NFL adopts new Anthem policy

[PrincetonTiger]

Just now, NFLfan said:

 

What would you like to see them do? (Serious question.)

The have already done a few things 

   One thing that could be done are things like what the Jets owner, Jed York and the Irsays have done and provide support and understanding 

 

     Adapt or create a Play60 type of program to address bullying and such because change will occur at the earliest level

[NFLfan]

10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Any job I know of, if your boss tells you to stop doing something or do something different and you don't comply, you get fired. In the NFL even if someone still kneels they will only get fined. These guys make million of dollars to play a kids game so just stay in the locker room while the Anthem is playing. NFL Players have it made in life in reality. You lose your job in the real world if you don't comply with your bosses. Tomorrow if my boss told me to stop doing my paperwork the way I am doing it and do it differently, even if I hated the new way and disagreed with it I would get fired if I kept doing it the old way.

 

I hear you but that is not always the case. I once was asked by a boss to do something that I knew was not legal. It was also against my ethical principles. I said I would not do it and explained why. They were not pleased but I kept my job. I knew I was in the right. If I had complied, I could have been prosecuted for something someone else told me to do. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

I hear you but that is not always the case. I once was asked by a boss to do something that I knew was not legal. It was also against my ethical principles. I said I would not do it and explained why. They were not pleased but I kept my job. I knew I was in the right. If I had complied, I could have been prosecuted for something someone else told me to do. 

Well yeah if something isn't Legal of course, but in most cases a Boss isn't going to tell you do something Illegal or make a new policy that is illegal - that would be very odd. If they do they need to be fired. I have never been to ask to do anything illegal.

[PrincetonTiger]

5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Any job I know of, if your boss tells you to stop doing something or do something different and you don't comply, you get fired. In the NFL even if someone still kneels they will only get fined. These guys make million of dollars to play a kids game so just stay in the locker room while the Anthem is playing. NFL Players have it made in life in reality. You lose your job in the real world if you don't comply with your bosses. Tomorrow if my boss told me to stop doing my paperwork the way I am doing it and do it differently, even if I hated the new way and disagreed with it I would get fired if I kept doing it the old way.

Honest Question   

   Would you  not complain if your boss told you to make a radical(unfounded) change overnightt

 

   That is what is loss here

      A few guys protested something for a personal reason which was not against the By laws multiple protests were done as a sign of Unity after the NFL(Certain Owners) made a new by law and admonished the original protesters to try and save the almighty dollar

 

 

    If the NFL had treated the players like people not a cash cow the protests would be a footnote of history

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Well yeah if something isn't Legal of course, but in most cases a Boss isn't going to tell you do something Illegal or make a new policy that is illegal - that would be very odd. If they do they need to be fired. I have never been to ask to do anything illegal.

Some bosses do and morality differs for everyone 

   Even if something is legal doesn’t make it right 

     

 

    Drinking, Smoking and Gambling are legal but I have real moral issues with them

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Honest Question   

   Would you  not complain if your boss told you to make a radical(unfounded) change overnightt

 

   That is what is loss here

      A few guys protested something for a personal reason which was not against the By laws multiple protests were done as a sign of Unity after the NFL(Certain Owners) made a new by law and admonished the original protesters to try and save the almighty dollar

 

 

    If the NFL had treated the players like people not a cash cow the protests would be a footnote of history

Yes I would complain if I hated a new policy of course. Having said that if I don't comply, the only 2 options I would have is either quit and find another job or get fired. That is just the way it is in the real working world. If I told my Boss he was full of Doo Doo and his new policy sucked, I would be out the door.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Some bosses do and morality differs for everyone 

   Even if something is legal doesn’t make it right 

     

 

    Drinking, Smoking and Gambling are legal but I have real moral issues with them

I understand what you are saying but Morality's and Law are 2 different things.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yes I would complain if I hated a new policy of course. Having said that if I don't comply, the only 2 options I would have is either quit and find another job or get fired. That is just the way it is in the real working world. If I told my Boss he was full of Doo Doo and his new policy sucked, I would be out the door.

That is why there were league wide protests for a few games and then most stopped 

   

  There are times where you need to move on

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I understand what you are saying but Morality's and Law are 2 different things.

Not to some

[NFLfan]

10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Well yeah if something isn't Legal of course, but in most cases a Boss isn't going to tell you do something Illegal or make a new policy that is illegal - that would be very odd. If they do they need to be fired. I have never been to ask to do anything illegal.

 

Sometimes people don't realize something is illegal. In the case that I mentioned, this boss was managing a person's money (it was court-appointed). That person/client died but still owed money for services rendered the week before he died. I was asked to go to an ATM and withdraw funds to pay those who were caring for the guy until his death. I refused to do that, as I knew that once someone dies, no one should be withdrawing money from the deceased's accounts. The money is now part of his estate and it has to go to probate. I was told to try to withdraw the money anyway. I said I won't do it. 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

Sometimes people don't realize something is illegal. In the case that I mentioned, this boss was managing a person's money (court-appointed). That person/client died but still owed money for services rendered the week before he died. I was asked to go to an ATM and withdraw funds to pay those who were caring for the guy until his death. I refused to do that, as I knew that once someone dies, no one should be withdrawing money from the deceased's accounts. The money is now part of his estate and it has to go to probate. I was told to try to withdraw the money anyway. I said I won't do it. 

Perfect story 

   

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

Sometimes people don't realize something is illegal. In the case that I mentioned, this boss was managing a person's money (court-appointed). That person/client died but still owed money for services rendered the week before he died. I was asked to go to an ATM and withdraw funds to pay those who were caring for the guy until his death. I refused to do that, as I knew that once someone dies, no one should be withdrawing money from the deceased's accounts. The money is now part of his estate and it has to go to probate. I was told to try to withdraw the money anyway. I said I won't do it. 

Your case would rarely happen to anyone else, that is really odd. Glad you knew that was Illegal. Thanks for the insight.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

Sometimes people don't realize something is illegal. In the case that I mentioned, this boss was managing a person's money (court-appointed). That person/client died but still owed money for services rendered the week before he died. I was asked to go to an ATM and withdraw funds to pay those who were caring for the guy until his death. I refused to do that, as I knew that once someone dies, no one should be withdrawing money from the deceased's accounts. The money is now part of his estate and it has to go to probate. I was told to try to withdraw the money anyway. I said I won't do it. 

This  remembrance reminds me of the #MeToo and Harvey Weinstein Stories

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Your case would rarely happen to anyone else, that is really odd. Glad you knew that was Illegal. Thanks for the insight.

It happens pretty often to caregivers and POAs

[DougDew]

6 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

Small point of order and apologies if I’ve missed this, but where did you get 1% from?

Common sense.  How many times do police officers in the entire US interact with potential criminals each year, and how many of those interactions end up with a dead citizen?  I think 1% was generous, and its even way less than 1% if we include traffic stops.

 

NFL fans have to pay up 90 mill for that?  Its not philanthropy.  Its robbery.

[NFLfan]

4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Perfect story 

   The only people that should are the family

Even family are not allowed. The executor of the will can do that but it still has to go to court.

 

Now if the account is jointly owned, then the other person on the account can access the funds. In addition, you can also have an account that has "in trust for" someone else. When the account holder dies, the person that the account is "in trust for" can access the funds. 

[PrincetonTiger]

9 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

Even family are not allowed. The executor of the will can do that but it still has to go to court.

 

Now if the account is jointly owned, then the other person on the account can access the funds. In addition, you can also have an account that has "in trust for" someone else. When the account holder dies, the person that the account is "in trust for" can access the funds. 

Yes

   Experienced this first hand when my GM died

     

[Nadine]

Colin Kaepernick was awarded Amnesty International's Ambassador of Conscience Award.

 

This is the global human rights organization's biggest honor. The award, which “celebrates individuals and groups who speak out for justice,” include former South Africa president Nelson Mandela, Malala Yousafzai, the education activist from Pakistan who survived an assassination attempt by the Taliban, and rock group U2.

 

Quote

The organization recognized Kaepernick for his protest against police violence: his action, kneeling during the national anthem before NFL games, sparked a movement replicated across America and the world, starting a debate about free speech and patriotism that was inflamed by the President of the United States, one of Kaepernick’s most relentless critics. http://time.com/5248606/colin-kaepernick-wins-amnesty-internationals-ambassador-of-conscience-award/

 

Here's his acceptance speech

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

@Nadine

  Colin received a great honor

[DougDew]

He had two years to come up with a reason, and others fed it to him....the people who set up to rob the NFL about one month after he protested.  Nice try Colin, we know you're lying about your original protest and have now found your new calling as a puppet.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

He had two years to come up with a reason, and others fed it to him....the people who set up to rob the NFL about one month after he protested.  Nice try Colin, we know you're lying about your original protest and have now found your new calling as a puppet.

can't say I agree, but I can't say I disagree here either. 

[Nadine]

5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

@Nadine

  Colin received a great honor

It was well deserved.  I'm impressed with the dialogue he's created including right here on our forums

[NFLfan]

49 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Any job I know of, if your boss tells you to stop doing something or do something different and you don't comply, you get fired. In the NFL even if someone still kneels they will only get fined. These guys make million of dollars to play a kids game so just stay in the locker room while the Anthem is playing. NFL Players have it made in life in reality. You lose your job in the real world if you don't comply with your bosses. Tomorrow if my boss told me to stop doing my paperwork the way I am doing it and do it differently, even if I hated the new way and disagreed with it I would get fired if I kept doing it the old way.

 

I did not mean to minimize your point with my earlier post. I was just giving other examples to consider.

 

Your point here is well taken. If you don't comply with rules/policies/etc, you run the strong possibility of losing your job. 

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, Nadine said:

It was well deserved.  I'm impressed with the dialogue he's created including right here on our forums

Well, here's the thing.  The fact he's suing for not having a job in the NFL tells me that this wasn't originally about self sacrifice by protesting. He may have turned it into it but there's enough circumstantial evidence to suggest it started as a crybaby tantrum over being benched.

[SteelCityColt]

29 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Common sense.  How many times do police officers in the entire US interact with potential criminals each year, and how many of those interactions end up with a dead citizen?  I think 1% was generous, and its even way less than 1% if we include traffic stops.

 

NFL fans have to pay up 90 mill for that?  Its not philanthropy.  Its robbery.

 

Yeah.. if you’re going to present numbers as facts they need to be more than common sense. But of course the percentage will be low, it’s what, circa 500 fatalities per year by police shootings. That’s not point and you know it. The question is, and always is, were they justified? 

 

Are you too suggesting that every encounter is with a “potential criminal” or just certain people?

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, Nadine said:

It was well deserved.  I'm impressed with the dialogue he's created including right here on our forums

And somebody can commit vandalism by disturbing other public events and I guess that would be justified as long as it starts a conversation?

 

Or results in a $90 million heist.

[Nadine]

5 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well, here's the thing.  The fact he's suing for not having a job in the NFL tells me that this wasn't originally about self sacrifice by protesting. He may have turned it into it but there's enough circumstantial evidence to suggest it started as a crybaby tantrum over being benched.

Or, the lawsuit sheds more light on the issue that he started with

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well, here's the thing.  The fact he's suing for not having a job in the NFL tells me that this wasn't originally about self sacrifice by protesting. He may have turned it into it but there's enough circumstantial evidence to suggest it started as a crybaby tantrum over being benched.

The only people that should know are those in his camp

[SteelCityColt]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

And somebody can commit vandalism by disturbing other public events and I guess that would be justified as long as it starts a conversation?

 

Or results in a $90 million heist.

You could argue getting filmed shooting people without justification requires the conversation to be started.

[csmopar]

Here's what bothers me with this Kaepernick thing.  This was tweeted out the morning of the first "protest kneeling". Copied from espn

 

"Aug. 26

 

Kelly announced Blaine Gabbert will start Week 1 against the Los Angeles Rams, with Colin Kaepernick serving in a backup role.

 

Fox Sports' Jay Glazer said he would be "shocked" if Kaepernick is on the 49ers' 53-man roster at the end of the season (via RotoWorld). Glazer said Kaepernick "may not even be on [the roster] in the next two weeks." 

 

When asked whether the team had considered cutting Kaepernick, Kelly told reporters the 49ers have "never had a conversation about that."

 

It was just hours later, that Kaepernick started his "protest"

 

Two days later, 
 

"Aug. 28 — Kaepernick expands on his reasoning for the protest

Kaepernick met with the media two days after the game and for the first time since the protest gained national attention. He reiterated that he was acting to give a voice to people who didn’t have one."

 

3 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Or, the lawsuit sheds more light on the issue that he started with

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

 

8 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well, here's the thing.  The fact he's suing for not having a job in the NFL tells me that this wasn't originally about self sacrifice by protesting. He may have turned it into it but there's enough circumstantial evidence to suggest it started as a crybaby tantrum over being benched.

Anyone who feels they have been wronged can sue

[csmopar]

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

 

Anyone who feels they have been wronged can sue

That fact doesn't make the lawsuit any more or any less credible...

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Yeah.. if you’re going to present numbers as facts they need to be more than common sense. 

 

Are you too suggesting that every encounter is with a “potential criminal” or just certain people?

No they don't.  1% was clearly an estimate, and a generous one.  

 

What bias-prism are you reading my comments through?  All of the encounters.  All.  When ever a police officer responds to a call, that person is a potential criminal.  Gotta better word for it, then use it.

 

And in all....you know...all... of those interactions, less than 1% result in a dead citizen.  

 

And the broader question, exactly who gets to cash the $90 mill check?  What's their names.  What organization do they belong to, and what happens to the money.  Does anybody get to buy a new black Mercedes somewhere down the line?

[csmopar]

2 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

The only people that should know are those in his camp

I'm not following?  Are you saying that only those who are in his camp should get to know if he's sincere or not?

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

Here's what bothers me with this Kaepernick thing.  This was tweeted out the morning of the first "protest kneeling". Copied from 

 

"Aug. 26

 

Kelly announced Blaine Gabbert will start Week 1 against the Los Angeles Rams, with Colin Kaepernick serving in a backup role.

 

Fox Sports' Jay Glazer said he would be "shocked" if Kaepernick is on the 49ers' 53-man roster at the end of the season (via RotoWorld). Glazer said Kaepernick "may not even be on [the roster] in the next two weeks." 

 

When asked whether the team had considered cutting Kaepernick, Kelly told reporters the 49ers have "never had a conversation about that."

 

It was just hours later, that Kaepernick started his "protest"

 

Two days later, 
 

"Aug. 28 — Kaepernick expands on his reasoning for the protest

Kaepernick met with the media two days after the game and for the first time since the protest gained national attention. He reiterated that he was acting to give a voice to people who didn’t have one."

 

 

 

And that is how he feels

[DougDew]

3 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

You could argue getting filmed shooting people without justification requires the conversation to be started.

If statistically random events started national conversations, all we'd ever do in this country is talk.

 

Then, of course, hand out money at the end of the conversation.   Just like this one..

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

That fact doesn't make the lawsuit any more or any less credible...

The only who can say that are the Judges hearing the 

    

 

   

[PrincetonTiger]

Friendly Reminder from TigerTown    

  It is never productive to repeatedly hit your head on a Brick Wall

 

 

 

[csmopar]

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

The only who can say that are the Judges hearing the 

    

 

   

granted, but you're missing the point entirely

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

Friendly Reminder from TigerTown    

  It is never productive to repeatedly hit your head on a Brick Wall

 

 

 

then why do it?

[csmopar]

4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

And that is how he feels

AFTER the fact. Again, the point went right over you

[PrincetonTiger]

Just now, csmopar said:

granted, but you're missing the point entirely

No because our opinions do not matter and it is a waste of time try and make it count

[SteelCityColt]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

No they don't.  1% was clearly an estimate, and a generous one.  

 

What bias-prism are you reading my comments through?  All of the encounters.  All.  When ever a police officer responds to a call, that person is a potential criminal.  Gotta better word for it, then use it.

 

And in all....you know...all... of those interactions, less than 1% result in a dead citizen.  

 

And the broader question, exactly who gets to cash the $90 mill check?  What's their names.  What organization do they belong to, and what happens to the money.  Does anybody get to buy a new black Mercedes somewhere down the line?

 

No it was presented as statstic, if it was clear I wouldn’t have felt the need to check it now would I?

 

No bias-prism at all, again clarifying your position, although it’s illuminating that’s how you think.

 

Just because it’s a low percentage doesn’t take away from the issue. Are you saying it’s ok for people to commit in effect murder (if the fatality proves to be unjustified) because hey “it’s less than 1%”. So if I meet 200 people in my life and kill one I’m okay... because it’s less than 1%.  This is even before we’ve got into the topic of there being higher incidences with certain demographics. 

 

Honestly America, if you don’t think you have an issue with guns, gun crime and sadly in some cases people who are meant to use guns to “protect” then you need a reality check.