Should The SeaHawks let Sean play? Opinions?

[caress 0]

Well I am sure that it is no secret that a player for the Seahawks got thrown in jail for domestic violence for shaking up his girlfriend in public. Just want toknow what you all think. The decision is he will play in the play-off game. Granted it aint politics but I would like the opinion of those of you who are into Football.-Caress

I've learned.... That being kind is more important than being
right.

[BillyVance 35]

I would say if you have an unresolved criminal issue stemming from an arrest, you should be suspended from playing. It's pretty common across college football, except for a few high profile players who get an extra break. Of course, Marcus Vick is one extreme example and he used up all his chances.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[TrophyHusband 0]

his girlfriend said that nothing happened, and he wasn't charged with anything. that doesn't mean that nothing happened, but until there are some actual charges or a victim claiming that something happened, i think it would be an over-reaction to suspend him.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[CanuckInUSA 0]

If he commited a crime he should do the time. But professional athletes have been known to get their "get out of jail for free" cards every once in a while.

Not long ago here in the city of Vancouver BC a pedestrian was struck down and killed by a hit and run driver after a night out on the town. The police say they know who the registered owner of the car is (who knows who was driving), but still no arrests have been made. Not long ago one of the local TV stations told us that the car is owned by a member of the NHL's Vancouver Canucks (they didn't mention a name only that the owner of the vehicle is affiliated with the team). It seems pretty fishy to me that the police know the registered owner, but I guess public relations for the local sports team is more important than public safety? What other professional athletes do we know who have gotten away with murder? So I'm guessing that yes the Seahawks will let their man play.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[NWFlyer 2]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawks/2002746040_locklear18.html

More info above. Sounds like classic domestic violence to me. Victim, despite all evidence to the contrary, denies that he did anything to her.

Sad... and he'll continue to play. She'll stick with him till he does something really scary. Then she'll leave but she'll probably come back anyway. It's a difficult cycle to break out of, even more difficult, I would imagine, when the abuser is high-profile, wealthy, and protected and beloved by the community.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[Andy9o8 2]

Professional player of a sport in which players hit each other violently is accused of committing an act off the field of hitting someone violently. Therefore, since he's accused of doing it off the field, prohibit him from doing it on the field.

Life is odd.

[Andy9o8 2]

Professional sports players are supposed to be role models for children. If they're convicted of a crime of moral turpitude (which domestic violence certainly is), then I say yes, kick them off the playing field. And I agree that this does have the classic hallmarks of the victim recanting the original accusation, etc. But sometimes people are accused of crimes which they did not commit. That, of course, is where the presumption of innocence comes in. So it may be unfair to suspend a player based only on a charge, at least until a verdict is in.

[unformed 0]

Quote

Professional sports players are supposed to be role models for children.

maybe i'm wrong here, but i thought parents and people of the church/mosque/temple were supposed to be role models for children?

why again are professional athletes supposed to be role models?

This ad space for sale.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Professional sports players are supposed to be role models for children.

maybe i'm wrong here, but i thought parents and people of the church/mosque/temple were supposed to be role models for children?

Of course they are.

Quote

why again are professional athletes supposed to be role models?

I'm not trying to use circular reasoning, but they're supposed to act like role models because they are, in fact, role models. Maybe I should have better phrased it "professional athletes should behave like the role models they are". Why are they role models? Because kids idolize them, and naturally want to emulate them. Pro sports don't exist in a vacuum; they wouldn't exist without an audience; they exist because because the spectators who pay admission to games, and the sponsors who advertise to the spectators who watch on TV, exist. Children make up a huge portion of the audience of pro sports - that's simply a fact. Whether the players like it or not, the kids will look up to them as role models. That conveys a responsibility upon the players to be mindful that their conduct may influence children, and thus to behave accordingly. Maybe that's unfair, but nobody forces a pro athlete - who even if in the lower end of the players' pay schedule is very well-paid - to be a pro athlete. Don't like being a role model for kids? Simple- don't be a pro athlete.

[unformed 0]

Quote

I'm not trying to use circular reasoning, but they're supposed to act like role models because they are, in fact, role models.

You raise your kids to do the right thing, and understand what exactly athletes are, and that just because they do something, it doesn't make it right.

Quote

they exist because because the spectators who pay admission to games, and the sponsors who advertise to the spectators who watch on TV, exist. Children make up a huge portion of the audience of pro sports - that's simply a fact. Whether the players like it or not, the kids will look up to them as role models. That conveys a responsibility upon the players to be mindful that their conduct may influence children, and thus to behave accordingly.

No it doesn't.

They have absolutely no responsibility to raise your kid. They have absolutely no responsibility to make sure what they do won't be emulated by a kid who wasn't taught by his parents the difference between right and wrong.

Quote

Maybe that's unfair, but nobody forces a pro athlete - who even if in the lower end of the players' pay schedule is very well-paid - to be a pro athlete. Don't like being a role model for kids? Simple- don't be a pro athlete.

I take it you're one of those people who would like to blame Marilyn Manson when some kid goes ballistic, and he happens to listen to death metal?

This ad space for sale.

[Andy9o8 2]

You're mischaracterizing my post, and your analogy is weak. Mostly I don't feel like playing "the analogy game" I see on here so often. I stand by my post; you feel free to disagree, and that's ok. I'm moving on.

[unformed 0]

Quote

You're mischaracterizing my post, and your analogy is weak. Mostly I don't feel like playing "the analogy game" I see on here so often. I stand by my post; you feel free to disagree, and that's ok. I'm moving on.

No I really want to know why you believe an athlete should be responsible for kids emulating him.

Your answer was, because kids look up to him.

That's not the athlete's problem. That's the parents' problem.

This ad space for sale.

[caress 0]

you both posed such an interesting arguement. And it was done in a remarkably clean way. Not that it matters to either of you but I am proud of you both to stick by your guns and say what is on your mind without geting the whole thread locked down. I agree that the parents should take an active role in whom their children see as role models. And if you are famous you have a responsibility to take control of your actions in public. Your private life is your own though. that is where you draw the line. While Sean is not yet convicted of this offense, he was still seen harming a person in public and that is violence and I think we are trying to teach the young folks that violence is unacceptable unless absolutly necessary. I just do not know whether or not it was necessary here. Sometimes women get outta control and a man has to defend himself because she is outta control. Then there are moments when the man is just trying to be well bluntly an asshole. So since we do not know why the fight ensued, the fact remains he was found by the arresting officer to be at fault. Each story has 2 sides and until that is clear. How should we deal with these guys? That is the question we are all trying to figure out here. Nicely argued you two! Thanks for your opinions anyone else?

I've learned.... That being kind is more important than being
right.

[rehmwa 2]

IMO -

1 - Sport celebrities are not role models. It's just their job. If kids are taking them as role models, then the parents failed to teach them what's really important. But it happens anyway.

2 - It's a job. Like any other job, if someone is accused of a crime and they are released prior to the trial, then they should get to continue their life in the meantime.

3 - But, if a sports figure gets special positive or negative treatment by society just because of their job, then that sucks and shows that society also has screwed up what's really important.

No special treatment (pro or con) no excuses either. Just keep moving

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Quote

You're mischaracterizing my post, and your analogy is weak. Mostly I don't feel like playing "the analogy game" I see on here so often. I stand by my post; you feel free to disagree, and that's ok. I'm moving on.

No I really want to know why you believe an athlete should be responsible for kids emulating him.

Your answer was, because kids look up to him.

That's not the athlete's problem. That's the parents' problem.

I agree with you.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[rwieder 0]

The man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. In the interim, he should by law be allowed to live his life normally. Like it or not, these are the laws we live by.

I strongly dissagree that sports figure should be shining examples for our children. They are paid professional atheletes, not mentors for children. Everyone thinks football is a very violent game. Watched any ice hockey lately?

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[Nightingale 0]

If he's not in jail and hasn't been convicted, I don't see any reason why he shouldn't be able to play. The guy deserves his day in court, if it gets that far, and we should refrain judgment until then, because there's no way to know what really happened.