This is at Every Game ,with every Team !

To me , the NFL needs to stop beer sales altogether but I also know that will never happen too much $$$$$$$$$$.Drunks at a game never help and really when you get to it why is it you need to drink at a game anyway .Hey I like beer and I'm not ant-drinking but I like to enjoy the game I've paid 2000$ dollars to attend :) and if there are kids around ,It's just not cool.

After being hit in the head at FedEx with a beer mug thrown by a Redskins Fan who was aiming at the Eagles fan in the row in front of me, I have to say Giantone make a good point. :lol: Of course, if it had hit my 9 yr old son, I would have wanted to fight the thrower, regardless of the fact that it was a Redskins fan and a woman. (The county police got her out of there quick)

Used to be that games were a time to celebrate and cheer the team and find a sense of community. It's still all that for most people, but now a sizeable number of people go to the games to drink.

2 words: designated driver.

Also, if the cops wanted to, they could set up lots of roadblocks outside of NFL games, like it was New Year's Eve. Arrest a few drunks, and my guess is that the numbers will drop.

while i personally don't see a reason to sell at games, lots of people think its an integral part of the experience.

i doubt the vendors or teams want to stop when they're making $7+ profit per beer.

i can booze right along side the best of them, but i agree with giantone here. we all pay sooo much money to enjoy the redskins or any pro sports team for that matter. i do not drink at sporting events. maybe 8 straight years of all the bullcrap i used to hear at the vet when the skins visited turned me off. but between the beer muscles, all the vulgarities and not to mention all the bathroom breaks you have to take, no thanks

you guys are pathetic. if a vendor or beer stand sold him beer , like i used to see all the time at the vet, while visibly drunk, why shouldnt they be responsible? here a little girls life, along with her families, is basically ruined. as far as im concerned, all parties involved should pay. is 109 million enough if it would be your little girl?

Typical liberal dribble. Her life is ruined. What's the point in trying to capitalize on it? It is the fault of the guy not the vendors. Why should some greasy lawyer get 30 - 40 million because a poor little girl was paralyzed?

Typical liberal dribble. Her life is ruined. What's the point in trying to capitalize on it? It is the fault of the guy not the vendors. Why should some greasy lawyer get 30 - 40 million because a poor little girl was paralyzed?

Holding corporations liable for their negligent actions is not liberal drivel. It is, in fact, merely making sure that corporations are also held "personally" responsible for their actions.

As for the greasy lawyer making 30-40 million - I resemble that remark (Well, except for the 30-40 million).

if the vendors sold beer to someone that is visibly intoxicated then yes, they should also be held accountable.they main culprit in this is obviously the man driving the car, but he is not alone. and maybe the 109 million can soften the blow alittle bit for a young child(and family) who has had their lives changed forever. and im not sure what political party affliation has to do with any of this