Do you believe the NFL should suspend players for Marijauna? (1 Viewer)

[VaTerp]

This is the most ridiculous thread ever started. Geez, should teachers, doctors, and policemen be allowed to smoke dope? If you were a QB would you want your right tackle to smoke down before a game and protect you? That's just ridiculous. Do you know how many legal issues you could throw at someone. Would you let a doctor operate on you after he smoked down? Let's see, would you want a pitcher throwing a 94 mph fastball at your head after he smoked down? Can someone delete this thread? Dumb. Justin Blackmon just got nailed again. Why aren't ppl throwing up support threads for Mr. Blackmon?

Is this the MOST ridiculous thread ever? Really? Naaaw

And yes, Teachers, Police, Doctors, Politicians, Programmers, Etc should all be allowed to smoke dope ... on their own time.

No-one here, or at least I hope no-one here, is suggesting that these professionals, or the ones in the NFL, should burn a fat one an hour before stepping on the field, into a classroom, into a squad car or into an operating room. But adults should be able to fire up just like they are allowed to drink up when they are away from their profession.

Amen.

RoosterScott's post, which seems to have been deleted, displays an incredible amount of ignorance and is eerily reminiscent of the fallacy based boogeyman arguments that contributed to the propaganda machine which helped put in place federal marijuana laws in the 1930s.

1) Roosterscott ask should certain professionals "be allowed to smoke dope" as if there are not people of ALL professions smoke weed and use other recreational drugs. I personally know of several lawyers, doctors,business executives, politicians, and others who use recreational drugs on a regular basis. But guess what, they are not tested randomly for it, they perform competently at their jobs, everybody goes about their business, and nobody is worse for the wear. The suggestion that a lack of testing and suspending players for weed will lead to stoned out offensive linemen putting their QBs health at risk, pitchers throwing at the heads of baseball players, or that some legal issues would result from this is BEYOND preposterous and scary that any presumably serious adult even thinks like this.

2) His post also reflects the ignorance that NFL players, like many other professionals from all lines of work, don't use marijuana now. As many here know, unless you are in the drug program the NFL test you once a year for weed. Many former players have openly talked about how they used marijuana throughout the season because they preferred it over prescription narcotics for pain management. Former Redskins TE, Chris Cooley recently said on the radio that he estimated that well over 50% of the locker room in his playing days consisted of guys who smoked weed and that it would likely be easier to find a group of players to go toke up with than it would to find guys who wanted to go out for beers. So weed use is high in the NFL NOW. And obviously a guy like Josh Gordon can use marijuana and still perform at a high level. Just like there are many people in other professions who use recreational drugs in their own time but then perform their jobs at a high level. We all know that In the NFL if you don't perform your job, regardless of the reason, you are not going to last long. So that makes roosterscott's post even more absurd.

3) For those commenting on that the NFL should continue to test for it b/c it's illegal- Why do you think the NFL should be playing law enforcement? There are many illegal activities that people take part in that the NFL, and other companies, don't test actively involve themselves in. If there was a test that could show whether or not you slept with an escort or a prostitute should the NFL test for that? Because if they did, A LOT more players would be getting suspended. And if other companies did this many people would be out of work, like say a sitting U.S. Senator from Louisiana.

And it's illegal to use many of the drugs the NFL pushes on players for pain management without a prescription. Should the NFL be testing to make sure that all players are only using these drugs when they have a written prescription and using only the prescribed amount? Actually, you could make a MUCH better argument for the NFL doing this then testing for marijuana which is medically proven to have medicinal benefits and is MUCH less harmful to people than the very prescription drugs that are pushed by team doctors. The notion that the NFL should test for something simply b/c it's illegal is just not logical.

4) Speaking of illegality, marijuana is legal in two states and has been decriminalized in 16 others as well as the District of Columbia. So 1/3 of the country doesnt even believe its an issue their law enforcement should be dealing with. Yet people think the NFL should test for it "because it's illegal." That's just absurd. Additionally, medical marijuana use is legal in 23 states plus D.C. So that's nearly half the country where the NFL policy is at odds with players and their medical providers making personal decisions on how to treat issues that marijuana could be part of the solution to.

5) A few people have commented on other companies that fire people for one failed drug test. While I don't doubt the veracity of these claims I know that according to the Society of Human Resource Management nearly 2/3 of employers do NOT test current employees AT ALL, let alone random drug testing which is relatively rare for most businesses to do. And while the SHRM say that about 57% of employers use pre-employment testing I personally know of several instances where people were hired despite a failed test and have a friend who works in HR management who said it's "common practice" for companies to overlook failed pre-employment tests if the candidates are otherwise well qualified. I think there is an argument to be made for drug testing at certain jobs that can affect public safety or post incident testing for people who operate vehicles or machinery that can pose public safety threats but for the most part people who use recreational drugs are not being tested at their jobs and to say the NFL should test players because joe schmo working at so and so place faces the same consequences is inaccurate and out of context.

There are also people who commented that the NFL should suspend players for positive test b/c its in the CBA. You can't really argue with that. I think the way the OP posed the question is flawed. I certainly don't expect the NFL to ignore the CBA and suddenly change course. I do believe, VERY STRONGLY, though that the NFL and NFLPA are doing a disservice to itself, it's players, and the fans with it's draconian drug policies, particularly once players "enter the program." I have no problem with disciplinary actions and suspensions for activities that result in arrest but the random testing for marijuana, particularly given the way the NFL pushes much more harmful prescription narcotics, is poor policy plain and simple. I really hope the NFLPA addresses this in the next CBA and that the NFL does not hold it over their heads as leverage to negotiating financial, or other, concessions.

 

[renesauz]

One thing that bothers me is the constant assertion that marajuana is benign and does no harm- this is simply not true. I've never met a heavy smoker who hasn't gotten dumber over the years, and pot does have a lot of carcinagens. And NOBODY is smarter while they are high, no matter what some delusional folks in here suggest.

We could say the same or simlar things about things like alcohol, so this is not an automatic reason to keep it illegal, but let's stop acting like it's completely harmless.

 

[Captain Hook]

Flawed poll

The NFL rules have weed as a banned substance so if that is the rule the violators should get a suspension

BUT should the NFL change the rule? Yes of course - if anyone is going to suspend the player it should be the clubs they work for (if they care)

 

[VaTerp]

One thing that bothers me is the constant assertion that marajuana is benign and does no harm- this is simply not true. I've never met a heavy smoker who hasn't gotten dumber over the years, and pot does have a lot of carcinagens. And NOBODY is smarter while they are high, no matter what some delusional folks in here suggest.

We could say the same or simlar things about things like alcohol, so this is not an automatic reason to keep it illegal, but let's stop acting like it's completely harmless.

One thing that bothers me is this straw man argument that people often make when discussing this issue.

Nobody in this thread, or in serious debates about marijuana, suggest that it does "no harm" or that you are smarter when you are high. One person in this thread said they do their job better when they have smoked weed. And who are you to say his self assessment is inaccurate? It's certainly possible. Everyone's brain is different and people react differently to things. I know professional writers who smoke before doing their work. I know other professionals who smoke daily, but only after they've done working for the day.

But the point is that just because something is potentially harmful doesnt mean it should be illegal or that the NFL should be testing for it. It's well documented that marijuana consumption is SIGNIFICANTLY less harmful than alcohol, tobacco, and sugar consumption. Yet nobody is seriously suggesting that these things be completely illegal or that the NFL should suspend players for the latter two. A lot of carcinogens you say... Relative to what? Microwave popcorn has "a lot" of carcinogens. So does alcohol, red meat, soda and other sugary drinks, artificial sweeteners, transfats found in fries and snack chips, and most farm raised fish. Should all of these things be illegal and tested for as well? The fact is that there are no conclusive medical studies that show a definitive link between even heavy marijuana use and cancer as opposed to numerous studies that show a direct link between tobacco use and cancer and other fatal diseases and the same thing with alcohol and sugar consumption.

The point is not that smoking marijuana is the most healthful thing in the world that will improve lives. But that doesnt mean it should be illegal or that it's recreational use alone should cost people their careers. There are many other things that people indulge in every day, including prescription narcotics pushed by the NFL, that are proven to have MUCH worse negative effects on people. That is a fact.

So nobody is saying the NFL, or anyone else, should promote recreational drug use or that everyone should be lighting up before going to work. All most reasonable legalization advocates are saying is that there is no logical justification for continued prohibition of the drug or for entities like the NFL to randomly test players for it. Not to mention that marijuana prohibition is a huge drain on public resources, is enforced in a discriminatory fashion, and denies some people medical treatment options which would otherwise be prescribed to them by their doctors. But that is a discussion for another forum.

 

[renesauz]

One thing that bothers me is the constant assertion that marajuana is benign and does no harm- this is simply not true. I've never met a heavy smoker who hasn't gotten dumber over the years, and pot does have a lot of carcinagens. And NOBODY is smarter while they are high, no matter what some delusional folks in here suggest.

We could say the same or simlar things about things like alcohol, so this is not an automatic reason to keep it illegal, but let's stop acting like it's completely harmless.

One thing that bothers me is this straw man argument that people often make when discussing this issue.

Nobody in this thread, or in serious debates about marijuana, suggest that it does "no harm" or that you are smarter when you are high. One person in this thread said they do their job better when they have smoked weed. And who are you to say his self assessment is inaccurate? It's certainly possible. Everyone's brain is different and people react differently to things. I know professional writers who smoke before doing their work. I know other professionals who smoke daily, but only after they've done working for the day.

But the point is that just because something is potentially harmful doesnt mean it should be illegal or that the NFL should be testing for it. It's well documented that marijuana consumption is SIGNIFICANTLY less harmful than alcohol, tobacco, and sugar consumption. Yet nobody is seriously suggesting that these things be completely illegal or that the NFL should suspend players for the latter two. A lot of carcinogens you say... Relative to what? Microwave popcorn has "a lot" of carcinogens. So does alcohol, red meat, soda and other sugary drinks, artificial sweeteners, transfats found in fries and snack chips, and most farm raised fish. Should all of these things be illegal and tested for as well? The fact is that there are no conclusive medical studies that show a definitive link between even heavy marijuana use and cancer as opposed to numerous studies that show a direct link between tobacco use and cancer and other fatal diseases and the same thing with alcohol and sugar consumption.

The point is not that smoking marijuana is the most healthful thing in the world that will improve lives. But that doesnt mean it should be illegal or that it's recreational use alone should cost people their careers. There are many other things that people indulge in every day, including prescription narcotics pushed by the NFL, that are proven to have MUCH worse negative effects on people. That is a fact.

So nobody is saying the NFL, or anyone else, should promote recreational drug use or that everyone should be lighting up before going to work. All most reasonable legalization advocates are saying is that there is no logical justification for continued prohibition of the drug or for entities like the NFL to randomly test players for it. Not to mention that marijuana prohibition is a huge drain on public resources, is enforced in a discriminatory fashion, and denies some people medical treatment options which would otherwise be prescribed to them by their doctors. But that is a discussion for another forum.

Note the bolded.

I'm having a problem with my teens and pot right now. They seem to think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and are constantly smoking it. Numerous studies have shown that it does in fact, have an adverse effect on the adolescant brain especially. And I wasn't kidding when I said I've never known a heavy smoker who stayed even remotely smart. (But I've known several who I'd swear have gotten much dumber over the years.) I think the evidence suggests that much like alcohol, light to even moderate use poses little risk, but heavy use most certainly does. My point is that while we can certainly debate whether or not it should be illegal (and I tend to lean that it probably should be legalized for adults), we should not discuss pot in any context without at least acknowledging that there are, in fact, negative effects.

 

[Bri]

I don't think it's safe and/or a good decision to smoke weed before a game

 

[Mr Non Sequitur]

The Factor or night report from BO'R today was all about the NYT asking for the legalization of marijauna per the weekend. It is comical to hear the person against it using alcohol and firearms as the reasoning why. "Look at the terribleness in alcohol, we can't have another one like marijauna come along"

Do these people not understand that drinking likely would decrease in this country? You know how many people would skip the happy hour to run home and light up a J to forget the problems of the day?

70/30 against the NFL suspensions for ganja, pretty clear where most stand on this. I think 10 years ago the poll would have been more evenly split or perhaps even a little the other way. Times change.

 

[VaTerp]

One thing that bothers me is the constant assertion that marajuana is benign and does no harm- this is simply not true. I've never met a heavy smoker who hasn't gotten dumber over the years, and pot does have a lot of carcinagens. And NOBODY is smarter while they are high, no matter what some delusional folks in here suggest.

We could say the same or simlar things about things like alcohol, so this is not an automatic reason to keep it illegal, but let's stop acting like it's completely harmless.

One thing that bothers me is this straw man argument that people often make when discussing this issue.

Nobody in this thread, or in serious debates about marijuana, suggest that it does "no harm" or that you are smarter when you are high. One person in this thread said they do their job better when they have smoked weed. And who are you to say his self assessment is inaccurate? It's certainly possible. Everyone's brain is different and people react differently to things. I know professional writers who smoke before doing their work. I know other professionals who smoke daily, but only after they've done working for the day.

But the point is that just because something is potentially harmful doesnt mean it should be illegal or that the NFL should be testing for it. It's well documented that marijuana consumption is SIGNIFICANTLY less harmful than alcohol, tobacco, and sugar consumption. Yet nobody is seriously suggesting that these things be completely illegal or that the NFL should suspend players for the latter two. A lot of carcinogens you say... Relative to what? Microwave popcorn has "a lot" of carcinogens. So does alcohol, red meat, soda and other sugary drinks, artificial sweeteners, transfats found in fries and snack chips, and most farm raised fish. Should all of these things be illegal and tested for as well? The fact is that there are no conclusive medical studies that show a definitive link between even heavy marijuana use and cancer as opposed to numerous studies that show a direct link between tobacco use and cancer and other fatal diseases and the same thing with alcohol and sugar consumption.

The point is not that smoking marijuana is the most healthful thing in the world that will improve lives. But that doesnt mean it should be illegal or that it's recreational use alone should cost people their careers. There are many other things that people indulge in every day, including prescription narcotics pushed by the NFL, that are proven to have MUCH worse negative effects on people. That is a fact.

So nobody is saying the NFL, or anyone else, should promote recreational drug use or that everyone should be lighting up before going to work. All most reasonable legalization advocates are saying is that there is no logical justification for continued prohibition of the drug or for entities like the NFL to randomly test players for it. Not to mention that marijuana prohibition is a huge drain on public resources, is enforced in a discriminatory fashion, and denies some people medical treatment options which would otherwise be prescribed to them by their doctors. But that is a discussion for another forum.

Note the bolded.

I'm having a problem with my teens and pot right now. They seem to think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and are constantly smoking it. Numerous studies have shown that it does in fact, have an adverse effect on the adolescant brain especially. And I wasn't kidding when I said I've never known a heavy smoker who stayed even remotely smart. (But I've known several who I'd swear have gotten much dumber over the years.) I think the evidence suggests that much like alcohol, light to even moderate use poses little risk, but heavy use most certainly does. My point is that while we can certainly debate whether or not it should be illegal (and I tend to lean that it probably should be legalized for adults), we should not discuss pot in any context without at least acknowledging that there are, in fact, negative effects.

This is a complete mischaracterization of the evidence. There is a STARK difference in the risk and adverse effects of heavy marijuana use and heavy alcohol use. The CDC states that excessive alcohol use accounts for nearly 90,000 direct deaths and over 1 million emergency room visits, and is the 3rd leading lifestyle cause of death in the U.S. Additionally, alcohol is a leading cause of chronic disease and contributes to the likelihood of violent crime. The CDC has not data that marijuana does ANY of these things. There is NO COMPARISON on the documented adverse affects of marijuana and alcohol use so to say what you said above is flat out wrong in just about any context.

So that is why I go on and on about the facts and evidence on marijuana use vs alcohol, tobacco, sugar,etc. is because people like you will continue to say things that are counter to the facts and evidence. You say you weren't kidding that you don't know a heavy smoker who stayed even remotely smart. SO WHAT? That is your experience. Maybe you don't know a lot of people, maybe you don't know a lot of smart people, maybe you just happen to know some really dumb potheads. Maybe you are conveniently generalizing things to support your predetermined position. But I know a lot of really smart, really successful people who smoke marijuana on a regular basis. And there are millions of very smart, very successful people who do the same. This is undeniable to anyone with common sense but it's also largely beside the point without the medical studies that prove your assertion that even heavy marijuana use in ADULTS causes loss of intelligence.

When it comes to underage people a lot of things affect their development and nobody in their right mind is advocating for minors to legally be allowed to smoke. Just like they arent legally allowed to do a number of things. As a parent and someone who has worked directly with kids in some professional capacity for over a decade, I don't wish teenage problems on anyone. But I can tell you what, I'd rather them be experimenting with weed than with cigarettes or binge drinking or any number of things a lot of teenagers inevitably get into. All of this, of course, has nothing to do with whether or not the NFL should be testing it's players for marijuana use.

 

[Bri]

The Factor or night report from BO'R today was all about the NYT asking for the legalization of marijauna per the weekend. It is comical to hear the person against it using alcohol and firearms as the reasoning why. "Look at the terribleness in alcohol, we can't have another one like marijauna come along"

Do these people not understand that drinking likely would decrease in this country? You know how many people would skip the happy hour to run home and light up a J to forget the problems of the day?

70/30 against the NFL suspensions for ganja, pretty clear where most stand on this. I think 10 years ago the poll would have been more evenly split or perhaps even a little the other way. Times change.

Looking back at prohibition could probably teach us a thing or two at this point.

I don't want people high and driving. I don't want my babysitter stoned while watching my kids. I don't want construction workers operating a wrecking ball and toking a the same time(although it'd probably be amusing at first) ....there's a lot of alcohol laws that I would like applied to marijuana if it's legalized.

Marijuana also offers a second hand high which will make it concerning to others and that'll need to be discussed at some point

 

[Bob Barker]

i love weed, my whole life revolves around it. I would never work for a company that didnt allow you to smoke

 

[GregR]

NFL and NFLPA discussing raising marijuana thresholds. Not surprising if it ends up being used as leverage to get the HGH testing agreement done.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/josh-gordon-s-suspension-needs-to-prompt-nfl-players-to-finalize-drug-policy-082914

Sources say the NFL Players Association would like to have the NFL's THC threshold raised. The league office surely noted WADA's changing its level, realizes Major League Baseball's threshold is 50 ng/ml and understands many of the stigmas surrounding marijuana have lessened in recent years. A league source said the NFL is willing to discuss raising the levels, but an agreement on that issue hasn't been reached. The source also said it wasn't until very recently that the NFLPA formally proposed raising the levels.

...

But that's just what it's shaping up to be in Cleveland, in part because the players and the league are stuck on a major issue in the drug policy, and that's commissioner Roger Goodell's power to hear appeals in cases where there's a violation without positive test (e.g. Rodney Harrison's four-game ban in 2007 after he admitted he received HGH). If they can work through that point, the belief is everything else could easily be negotiated. And that means likely higher thresholds for marijuana testing.

The sides have pretty much worked out the details on HGH-testing procedures, third-party arbitration on positive tests and a population study to determine normal levels of the hormone in the average NFL player's body.

The NFL gave in to the demands for the population study, has been willing to give players true neutral arbitration on all positive drug tests and has made other adjustments in the union's favor, such as considering a positive test for Adderall to be a substance-abuse violation. The new classification would refer players to the drug program instead of a performance-enhancing issue that currently results in a four-game suspension. The NFLPA, meanwhile, has shown flexibility on increased penalties for first-time DUI offenses, though not enough for the league, apparently. In Goodell's letter to owners to introduce the new policy on domestic-violence, he stated the union has resisted the league's push for a two-game suspension for first-time offense.

 

[Pots]

i love weed, my whole life revolves around it. I would never work for a company that didnt allow you to smoke

That's... kind of sad...

 

[Pots]

NFL and NFLPA discussing raising marijuana thresholds. Not surprising if it ends up being used as leverage to get the HGH testing agreement done.

HGH testing > Marajuana testing. I'll take that trade.

 

[drummer]

i love weed, my whole life revolves around it. I would never work for a company that didnt allow you to smoke

That's... kind of sad...

I dunno. I one way I would agree with it. Then again, you get fired if you work in a casino and you test positive for weed.

Job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weed.

Yeah, you got a point.

 

[Pots]

i love weed, my whole life revolves around it. I would never work for a company that didnt allow you to smoke

That's... kind of sad...

I dunno. I one way I would agree with it. Then again, you get fired if you work in a casino and you test positive for weed.

Job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weed.

Yeah, you got a point.

He could be Josh Gordon...

 

[drummer]

i love weed, my whole life revolves around it. I would never work for a company that didnt allow you to smoke

That's... kind of sad...

I dunno. I one way I would agree with it. Then again, you get fired if you work in a casino and you test positive for weed.

Job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weed.

Yeah, you got a point.

He could be Josh Gordon...

Well, if a doctor gave me a choice between weed and opiates for pain, I'd take the weed.

Unless he prescribes me some damn good opiates...

 

[The Big Guy]

I would rather see a player smoke some weed to help them manage the beating that they put onto their bodies vs becoming pill popping addicts to manage their pain.

 

[Leonidas]

I think marijuana should be legal and I do not believe employers should punish employees for using marijuana when off the clock and off company property while not acting in any official or representative function

 

[McGarnicle]

I do not think that players should be suspended for smoking marijuana, and also I believe that I would like to smoke some of that marijuana right now.

 

[flapgreen]

Nope

 

[habsfan]

The pot doesn't bother me.

Their inability to stay away from it in light of the rules bothers me...

 

[hoopvillian]

I do not think that players should be suspended for smoking marijuana, and also I believe that I would like to smoke some of that marijuana right now.

I'll join you. Players union should get this exempt next time they re-do their contract.

 

[Banger]

It's ridiculous it's even illegal. It's not performance enhancing and shouldn't be tested for. They pump these guys full of opiate based pain killers and it's fine. That stuff is waaaaaayy more harmful than pot has been or ever will be but it's fine because it's "legal".