¶ 59. {concurring). I concur in the court's mandate but write separately to set forth a different analysis of the question whether cheerleading is a "sport involving amateur teams" for purposes of Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m)(a).
¶ 60. The majority opinion resolves this vexing issue of statutory interpretation in one short paragraph, relying on dictionary definitions of the key statutory words "sport" and "teams."1 Dictionaries may aid the court in determining the meaning of statutory words. But they do not in the present case. Dictionaries usually furnish more than one meaning to a word, and a court has to be careful not to select a friendly definition it likes from the many offered without explaining its choice. Thus resort to a dictionary can be, as Justice Scalia has written of the use of legislative history, "the equivalent of entering a crowded cocktail party and looking over the heads of the guests for one's friends."2
¶ 61. The dictionary definitions of "sport" and "teams" do not demonstrate whether cheerleading is "a sport involving amateur teams" for purposes of Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m). The dictionaries suggest that the *384words "sport" and "team" each connote an element of competition that may or may not be present in cheer-leading. "Sport" is defined as "[a]n activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively"3 or as "a game or contest esp. when involving individual skill or physical prowess on which money is staked."4 "Team" is defined as "[a] group on the same side, as in a game,"5 or as "a number of persons selected to contend on one side in a match (as in cricket, football, rowing, or a debate)."6 These definitions plainly suggest that team sports involve competition.
¶ 62. Connoting competition, the definitions of "sport" and "team" yield equivocal results when applied to an activity such as cheerleading. Although organized cheerleading competitions do exist,7 cheerleaders tradi*385tionally have not participated in organized competition and now do so only sometimes. Indeed, the cheerleading squad at issue in the present case apparently did not participate in any organized cheerleading competitions.8 Consequently, it is unclear whether cheerleading is "often undertaken competitively"9 or constitutes "a game or contest."10 Nor is it clear whether a cheerleading squad may be considered "[a] group on the same side, as in a game,"11 or "a number of persons selected to contend on one side in a match."12
¶ 63. This court ordinarily gives statutory language "its 'common, ordinary, and accepted meaning.' "13 The dictionary definitions of "sport" and "team" do not demonstrate whether it is the common, ordinary, and accepted practice to regard cheerleading as a "sport involving amateur teams." At best, the dictionaries demonstrate only that the statutory words "sport" and "team" can be used in reference to cheerleading and *386cheerleading squads, not that it is the common, ordinary, and accepted practice to use these words in such a manner. As Justice Scalia has written, a court must not overlook "the distinction between how a word can be used and how it ordinarily is used" when interpreting statutory text.14
¶ 64. It is hardly surprising that the dictionaries do not definitively determine whether cheerleading constitutes a "sport involving amateur teams." Whether cheerleading should be considered a team sport has been a matter of public debate. Just this last September, a Washington Post article stated that "cheerleading is not officially considered a sport at most high schools and universities" and that "cheerleading in most states is not considered a sport; it's an 'activity' such as chess club and debating."15 It would be very odd if the high schools, universities, and states that do not consider cheerleading a sport could discover the error of their ways simply by consulting a dictionary.
¶ 65. As I see this case, the statute's phrase "a sport involving amateur teams" must be interpreted in light of the legislature's express purpose of "decreasing] uncertainty regarding the legal responsibility for deaths or injuries that result from participation in recreational activities and thereby to help assure the continued availability in this state of enterprises that offer recreational activities to the public."16
*387¶ 66. The application of Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m) would be fraught with uncertainty if competition were taken to be the essence of a "sport involving amateur teams" under the statute. As the majority opinion points out,17 a cheerleading squad may cheer at a basketball game one day but then compete in an organized cheerleading contest the next. The statute's purpose of decreasing uncertainty would not be furthered if the statutory phrase "sport involving amateur teams" imposed a requirement of competition on cheerleading limiting the scope of Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m).
¶ 67. Accordingly, because cheerleading can be construed as "a sport involving amateur teams" and such construction furthers the purpose of Wis. Stat. § 895.525, I conclude that Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m)(a) covers high school cheerleaders. For the reasons set forth, I write separately.
¶ 68. I am authorized to state that Justice ANN WALSH BRADLEY joins this opinion.See majority op., ¶ 17.
Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 U.S. 511, 519 (1993) (Scalia, J., concurring).
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1742 (3d ed. 1992) [hereinafter American Heritage],
Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2206 (1961) [hereinafter Webster's].
American Heritage, supra note 3, at 1842. American Heritage denotes this particular definition of "team" as applicable in the context oí "Sports & Games." Id. This sports-specific definition of "team" is the most relevant definition for purposes of Wis. Stat. § 895.525(4m), which refers specifically to sports teams and not to teams generally.
Inexplicably, the majority opinion skips over American Heritage's sports-specific definition of "team" in favor of an alternative definition that obviously is meant to apply in broader contexts: "a group organized to work together: a team of engineers." Id. (italics in original). See also majority op., ¶ 17 (quoting this definition in part).
Webster's, supra note 4, at 2346.
See World Cheerleading Association, 2007-2008 WCA National Champions, at http://www.cheerwca.com/ 2007- champions -results.htm (last visited Jan. 20, 2009).
See majority op., ¶ 3 (stating only that Noffke was a varsity basketball cheerleader; not mentioning any sort of organized cheerleading competitions).
American Heritage, supra note 3, at 1742.
Webster's, supra note 4, at 2206.
American Heritage, supra note 3, at 1842.
Although a cheerleading squad obviously represents "a group on the same side," it is uncertain whether a cheerleading squad is "in a game" any more than the fans are. The squad in the present case cheers at high school basketball games. It could reasonably be stated that these basketball games involve only two teams (the ones that play basketball), not four teams as the defendants might appear to argue.
Webster's, supra note 4, at 2346.
Majority op., ¶ 10 (quoting State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane County, 2004 WI 58, ¶ 45, 271 Wis. 2d 633, 681 N.W.2d 110.
Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223, 242 (1993) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (emphasis in original).
Rooting for Safety, Washington Post, Sept. 9, 2008, at HE01.
Wis. Stat. § 895.525(1).
See also Racine Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. State Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86, ¶ 92, 292 Wis. 2d 549, 717 *387N.W.2d 184 (2006) (construing the statute's terms to be consistent with its express purpose); State v. Hayes, 2004 WI 80, ¶ 39, 273 Wis. 2d 1, 681 N.W.2d 203 (2004) ("We therefore turn to an analysis of the purpose[]... of the statute to determine the interpretation that gives the statute its intended effect.").
Majority op., ¶ 33.