ORIGINAL: SoCal GliderGuider
It is to be noted that the $1,000,000 is for ORGANIZED sports such as little league and youth soccer. Not for individuals just playing catch base ball or kicking around a soccer ball. Same could be demanded of an R/C club as it is an ORGANIZED activity demanding the same considerations as other ORGANIZED sports -- control of public property to facilitate their activities.
So the argument for the same liability coverage as the AMA to use a public facility as an individual is spurious and extremely questionable.
Of course the post I was responding to was talking about clubs and not individuals, so my response was neither spurious or questionable.
ira d wrote
I dont know this for sure but i suspect the reason some of these cities or requiring AMA
is because some clubs made a pitch about the AMA to them.
I was simply saying that a club may choose to not use the AMA insurance benefit as a bargaining chip, but then either the club, or its members, would have to come up with something. Unless of course you are making the point that you think that there should be no insurance required by anyone, which is what you seem to be saying when talking about people playing catch in the park.