Comments on: Another Try in New York

By: NATHAN

NATHAN — Sun, 05 Sep 2010 15:23:10 +0000

CheapTabletsOnline.com. Canadian Health&Care.No prescription online pharmacy.Special Internet Prices.Best quality drugs. No prescription pills. Order pills online…

Buy:Zetia.Lipothin.Benicar.Prozac.Female Pink Viagra.Wellbutrin SR.Cozaar.Seroquel.Nymphomax.Amoxicillin.Aricept.Lasix.Buspar.Zocor.Female Cialis.SleepWell.Ventolin.Lipitor.Acomplia.Advair….

By: admin

admin — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:29:56 +0000

Thanks. The post is protected, if you’d like to use the post let me know.

By: Kelly Brown

Kelly Brown — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:19:44 +0000

I really like your post. Does it copyright protected?

By: admin

admin — Wed, 20 May 2009 01:33:33 +0000

F.E.K.

You are right on, from an objective standpoint MMA is no more brutal than boxing (and as you point out, is actually probably less brutal over the long haul). I don’t think the overall health impacts are what’s really under some people’s skin. In my humble opinion, I think that some people just can’t get past the groundfighting. While Bob Reilly doesn’t focus on groundfighting, I think that is really where a lot of people get stuck. People are just not used to seeing a fighter go down and get swarmed by an opponent. Instead, they’re used to seeing the downed fighter be allowed to get back to semi-consciousness, stand up, and take more abuse. To some people the latter seems less brutal. I, like you, don’t see it that way.

By: fast eddie k

fast eddie k — Tue, 12 May 2009 18:31:29 +0000

1.) The current New York Law banning “combative sports” (other than boxing and sanctioned martial arts), is in opposition to popular sentiment, capitalism, and plain old common sense. These pressures will hopefully be a catalyst for regulatory change. Mixed Martial Arts is exactly as the name indicates, mixed “martial arts”. Looking back, the evolution of the sport is definite and measurable, and should be examined further to support MMA’s inclusion as a “martial art”. The 1997 ban was, in a sense, knee-jerking. The athletes of todays UFC have come a long way from the likes of Tank Abbott and company, when there weren’t even weight divisions.
To my knowledge, there has been only one documented case of a death from injuries suffered at a professional MMA event. It was later discovered that the individual has a preexisting condition which may have contributed to the complications leading to his death.
In contrast, there have been several boxing related deaths I can remember. Additionally, boxing gloves were origianlly designed to protect a fighter’s hands, not an opponent’s face…thus prolonging the matches and increasing the chronic effects of repeated trauma to the head. From this prospective, I see MMA as something less brutal as suggested by Bob Reilly.

By: admin

admin — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:54:51 +0000

Thanks for bringing up money. While not addressed in my original post, Mr. Reilly’s report does actually discuss the economics of hosting MMA events. He starts by stating that the potential economic benefits to NY should be irrelevant to whether MMA is legalized. I’m not sure I understand this statement. Specifically, Mr. Reilly seems to be primarily concerned with the detrimental effect legalizing MMA would have on the people of NY. Thus, I would think that a legislator with such a concern would want to be sure that the activity being outlawed would actually be having a net negative impact. In order to figure that out, you’d need to do some kind of cost/benefit analysis, which (gasp) would need to consider economics.

Despite his apparent reservations, Mr. Reilly’s Report does go on to discuss economics. Specifically, the Report states that an economic impact study prepared for Zuffa, LLC (owner of the UFC) estimated that two events (one in Buffalo and one in NYC) would generate $837,000 for the state, $30,000 for Buffalo, and $400,000 for NYC. The Report states that this revenue would result from various taxes including sales tax, personal income tax, business income tax, exhibition tax, and auto rental tax. But Mr. Reilly goes on to point out that the proposed legislation would cap an additional “event tax” (i.e. tax on ticket sales) at $50,000, while other states, such as Maryland, have enacted a 10% event tax.

All that being said, Assemblyman Reilly seems to argue that since the amount of potential state revenue would be small relative to the total gate, hosting such events would result in a net loss for the local economy. Specifically, the Report states: “In summary, an event at a site such as Albany would have a gate of approximately $4 million wih $500,000 being added to the local economy; however, $3.5 million would be taken out of the local economy and sent to Las Vegas where Zuffa, LLC is located.” The Report then makes the seemingly irrelevant points that the owners of Zuffa also own casinos and don’t employ union labor. I didn’t go to law school because I’m a math wiz, but this sounds like a $500,000 gain for Albany, as opposed to a $3.5 million dollar loss. I can understand opposing the legislation because the state’s cut isn’t big enough, but I don’t understand arguing that this is somehow a loss.

By: vripley

vripley — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:04:43 +0000

This is a great post that bring up some very important points. I agree about boxing being in the same category. I fear that, like most things, money is behind much of this… I know you didn’t want to drag other sports through the “violence ringer,” but I thought that I should mention that hockey and football (among many others) are similar. While I realize that the objective is different than simply hitting your opponent, it is a very important part. Not to mention, it is the component that brings the fans back for more. When are these tree-hugging bleeding hearts gonna realize that we like violence?

By: Finance Information Blog

Finance Information Blog — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:38:44 +0000

[...] Another Try in New York « MMA Legal Spot [...]