Garcia suspended

[Rivercard]

Hey. This tread has 100 replies now.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Rivercard
Hey. This tread has 100 replies now.

No it doesn't!

 

[Lars the Red]

Originally posted by Lex
1616- I beg to differ, our first president was a hemp grower. I believe he lived in the northeast. Hippie lettuce grows wild all over the upper midwest, where they have long winters, unless it has been destroyed.

Here in Arizona, there have been operations growing plants just outside of Phoenix, in the hills, where a spring fed the crop.

Native Americans propogated the plant before the white man ever landed in the new world, hence the traditional smoking of the peace pipe. Who wants to fight after that?

Um....Lex, we had fields of the stuff all over the place where I grew up, but it wasn't worth the match it took to light it. MJ has greatly varying amounts of THC depending on soil, light, fertization, cultivation, etc. Saying it grows all over doesn't mean it's good all over.

 

[Sack Daddy]

Ugh, say what?

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
Kerouac, this is one time I completely agree with you.

While I agree that many of the drug laws are more political than anything. Ephedra (also known as Ephedrine, or Ma Huang) is one drug that has been proven very very dangerous health-wise with many, many docuemented deaths attributed to it....not just in Football.

Any of you who thinks a professional football player who shows up with this weigth loss, energy boosting, performance enhancing drug in their system and says "I wasn't taking it for that purpose" is totally, totally naive.

The drug has been proven, time and again to be very dangerous.
It goes way beyond football.

That's why such a tough line on it by the NFL. In this case I applaud their decision.

Frank Garcia is an idiot. He got caught.

I would suggest that any of you who keep saying "its just a cold medication" go to google and type in Ephedrine.
Learn WTF you are talking about. IT IS A VERY, VERY DANGEROUS DRUG!!!!

I agree, Ephedrine has been fatal in some cases, but you are going over the top. Deaths attributed to it's use as compared to the number of users is very rare. If you read up, you'll see what I mean. One death is one too many, but you have to have perspective. I don't think Garcia is an idiot and I don't find it inconceiveable he was using cold medicine to treat a cold. If I was going to cheat and get an edge, I'd use something better than Ephedra.

 

[Alan]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
The drug has been proven, time and again to be very dangerous.
It goes way beyond football.

So has Aspirin and Tylenol. Let's hope no one gets a headache.

 

[JeffGollin]

Just one person's opinion, but -

Just examples... My pointe: Is it OK to legalize MJ just because is not quite as lethal as alcohol?
If an individual ingests any substance (from MJ to Cocaine to Nicotine to Beer to High Cholesterol Pork Rind to Ephedra), it should be considered a medical problem not a legal or criminal one.

But if a person steals to support a drug habit, drives under the influence or gets drunk and beats his wife, it should be considered a legal (i.e. criminal) problem.

And if taking a drug impairs a person's ability to operate satisfactorily in the workplace, the company has the option of helping the dude/dude-ess or firing his/her ass.

And if someone under the influence acts inappropriately in a restaurant or public place, it should be handled no more stringently or leniently than if it was merely a sober obnoxious person who was acting up.

The remaining gray area then becomes "what about kids?" In my opinion, the distribution and consumption of anything that can harm a minor (physically, emotionally or mentally/now or for the future) should be prohibited/regulated with proper penalties enforced.

And you could also make the case that - since anyone physically or emotionally addicted to drugs, food etc. - is not under control and, therefore, no more able to cope emotionally than a minor - that the distribution of all of these things should be either prohibited or regulated according to potential severity of addiction or physical/emotional damage to the user.

Bottom Line - Sock it to the suppliers and distributors. Educate potential users and treat the users. Prosecute users who break other laws. Use peer-pressure and civil remedies to deal with users who behave obnoxiously. Protect the kids.

 

[Rivercard]

Re: Just one person's opinion, but -

Originally posted by JeffGollin
Bottom Line - Sock it to the suppliers and distributors. Educate potential users and treat the users. Prosecute users who break other laws. Use peer-pressure and civil remedies to deal with users who behave obnoxiously. Protect the kids.

Hey Jeff, I couldn't figure out your post - Can't tell if you were leaning more to the side of police enforcement or de-criminalization. I don't mean to sound harsh but I would prefer not to live in a "child proof" world if you know what I mean.