Gregory takes shot at Mike Nolan

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
10,995
So?

I don't get how that is relevant to this conversation.
I could see a situation where the coach may not have trusted that he was going to make it to next week due to so many failed tests.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
10,995
Because last year a failed test couldn't lead to a suspension?
I se your point. All I'm saying is that some old school dudes feel that it is detrimental to trust someone who has been in a lot of trouble too quickly. Or ever.
 

boozeman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
74,187
I se your point. All I'm saying is that some old school dudes feel that it is detrimental to trust someone who has been in a lot of trouble too quickly. Or ever.
It all just comes down to trusting some stoner.

I can see the rationale, mainly because it has been in place for so long.

Someone that smokes pot = Unreliable head case.

I have seen both sides of the spectrum.

This is just going to be something that society has to deal with. Either you accept, at least try to understand or just flat out reject it.

Sadly, even fucking pot is still a divisive issue.

And you know, and I know, that marijuana laws is, are and always have been a joke.

I would hope that anyone who has smoked a fucking joint would not stand in the way of making it legal.

But I think they do.
 

jsmith6919

Classless Shitpainter
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
23,047
I've long been in the faction that weed should be legal but I'm curious what yall think about driving while high? Should it be the same, less, or more than a dwi?
 

boozeman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
74,187
I've long been in the faction that weed should be legal but I'm curious what yall think about driving while high? Should it be the same, less, or more than a dwi?
Good question.

Driving high is nothing like driving drunk.

But both do classify as impaired.

I think drunk drivers are more aggressive, reckless and unpredictable.

Stoned drivers are more concerned about getting their fast food home before it gets its feelings hurt.
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
16,157
I've long been in the faction that weed should be legal but I'm curious what yall think about driving while high? Should it be the same, less, or more than a dwi?
I think it should be the same. You would be driving under the influence. Doesn't matter if it's a drug or alcohol. The point is, your ability to safely operate a motor vehicle would be impaired.

But how would they be able to immediately test for it like they do with alcohol? They can do a road side sobriety test, sure. But they'd still need a blood level for legal purposes. Could testing breath or blood give them that immediate result? I honestly have no idea.
 

boozeman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
74,187
I think it should be the same. You would be driving under the influence. Doesn't matter if it's a drug or alcohol. The point is, your ability to safely operate a motor vehicle would be impaired.

But how would they be able to immediately test for it like they do with alcohol? They can do a road side sobriety test, sure. But they'd still need a blood level for legal purposes. Could testing breath or blood give them that immediate result? I honestly have no idea.
Thing is, they wouldn't. Way too complicated.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
10,995
It all just comes down to trusting some stoner.

I can see the rationale, mainly because it has been in place for so long.

Someone that smokes pot = Unreliable head case.

I have seen both sides of the spectrum.

This is just going to be something that society has to deal with. Either you accept, at least try to understand or just flat out reject it.

Sadly, even fucking pot is still a divisive issue.

And you know, and I know, that marijuana laws is, are and always have been a joke.

I would hope that anyone who has smoked a fucking joint would not stand in the way of making it legal.

But I think they do.
It should 100% be legal but that is a different subject.

One line of thinking is, hey, these are the rules and you have to follow them. If this means the world to you then just don’t smoke. You can make all of your dreams come true, become part of the most elite, rarest athletes in the world and be one of the highest paid players in the NFL. All you have to do is not smoke. Either 1) the player has no respect for authority and can only think of himself 2) the player is truly an addict 3) the player just doesn’t want it bad enough

Rights only have a small part to play in this discussion. If he was told to not eat grape popsicles and he can have it all and then shows up with a purple tongue 100 times I don’t think he deserves a chance. I can see that rationale for sure. So yeah, under this circumstance he probably lost the respect of people who truly appreciate what a rare opportunity he has. I really don’t see how hard it is to understand that viewpoint even if you don’t agree with it.

There are many restrictions to becoming an elite athlete that some might not agree with. Sorry but narrow is the gate to NFL elite-ness.
 
Last edited:

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
10,995
It all just comes down to trusting some stoner.

I can see the rationale, mainly because it has been in place for so long.

Someone that smokes pot = Unreliable head case.

I have seen both sides of the spectrum.

This is just going to be something that society has to deal with. Either you accept, at least try to understand or just flat out reject it.

Sadly, even fucking pot is still a divisive issue.

And you know, and I know, that marijuana laws is, are and always have been a joke.

I would hope that anyone who has smoked a fucking joint would not stand in the way of making it legal.

But I think they do.
Further, it’s not that he smoked pot. He got suspended many times, was given many chances and still failed over 100 tests. ONE HUNDRED. Explain to me how he’s the victim here. Do you give employees 100 chances to follow the rules?
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
10,995
I think it should be the same. You would be driving under the influence. Doesn't matter if it's a drug or alcohol. The point is, your ability to safely operate a motor vehicle would be impaired.

But how would they be able to immediately test for it like they do with alcohol? They can do a road side sobriety test, sure. But they'd still need a blood level for legal purposes. Could testing breath or blood give them that immediate result? I honestly have no idea.

Funny thing, I had this conversation earlier. My new employee was a cop and is married to a retired cop. I told her it should be legal and she agreed as long as there is Impairment testing.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
38,261
Funny thing, I had this conversation earlier. My new employee was a cop and is married to a retired cop. I told her it should be legal and she agreed as long as there is Impairment testing.
They have been doing that for a long time. Of course officers suck at it. I've represented a few DWI (drug intoxication) and it never really sticks when it's weed. It's hard to prove and honestly it's very hard to judge.
 

Iamtdg

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
91,145
I've long been in the faction that weed should be legal but I'm curious what yall think about driving while high? Should it be the same, less, or more than a dwi?
It should be treated the same, IMO.
 

shoop

Semi-contributing member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,090
It should be treated the same, IMO.
This. And I am in the “it should be legal even though I don’t and probably wouldn’t do it” crowd. My son was involved in a car accident a couple of weeks ago. No one seriously hurt. Person that caused the accident hit and run. Police said the cehicle smelled of marijuana from 20 feet away. Assuming that was the issue isn’t too much of a stretch. Just because someone may be more careful driving while smoking, their actions and decisions are still impaired.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
38,261
This. And I am in the “it should be legal even though I don’t and probably wouldn’t do it” crowd. My son was involved in a car accident a couple of weeks ago. No one seriously hurt. Person that caused the accident hit and run. Police said the cehicle smelled of marijuana from 20 feet away. Assuming that was the issue isn’t too much of a stretch. Just because someone may be more careful driving while smoking, their actions and decisions are still impaired.
The difficult part is much like Alcohol where do you cut it off? Sober people would fail many sobriety tests. They either suck at following directions, don't have great balance, or an officer will claim something is a clue or indicator that really isn't. So with alcohol we do a BAC, if you're above a .08 you're screwed and if you're below you're not. Now a first time drinker could easily be impaired below a .08 and an experience drinker might not be impaired above a .08 but that's why we have drawn this bright line. People know the rules and can judge by the amount they have drank approximately where they should fall.

You can do a blood draw to determine the presence of marijuana in a person's system but with weed it stays in your system 30 days. So it's not so easy to draw a bright line. We've been dealing with these types of impairments for a long time as well though. Lets say you have a prescription for xanax, you take it as prescribed and it makes you a little loopy. Does that get defined as impaired? It can be (DWI Drug Intoxication in Missouri). But then again, there isn't any bright cutoff making it extremely difficult for a prosecuting attorney to prosecute a case like that.

Your doctor prescribed you Oxy for your tooth getting pulled. You took it and drove. Do you want to subject that person to a DWI the same as alcohol or set up a different set of rules and punishments? Weed if it is being viewed in a medicinal light is going to be compared similarly.
 

p1_

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
12,672
Good question.

Driving high is nothing like driving drunk.

But both do classify as impaired.

I think drunk drivers are more aggressive, reckless and unpredictable.

Stoned drivers are more concerned about getting their fast food home before it gets its feelings hurt.
Drunk folk have poor reaction time, where stoners drive at least 10 mph or more under the speed limit .
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
16,157
Drunk folk have poor reaction time, where stoners drive at least 10 mph or more under the speed limit .
They might be driving slower, but their reaction times are still impaired. Not to mention their attention to the road and their surroundings.

And God forbid they drop a dorito and bend down and fumble around for it for a good while.
 

Clff15701

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
1,020
Yeah no reason to really say anything now. I guess everyone is human though and I can't blame him for being frustrated last year. Hell we were all frustrated. Good news is the new coaches appear poised and ready to play him so he just needs to be ready to go have a career year. It's his first chance at a complete and total season.
That’s my thing. Nolan is gone so there really is no reason to bring it up in the media. He should have just gone to McCarthy privately and let that be the end of it.
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
17,971
It's basically Leon Lett all over again.

He's so good when he plays that you just keep letting him come back after all the failed tests.
 
Top Bottom