Los Angeles Prohibits Frisbee on Beaches

[stevey_frac]

Right. But.. A frisbee to the face is a long fucking way from lethal. This legislation is a total crock. Let the other people on the beach deal with it. Don't start using the legislative branch to enforce social mores.

At what level of harm, due to one's own negligence or intention, does it need to be to become illegal then?

When there is a statistically significant chance of irreparable harm to another individual. For instance, I'm all for legislating the use of snow tires in snowy areas, like the one I live in, because it provably reduces winter accident rates, and resulting injuries and fatalities. That's a proper use of the legislative branch.

[Gellert1984]

At what level of harm, due to one's own negligence or intention, does it need to be to become illegal then?

At about the point that they start killing more people per frisbee on beaches than cars do per car on the road (if that makes sense).

[Dauric]

At what level of harm, due to one's own negligence or intention, does it need to be to become illegal then?

At about the point that they start killing more people per frisbee on beaches than cars do per car on the road (if that makes sense).

"The first rule of Frisbee Club is you don't talk about Frisbee Club...."

[stevey_frac]

At what level of harm, due to one's own negligence or intention, does it need to be to become illegal then?

At about the point that they start killing more people per frisbee on beaches than cars do per car on the road (if that makes sense).

Dude. Wtf...

[Webzter]

You see... I personally feel that it is not the job of the government to protect it's citizens from themselves. Let us make mistakes. Let us fall down.

I'm all for legislating the use of snow tires in snowy areas, like the one I live in, because it provably reduces winter accident rates, and resulting injuries and fatalities. That's a proper use of the legislative branch.

[JBJ]

You see... I personally feel that it is not the job of the government to protect it's citizens from themselves. Let us make mistakes. Let us fall down.

I'm all for legislating the use of snow tires in snowy areas, like the one I live in, because it provably reduces winter accident rates, and resulting injuries and fatalities (including other people). That's a proper use of the legislative branch.

Highlighted one, and clarified the other.

Allowing someone to harm themselves is different than allowing them to hurt others.

[Webzter]

Allowing someone to harm themselves is different than allowing them to hurt others.

Ahh, in that case it seems reasonable to segregate off the sunbathers from the game-players.

[lucrezaborgia]

I'm confused as to what the argument is now about...the OP article was misinterpreted. Frisbies aren't banned and regulating behavior on public beaches isn't new by any stretch of the imagination. So what are you all still arguing about?

[stevey_frac]

Except Frisbee isn't a horribly dangerous sport that needs to be regulated on our beaches. There is no rising wave of Frisbee related injuries that we need legislation to address. This is not an evidence based solution to a difficult problem. This is the legislative branch doing something random. There is zero need for this legislation.

I'm confused as to what the argument is now about...the OP article was misinterpreted. Frisbies aren't banned and regulating behavior on public beaches isn't new by any stretch of the imagination. So what are you all still arguing about?

The article has been altered since it was first posted. And we can still argue about the original legislation.

[folkhero]

You still haven't proven how selective enforcement uniquely leads to abuse. Cops can decide who they want to ticket for speeding based on the severity of the offense. That is a good thing. It has nothing to do with people i do or don't like. Their is this thing called spirit of the law and it determines how cops enforce the law.Furthermore this law didn't make frisbee illegal it just allowed lifeguards to determine who is and who isn't acting responsibly.

Or they decide who they want to ticket for speeding based on the color of their car, or worse, the color of their skin. It has everything to do with the people that the cop does or doesn't like, and it has nothing to do with the spirit of the law.

My only problem with this is that I'd much rather they ban the fuckers who lay all over the place getting in the way of people actually trying to USE the beach.

I know, right? you can lay around in the sun and get skin cancer anywhere. I have to drive the better part of a day to get to LA and the beach, and then I'm not even allowed to run around in the sand and play frisbee?

[Ghostbear]

Except Frisbee isn't a horribly dangerous sport that needs to be regulated on our beaches. There is no rising wave of Frisbee related injuries that we need legislation to address. This is not an evidence based solution to a difficult problem. This is the legislative branch doing something random. There is zero need for this legislation.

Except, as I pointed out, we regulate far more than behavior that is dangerous already, and for good reason. Like my example of noise violations- many things that cause society to not function properly are banned or regulated. Danger is not, and should not be the only determinant we use.

In this case, the legislation as originally reported would have been to allow the maximum number of people to get the maximal amount of enjoyment out of a public property. How is that wrong? This is a case of weighing the rights of two groups against each other (frisbee players and everyone else), and they determined that everyone else had a greater right, while still allowing frisbee players to play frisbee as permitted by lifeguards- such that if they were unobtrusive, they would still be permitted to play.

[omgryebread]

I know, right? you can lay around in the sun and get skin cancer anywhere. I have to drive the better part of a day to get to LA and the beach, and then I'm not even allowed to run around in the sand and play frisbee?

You can run around and play frisbee anywhere. I have to drive the better part of a week to get to LA (or a day to Ocean City) and then I can't even lay around in the sun and get skin cancer without assholes kicking sand over me?


You guys seriously think that anything not lethal should be legal? Like, rock band outside your house at 2AM? Can I host a full football game with 11 people on each side and using up 100 yards of the beach?

None of us are trying to say that frisbees are a serious hazard. We are trying to say they are incredibly annoying and intrusive to other beachgoers. (Well, unless they're nice about it and go somewhere where there aren't a lot of people. Which, fun enough, is what LA changed their law to. Pretty awesome, right?)

[Griffin]

You can run around and play frisbee anywhere. I have to drive the better part of a week to get to LA (or a day to Ocean City) and then I can't even lay around in the sun and get skin cancer without assholes kicking sand over me?

No? First part: You can only run around and play frisbee in areas large enough to do so, and playing on sand has distinct differences to playing elsewhere.

Laying on a towel in the sun? That can be done at even the smallest public parks or, heck, even in a driveway or on a roof or something. And if your problem is /getting sand on you/, maybe the beach isn't the place you should be doing it?

Look, none of us are trying to say sunbathers are a hazard - I mean, you can trip over them and stuff, but not really a big deal. All we're saying is the lazy fucks are incredibly annoying and intrusive, preventing people who actually want to use the beach for stuff that requires the beach from being able to do so. (Well, unless their nice about it and willing to clear a space when people actually want to use that section of the beach for something. But I've never seen that happen, ever - asking someone to move so you can play frisbee is a one way ticket to a pretentious asshole rant.)

Basically, this law is simple - people who lounge on the beach are more important than those who engage in various forms of physical activity on the beach. Probably because there is more of the first. There's no high-mindedness to this law - it's just one group of people getting their way over another in regards to a place with limited space resources, nothing more, nothing less.

[Dauric]

There's these fucking people, and goddamnit they're -everywhere- I tell you. And they're all -doing shit-, all kinds of shit just fucking everywhere man. What's worse is they're all fucking doing shit in public places and getting in the way of my friends and I who want to do our own shit....

L.A. is one of the most populous cities in the U.S. and the county at large is heavily populated. And that's just the permanent residents, add in the tourist trade and the numbers of people that want to do their own shit on any particular day on any particular stretch of coastline can be downright astronomical. The Parks and Recreation department for L.A. has to balance the desire for all those people to use that space. Now from what I understand of the article is that the lifeguard on duty has jurisdiction on whether large-scale games of sportsthing can be played on any particular stretch of beach, instead of the previously existing total ban. To enforce this the Lifeguard can call on a police officer to write citations for violating that rule, as opposed to trying to grant lifeguards law-enforcement powers to write the citations themselves.

As far as large-field sportsthing games or sunbathers consider the municipal view: A large area of sportsthing players is a low concentration of people per acre of area. Sunbathers put a lot more people in a smaller area. Now when the acre of sportsthing players and the acre of sunbathers go up the beach to the restaurants and souvenir shops and vendors of all types, which acre of beach will bring in more tax revenues? Beaches being a prime tourist spot a lot of those tax revenues are coming in from people that don't actually live in your municipality, so it's a tax boon without raising taxes.

[folkhero]

None of us are trying to say that frisbees are a serious hazard. We are trying to say they are incredibly annoying and intrusive to other beachgoers. (Well, unless they're nice about it and go somewhere where there aren't a lot of people. Which, fun enough, is what LA changed their law to. Pretty awesome, right?)

Frisbee players do try to go where there aren't as many people because it isn't actually fun to try to run between people's blankets and worry about crashing into people. The problem is that sunbathers are incredibly annoying and intrusive to people who want to run around at the beach because they also tend to gravitate away from other sunbathers; everyone wants a little stretch of land for themselves and not have to get too close to any other sunbathers even though they only need the 15 square feet that their beach towel takes up.

As far as large-field sportsthing games or sunbathers consider the municipal view: A large area of sportsthing players is a low concentration of people per acre of area. Sunbathers put a lot more people in a smaller area. Now when the acre of sportsthing players and the acre of sunbathers go up the beach to the restaurants and souvenir shops and vendors of all types, which acre of beach will bring in more tax revenues? Beaches being a prime tourist spot a lot of those tax revenues are coming in from people that don't actually live in your municipality, so it's a tax boon without raising taxes.

I'm from the Jane Jacob's school of thought, that it's not just concentrations of people that is good for cities, but a diversity of people using a common space for mixed purposes. Look, I don't really have anything against sunbathers, that was just a device to show that sunbathers can be as annoying as frisbee throwers. When I'm at the beach, I like to sunbath and read, but I also like to throw around a frisbee or football and swim in the ocean if it's warm enough. I think the greatest value of the beach is that people can do all those things and more. It's fun to do all those things, and it's fun to watch other people do those things. If the city of LA wants to turn their beaches into monotonous, dull places to squeeze a few extra dollars out of them, I think they are making a mistake.

[Tiberius]

You still haven't proven how selective enforcement uniquely leads to abuse. Cops can decide who they want to ticket for speeding based on the severity of the offense. That is a good thing. It has nothing to do with people i do or don't like. Their is this thing called spirit of the law and it determines how cops enforce the law.Furthermore this law didn't make frisbee illegal it just allowed lifeguards to determine who is and who isn't acting responsibly.

Or they decide who they want to ticket for speeding based on the color of their car, or worse, the color of their skin. It has everything to do with the people that the cop does or doesn't like, and it has nothing to do with the spirit of the law.

Christ! Do people not understand the word UNIQUE. Any cop can use discrimination to selectively enforce any law and it's always illegal, in fact it's an affirmative defense. Allowing cops to use their discretion has empirically proven to be effective and doesn't UNIQUELY contribute to abuse.

[lucrezaborgia]

The problem is that sunbathers are incredibly annoying and intrusive to people who want to run around at the beach because they also tend to gravitate away from other sunbathers; everyone wants a little stretch of land for themselves and not have to get too close to any other sunbathers even though they only need the 15 square feet that their beach towel takes up.

So...everyone but the Frisbie players are selfish?

[lutzj]

I don't think it's the OP's fault: the content of the article changed dramatically. When I read it yesterday, it was consistent with the OP.

Pretty sure they updated the article (or the link). I'll edit the post so nobody else gets confused.

[stevey_frac]

The problem is that sunbathers are incredibly annoying and intrusive to people who want to run around at the beach because they also tend to gravitate away from other sunbathers; everyone wants a little stretch of land for themselves and not have to get too close to any other sunbathers even though they only need the 15 square feet that their beach towel takes up.

So...everyone but the Frisbie players are selfish?

I think it's more, everyone INCLUDING the Frisbee players are selfish, but that the law favours one side over the other. There is no requirement that a person not start sun bathing in the middle of an active game of Frisbee, but there is a requirement not to start playing Frisbee in the middle of people actively sunbathing. Both are equally douche-baggy.

[lucrezaborgia]

I think it's more, everyone INCLUDING the Frisbee players are selfish, but that the law favours one side over the other. There is no requirement that a person not start sun bathing in the middle of an active game of Frisbee, but there is a requirement not to start playing Frisbee in the middle of people actively sunbathing. Both are equally douche-baggy.

Eh...I grew up on Miami's beaches and I can assure you that most of the time, it's not the people laying around that are douches. YMMV. That being said, Miami and the rest of the cities ban certain beach sports in general areas and have designated areas for them. You can't fly a kite anywhere on the beach but somehow if you are in the water it does not count...

[omgryebread]

No? First part: You can only run around and play frisbee in areas large enough to do so, and playing on sand has distinct differences to playing elsewhere.

Laying on a towel in the sun? That can be done at even the smallest public parks or, heck, even in a driveway or on a roof or something. And if your problem is /getting sand on you/, maybe the beach isn't the place you should be doing it?

You're seriously going to talk about the distinction between playing frisbee on grass or whatever vs. sand, and then suggest that laying on a roof is an alternative to laying on the beach? Especially with the lack of, you know, an ocean, which doesn't seem useful or desirable for playing with a frisbee. I also don't mind sand, but I do mind it when it's kicked onto me or in my face.

[/quote]Look, none of us are trying to say sunbathers are a hazard - I mean, you can trip over them and stuff, but not really a big deal. All we're saying is the lazy fucks are incredibly annoying and intrusive, preventing people who actually want to use the beach for stuff that requires the beach from being able to do so. (Well, unless their nice about it and willing to clear a space when people actually want to use that section of the beach for something. But I've never seen that happen, ever - asking someone to move so you can play frisbee is a one way ticket to a pretentious asshole rant.)[/quote]That section of the beach is already being used for something. Sunbathing! You have this weird attitude that playing frisbee is a superior activity that deserves beach space over sunbathing. Both activities deserve beach space. It's just that one causes disruption to others attempting to use the beach. Once I plop down my towel and cooler, that's it. The small radius around me is not available for playing or sunbathing, sure. Frisbee playing takes up much more space per person. In addition, outside my small radius, unless I'm a total asshole and throwing trash around or something, I have no potential to disrupt any other space. Frisbee playing can quite easily mess with other people's spaces, even if the frisbee players are really nice and trying to be careful. They still might miss a catch and whack someone with a frisbee.

Basically, this law is simple - people who lounge on the beach are more important than those who engage in various forms of physical activity on the beach. Probably because there is more of the first. There's no high-mindedness to this law - it's just one group of people getting their way over another in regards to a place with limited space resources, nothing more, nothing less.

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit and public enjoyment (the two are probably correlated to a good degree.) With this regulation, sunbathers (the majority of people) have an increase in enjoyment. Sport-players have a decrease in enjoyment (they can't play wherever they want), but it's not as severe, because they can still play with permission. Probably not on prime beach real estate, because it makes more sense to use said prime beach space for sunbathers, since more of those can fit in that nice area than frisbee players.

There is no requirement that a person not start sun bathing in the middle of an active game of Frisbee, but there is a requirement not to start playing Frisbee in the middle of people actively sunbathing. Both are equally douche-baggy.

Does anyone actually do that? I really doubt someone does that. Whereas frisbee players quite often take their game to people actively sunbathing (usually by accident, but still.)

[Zarq]

It's just that one causes disruption to others attempting to use the beach.

What if you want to talk to your friend, and the person next to you want to sleep, and your talking prevents him from sleeping. Are you suggesting everybody should just lie silently?

[Izawwlgood]

Removed upon rereading originally misquoted paragraph.

[Zarq]

That was a misquote. Griffin said that, not omgryebread.

[Diadem]

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit

Ban both the sunbathers and frisbee players then, and build replace the beaches with factories. It's the ideal spot, not only can they easily ship in large amounts of goods, they have a convenient place to dump toxic waste.

Or you know, you could realize that it 's the public interest that should concern a government, not the economy (well not beyond what is important for the public interest).

[omgryebread]

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit

Ban both the sunbathers and frisbee players then, and build replace the beaches with factories. It's the ideal spot, not only can they easily ship in large amounts of goods, they have a convenient place to dump toxic waste.

Or you know, you could realize that it 's the public interest that should concern a government, not the economy (well not beyond what is important for the public interest).

Wow really, did you just do that?

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit and public enjoyment (the two are probably correlated to a good degree.)

That's a deliberate and obvious misrepresentation of what I said.

[stevey_frac]

There is no requirement that a person not start sun bathing in the middle of an active game of Frisbee, but there is a requirement not to start playing Frisbee in the middle of people actively sunbathing. Both are equally douche-baggy.

Does anyone actually do that? I really doubt someone does that. Whereas frisbee players quite often take their game to people actively sunbathing (usually by accident, but still.)

To be fair: I've never seen Frisbee players attempt to start playing a game amongst people, nor have I seen sunbathers attempt to lay down in the middle of a game.

Both seem equally implausible to me.

[Diadem]

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit

Ban both the sunbathers and frisbee players then, and build replace the beaches with factories. It's the ideal spot, not only can they easily ship in large amounts of goods, they have a convenient place to dump toxic waste.

Or you know, you could realize that it 's the public interest that should concern a government, not the economy (well not beyond what is important for the public interest).

Wow really, did you just do that?

A city should use it's beaches for maximum economic benefit and public enjoyment (the two are probably correlated to a good degree.)

That's a deliberate and obvious misrepresentation of what I said.

Because I cut off the second part? Well I agree with the second part, so why would I include that part in my argument?

Your argument was, summarized, that sunbathers should take precedence over frisbee players because you can fit more of them per acre, so the city would rake in more tax dollars. That's a purely economic argument. So don't tell me I misrepresented what you said.

[omgryebread]

Because I cut off the second part? Well I agree with the second part, so why would I include that part in my argument?

Your argument was, summarized, that sunbathers should take precedence over frisbee players because you can fit more of them per acre, so the city would rake in more tax dollars. That's a purely economic argument. So don't tell me I misrepresented what you said.

Because the second part significantly changed my meaning. It wasn't two separate and distinct points. There was literally no grammatical separation. Your quote would be valid if it was an independent phrase or a separate sentence, but it was not, and you took a warped version of my point. What you claim is my argument is not my argument at all. My argument is that public property should be used for maximum public benefit, which includes both economic and intangible value. Looking at one without the other is bad policy. The city could make the beach more profitable by charging, but that's bad. On the other hand, the city could make the beach more fun by charging oceanside businesses less property tax in exchange for them lowering prices of their goods. That is also bad policy.

So yeah, your quotation of me basically ignored grammatical rules to change my point to something different.

Example, "I think Ponyville should be for Pegasi and Unicorns" has a significantly different meaning from "I think Ponyville should be for Pegasi", even though the second is technically directly quoting the first.

Why do I use an overwhelming amount of TV aimed at young girls for examples?

[Metaphysician]

I'm nearsighted and colorblind. I like going to the beach but all the people laying down on the ground are hard to see and a tripping hazard for me, so my problem with this law is that it doesn't ban people from laying out on beaches and tripping me when I walk.

[Tiberius]

Because I cut off the second part? Well I agree with the second part, so why would I include that part in my argument?

Your argument was, summarized, that sunbathers should take precedence over frisbee players because you can fit more of them per acre, so the city would rake in more tax dollars. That's a purely economic argument. So don't tell me I misrepresented what you said.

It's not just misrepresentative, it's plagiarism.

[sje46]

This is off-topic but last summer I went to an LA beach (Seal Beach) and there were dead stingray skeletons all over the place. Like, the place was *infested* with them. And I'm an east coast guy; our beaches don't have that or any animals. So I went swimming and I felt something in the water. I thought it was one of those floppy frisbee things. NOPE.

So to get back on topic...yeah, that sucks, I guess.

[Chen]

To be fair: I've never seen Frisbee players attempt to start playing a game amongst people, nor have I seen sunbathers attempt to lay down in the middle of a game.

Both seem equally implausible to me.

Well I've seen people throw a frisbee/football where it lands on people sunbathing, either due to being jerks or just missing a catch. I've never seen someone accidentally start sunbathing in the middle of a game of frisbee or football though.

[Dauric]

To be fair: I've never seen Frisbee players attempt to start playing a game amongst people, nor have I seen sunbathers attempt to lay down in the middle of a game.

Both seem equally implausible to me.

Well I've seen people throw a frisbee/football where it lands on people sunbathing, either due to being jerks or just missing a catch. I've never seen someone accidentally start sunbathing in the middle of a game of frisbee or football though.

Ahh, you've never seen the rare person who can't control their teleporting ability while they're sunbathing. Not many people know that the Volleyball competition of the '84 L.A. Olympics was disrupted for an hour while roughly a dozen 'porting sunbathers suddenly appeared on the designated courts unaware of their surroundings. At the time solar flares were blamed, but some people today blame time-travelling terminators in the weightlifting competition for the sabotage.

...

</snark*>

<* Either that or the cold medication I'm on to fight the flu that has knocked out half my office by this point is phasing my perception of reality in to some really strange places. Probably both 'snark' and strange-brain-syndrome.)