hornadylnl
Shooter
- Nov 19, 2008
- 21,505
- 63
But honestly, where is the wrong in this? My son will likely play one sport if not two. I have no problem with paying to allow him to be able to play. Why should it be free?
Just like what you said about wanting to have a range next door to your house, but if your neighbor didn't want it on his land, then that was his right.
What if your neighbor doesn't have kids and doesn't ever plan to have them. Why should he pay the same as the person with 4 kids who all play sports?
We aren't in disagreement here. I think all players should pay for the cost of equipment, field maintenance, etc. I was talking about "donations" to the athletic boosters to buy influence for their kids.