h a l f b a k e r y
Viva los semi-panaderos!
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
or Create a new account.
|
|
| Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Football is dangerous - people collide
with
each other and with the ground, and
pads
notwithstanding, they are hurt -
sometimes crippled. Football fans like
the
strategery involved - so why not touch
football? Clearly, violence is part of the
appeal.
I propose taser touch football.
Players
would carry tasers and the ball carrier
would be tased instead of tackled.
Blocking would be the same - no
grabbing, so no tasing. Getting tased
hurts, but a perusal of youtube will show
many taser parties and inebriated,
giggling men tasing one another with no
seious ill effects.. Getting tased is safer
than physically tackling and subduing a
person, which is why tasers help cops kill
fewer people. TT football would retain
the
strategy and substitute a safer form of
violence.
Is the Taser safer? A topical issue.
http://www.cbc.ca/c...1/15/rnc-taser.html
[boysparks, Nov 17 2007]
Short name, e.g., Bob's Coffee
Destination URL.
E.g., http://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
Does offense get tasers too? I mean, uh, just in case somebody fumbles the ball, which would probably happen every single play. |
|
| |