee they'll be checking signs upon entrance now or saying no signs allowed.
You'll also start having some at Rupp chant like Bama did if this keeps up.
They'll be more at every home game going forward. You can guarantee they'll be checking signs upon entrance now or saying no signs allowed.
You'll also start having some at Rupp chant like Bama did if this keeps up.
Next time it should be "Please Go Anywhere".
But again, there were clearly signs in the student section they didn't remove. So if they are going to remove other signs, then they probably need to remove those to.
And by the way, have we figured out who this guy is? I think he's my new hero.
But again, there were clearly signs in the student section they didn't remove. So if they are going to remove other signs, then they probably need to remove those to.
And by the way, have we figured out who this guy is? I think he's my new hero.
If I were there I'd have a sign in each hand and maybe a t-shirt. Are they allowed to do anything about the shirt?
The blue coats have always been total a-holes.
Yep, this will devolve into an uglier version of Tubby's last season. Tubby was a good guy who needed to move on. Cal is not thought of as nicely by most of BBN, in my opinion.
So he was willing to put the sign down so that it would no longer be seen …but that still wasn’t good enough?
Funny thing is, WAY more people have now seen the sign because of UK’s heavy-handed effort to prevent people from seeing it. That approach completely backfired on them.
I think the Rupp policy is you can't bring anything inside that might create controversy between fans. In this case, several fans complained so they asked him for his sign. When he refused they escorted him out. I would guess if you had a t-shirt that sparked complaints they could ask you to remove the t-shirt or leave. It's a good policy in my mind. You can't have people bringing in anything they want.
Last edited:
Well thats his side of the story, so who knows. I've also heard he was escorted out because of numerous complaints from fans which there's a code of conduct rule on signs. Supposedly he was walking it up and down aisles
When it comes to a pretty benign shirt, that would be pretty dicey. A sign can block views, hence the complaints but a shirt....hmm, I really don't think that one will fly.
It had nothing to do with blocking views. The policy is you can't bring anything inside Rupp that might create controversy with other fans. Several fans complained about what the sign said so they asked him for the sign. He refused and they escorted him from the building. I don't see a problem with policy.
Totally agree. I'm sure there are lawyers will to push this to the limit if the fan wants to pursue it, free bono.
If he can substantiate what he claims happened...being manhandled by the blue coat and/or security...I'd have a conversation with my lawyer.
Everyone should wear a burnt orange Texas Shirt at next home game.
Pitiful. Cal sucks but you can't say it. Gimme a break.
I worked with a blue coat up at Houston Oaks GC and he was a real horse's ass. I wouldn't doubt that most of them are just like him. Old boomers with a superiority complex. My apologies to old boomer that are perfectly nice.
Whoever ejected that Wildcat for that sign should also resign or go to TX with Cal.
Never saw that before.
It had no #!&%^ type of language on the sign to justify the eviction.
Rather Cal goes to AFH to ruin the Fowl Birds but $Bill won't get busted any more than UNC will.
We had much the same problem with HCBW here @ the Octagon. Once he saw the the handwriting on the wall he gracefully resigned after the B12 tnmt (class act).
Now we got a coach that can recruit v & compete v $Bill👍
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that regulate an establishment of religion, or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights. (Copy-pasted from wiki)
I understand this may not be something you’re super passionate about, but how on earth can you think such a policy is ok for the government to create and subsequently enforce when it is written in our founding document that they are not allowed to do that?
I'm very passionate about liberty and limited Government. That being said, the Constitution applies to the Federal Government, not City Government. I don't think there is anything unlawful about a private venue owned by a City Government restricting the behavior of people visiting that venue.
The Constitution applies to every city of every state. There is nothing in the constitution that says otherwise. Rupp arena is not a private venue. It is a public venue owned and operated by the government and is funded by taxpayer dollars.
The First Amendment is protection against the Federal Government restricting free speech. It has nothing to do with Rupp Arena or the City of Lexington.
I have no idea what the pro/against Cal make up is of Rupp Arena, but I don't have a problem with any venue having policies about what people can bring inside.
The Constitution reigns supreme over all local government. If you believe you have evidence to the contrary please provide it.
You saying the constitution has nothing to do with the city Lexington or a government owned building is wholly unamerican.
i don't care much about having to turn the sign over. it was funny and pretty tame. the arena has vague policies that could cover this situation. if he grabbed me or my family like that without provocation the police would have escorted me the rest of the way.
Rupp Arena has really toned it down from the days of hosting WWF Raw in the 90s where signs routinely said "SUCK IT!" "VINCE IS GAY!" "HELL YEAH 3:16"
It's just fact. The First Amendment specifically applies to the Federal Government. It does not apply to State Government or local Governments. The 14th Amendment addresses State and local Governments. The 14th Amendment doesn't expressly say anything about free speech but does say some broad language about depriving life, liberty, or property without due process of law. I doubt any of that could be used to say the city of Lexington can't restrict what people bring into Rupp Arena. Public safety and other considerations can be used to restrict free speech. If the concern is fights, etc., if people bring controversial items into Rupp, I would think they are on solid ground to enforce that policy.
As I said before the only limits on free speech are those that encourage violence through a call to action. I’ll ask you again, where is it written that the first amendment does not apply to the states? The 14th amendment granted more power to the federal government over state governments following the civil war.
I appreciate the civil discussion but there is no way we will find common ground when you think the constitution, our founding document, is so limited in its scope. Rupp Arena is not a private enterprise and his speech was peaceful. This is something all Americans should be able to agree on, imo.
Completely disagree. If that sign or any sign, shirt or whatever, is displeasing to someone, unless it is about race ,or violates another accepted public standard , the people should have been told to not look at it.. You can't take away from people freedom of speech or expression just because someone doesn't like it what is said.
Show me where is says it does apply to local Governments. It's essentially a contract between the Federal Government and the people. Why do State Governments have Constitutions if the Federal one applies to all Governmental entities?
The civil war established the federal government has authority over the states as well as the 14th amendment. The constitution has no clause in its literature that limits its scope in any such as way as you have proposed.
You can keep coming at me, but as I’ve said before we will not find common ground. You are just as bad as the folks on Twitter who support the state university doing this.
The civil war did no such thing. The Constitution governs how the Federal Government behaves. It's a Federal Government document, not a State or local Government document. The Constitution was developed because of forming a Federal Government. That's the reason it exists. State Governments who ratified the Constitution already had individual Constitutions and still do. The Constitution was written to limit the power of the Federal Government that was being created.
What started the civil war? And what did the civil war establish following its conclusion?
Civil war aside, have you ever heard of the Supremacy Clause? It’s article Vl, paragraph 2 of the constitution and I think you’ll find it quite interesting.
Last edited:
This statement is not accurate. State and local governments are bound by the First Amendment to the same extent as the feds. This is a matter of law that was settled long ago by the Supreme Court.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
I think it is darn-near certain the playoffs expand.
- Latest: Grumpyolddawg
