Handling of Randy Gregory Looks Bad on NFL, NFLPA

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You two both talk in codes and never tell the truth.........birds of a feather

I am able to understand him just fine.

He is saying you do the same thing to him. You don't listen and repeat yourself regardless of rebuttal.

And what have I lied about? Be specific.

 

[xwalker]

First, thanks for the link.

Second, who is the government? The government, in this case, are elected officials who represent the people. And the people, by in large, are not advocating for the legalization of marijuana. I think what you see reflected in the polls is more a response to "personal freedom" than "legalization of marijuana". What I mean is that people appear to be in favor of many activities in our society when actually they're more for the right to choose. It's the same with the abortion issue. Gallup polls say more Americans are pro-choice but if you delve deeper into the responses, you'll find that many aren't for abortion, they just believe in the right to choose.

Be that as it may, though I will personally never support recreational use of drugs - marijuana or otherwise - I understand that the tide is turning and eventually marijuana use will be decriminalized.

If you say that you're against alcohol, them I would understand if you are against legal weed; however, if not then why is alcohol better than weed?

Alcohol:
1. Healthier - No.
2. Less addictive - No.
3. Less dangerous if driving - No.
4. Less violent behavior - No.

I just don't see any reason for alcohol to be OK but for Weed to be bad.

I think that legal weed would keep illegal drug dealers from selling weed. If so, then it would be much harder for kids to get than it is now. Currently weed is much easier for kids to get than alcohol.

As I've said before I'm not a user of weed so I don't have any built in bias.

 

[xwalker]

I bet it does

If they have legit reasons for different treatment no problem; however, if one player ever gets favored treatment in the same circumstances in subjective rulings, then it could blow up on the NFL. If different races are involved it would be in court before you could blink. The NFL better be dotting their "I"s and crossing their" T"s.

At this point things come accross to the public as sketchy. Maybe it's just a lack of communication or maybe they really are inconsistent.

 

[sbark]

If you say that you're against alcohol, them I would understand if you are against legal weed; however, if not then why is alcohol better than weed?

Alcohol:
1. Healthier - No.
2. Less addictive - No.
3. Less dangerous if driving - No.
4. Less violent behavior - No.

I just don't see any reason for alcohol to be OK but for Weed to be bad.

I think that legal weed would keep illegal drug dealers from selling weed. If so, then it would be much harder for kids to get than it is now. Currently weed is much easier for kids to get than alcohol.

As I've said before I'm not a user of weed so I don't have any built in bias.

my biggest concern is having 2 of such type substances. Society isnt going to get rid of alcohol, and too add a 2nd widespread substance just doubles down on all the problems of the 1st. Lets let the expeirments of Colo/Wash St. run their course, let the spin on the problems being created get exposed.....and then let each state make their decision on a logical basis.

 

[Nightman]

If they have legit reasons for different treatment no problem; however, if one player ever gets favored treatment in the same circumstances in subjective rulings, then it could blow up on the NFL. If different races are involved it would be in court before you could blink. The NFL better be dotting their "I"s and crossing their" T"s.

At this point things come accross to the public as sketchy. Maybe it's just a lack of communication or maybe they really are inconsistent.

Please show me one piece of information that points to Gregory being railroaded........I haven't seen any

-Bell got his first suspension reduced because they were applying the new rules to an old infraction
-Bell got his second suspension reduced because he told a story about his knee surgery that they partly bought....they gave him 3 games with a 4th game fine instead of 4 games.....not exactly a break
-Bell's teammate got the exact same banishment Gregory got with less fails

Gregory didn't even appeal his 10 game suspension so that is on him

 

[xwalker]

Please show me one piece of information that points to Gregory being railroaded........I haven't seen any

-Bell got his first suspension reduced because they were applying the new rules to an old infraction
-Bell got his second suspension reduced because he told a story about his knee surgery that they partly bought....they gave him 3 games with a 4th game fine instead of 4 games.....not exactly a break
-Bell's teammate got the exact same banishment Gregory got with less fails

Gregory didn't even appeal his 10 game suspension so that is on him

I'm not claiming that he has been but I don't know either way.

The stories surrounding the drug testing when viewed as a whole, seem to show a sketchy process. Why would they apply new rules to Bell when the infraction occurred when the old rules where in place? Do they not have a calendar or a set process for how to deal with these types of situations? I've seen many other times when it seems that they did something dumb in their initial ruling and then had to tweak it after appeal.

The stories surrounding Bell seem to involved a lot of subjective rulings. They "partially" bought his knee story, they applied the wrong rules, etc..

 

[Jake]

I can't for the life of me figure out why Bell is the only player getting beneficial treatment on these suspensions. The only thing that comes to mind is he is a star player and that's a really bad look.

Steelers fans (I live around too many of them) think the NFL is out to get them. They thought Zeke got special treatment not getting fined for jumping in the kettle. Even Antonio Brown whined about it.

 

[xwalker]

my biggest concern is having 2 of such type substances. Society isnt going to get rid of alcohol, and too add a 2nd widespread substance just doubles down on all the problems of the 1st. Lets let the expeirments of Colo/Wash St. run their course, let the spin on the problems being created get exposed.....and then let each state make their decision on a logical basis.

There is really more than 2. Legal prescription drugs can impair people to the point that they should not be driving. Legal prescription drugs combined with Alcohol are probably way worse than Weed or even Weed and Alcohol together.

I think most people that are adamantly against legal weed are doing it from a morality type of mindset. The same mindset that in the past created "blue" laws and laws that prevented alcohol purchase on Sundays.

 

[tyke1doe]

Why do you feel this way?

No judgement here, I've never done anything beyond pot and didn't like it, so I don't have an agenda here, I'm just curious what you mean by "never support" and why?

Practically, because I believe that a sober mind is better than a drug-influenced mind. Spiritually, the Bible tells Christians to be sober-minded. When you're not sober-minded, you leave yourself vulnerable mentally, psychologically, morally and spiritually. And then there's the matter of leaving yourself vulnerable to addiction and the consequences that come with that - both for you and for others.

Even though posters on this board claim there are no negatives associated with marijuana, I've seen too many people waste time and waste their lives away because they couldn't put down the pot (and alcohol and harder drugs). And because I'm in relationship with others, if they suffer, I suffer - particularly if they're my loved ones.

It's not a road I prefer for myself or for others - even though they ultimately have a right to choose what they do with their lives.

Hope this answers the questions, and feel free to ask additional questions or challenged me. I'm not offended nor sensitive about what I believe and answering why I take the positions I do.

 

[Nightman]

Most people poo-poo'd this report

 

[tyke1doe]

If you say that you're against alcohol, them I would understand if you are against legal weed; however, if not then why is alcohol better than weed?

Alcohol:
1. Healthier - No.
2. Less addictive - No.
3. Less dangerous if driving - No.
4. Less violent behavior - No.

I just don't see any reason for alcohol to be OK but for Weed to be bad.

I think that legal weed would keep illegal drug dealers from selling weed. If so, then it would be much harder for kids to get than it is now. Currently weed is much easier for kids to get than alcohol.

As I've said before I'm not a user of weed so I don't have any built in bias.

Actually, I don't drink alcohol or smoke weed for the same reasons. I believe a sober-mind is better than a drug-influenced mind. If I had my way, alcohol would be treated the same as marijuana and harder drugs.

But herein is the difference:

1. You can drink without getting drunk - and many people do.
2. You smoke marijuana particularly because of the sensation it gives you. I don't know of too many people - if any - who smoke merely to smoke. If so, you can smoke something other than pot. No, people generally smoke pot because there's an chemical in pot that impacts your brain chemistry and makes you feel light-headed, tranquil, etc.

Second, the alcohol fight was lost long ago. We're not going back to the days of Prohibition. But that doesn't mean because we lost one fight we need to capitulate to legalize marijuana. This is not an either/or situation, as some want to make it. We (I use this term to collectively for those who oppose the legalization of pot) continue to flight against the legalization of marijuana for reasons I've stated in another post. And if we lose, we move on from there.
Again, I agree with you that alcohol has been more devastating to our culture than pot. But that doesn't mean if we don't fight against alcohol we should support the legalization of marijuana.

Third, I don't know if I would say kids can get pot easier than alcohol. Even so, as I stated before this is not a pot vs. alcohol debate. But if you legalize pot, kids will be able to get their hands on it much more. So the comparison should be ...
Illegal pot = X pot users who are kids.
legalization of pot = X (x) X pot users who are kids.
When you legalize something, you signal to society that it is okay to do. And in time, more people in society will partake in what a society makes legal.

 

[yimyammer]

Practically, because I believe that a sober mind is better than a drug-influenced mind. Spiritually, the Bible tells Christians to be sober-minded. When you're not sober-minded, you leave yourself vulnerable mentally, psychologically, morally and spiritually. And then there's the matter of leaving yourself vulnerable to addiction and the consequences that come with that - both for you and for others.

Even though posters on this board claim there are no negatives associated with marijuana, I've seen too many people waste time and waste their lives away because they couldn't put down the pot (and alcohol and harder drugs). And because I'm in relationship with others, if they suffer, I suffer - particularly if they're my loved ones.

It's not a road I prefer for myself or for others - even though they ultimately have a right to choose what they do with their lives.

Hope this answers the questions, and feel free to ask additional questions or challenged me. I'm not offended nor sensitive about what I believe and answering why I take the positions I do.

thanks for your reply

I come from a similar belief system and while I agree with many of the things you mentioned as they pertain to myself, what I don't feel I have the right to do is force my belief system on others even when I believe it may benefit them. The big man upstairs let me flounder around for years and wallow in the consequences of my choices until the light finally went on. I feel others deserve the freedom to hopefully one day find the grace I received. I dont know why so many people that enter into the belief system you mentioned feel they have the right (or obligation) to dictate to others how they should live. As for me, I've always been far too consumed, struggling to deal with all the planks in my eyes, to find time to try to tell others how they should live.

I'm not going to go into more depth on this topic that can go on a major rabbit trail quickly but suffice it to say, in an imperfect world with imperfect information, I am strongly opposed to having the control of ones body or lifestyle dictated by legislation. So when I look at an issue like drugs, I just dont believe I have the right to tell you or anyone else they cant do drugs. What I do feel I have the right to demand is that if you're going to do drugs, you dont get to drive under the influence, steal to support your habit or commit crimes as a result of your drug habit.

The dilemma is that I know all of the above will occur whether drugs are legal or not. So, imho, it becomes a question of which strategy is more effective (or less detrimental). Seeing how the war on drugs has created massive cartels flush with cash, prisons full of people that I believe need compassion and treatment, not confinement, I'm leaning against illegality of all but the most dangerous drugs.

There are no easy solutions, Portugal seems to have had some success with their decision to legalize drugs but its still early and I honestly haven't studied them enough to know all the pros and cons.

Lastly, I don't say any of the above as attempt to sway your views or pass judgement. I'm just throwing it out where I'm coming from as an FYI, fully understanding, you've probably thought long and hard about your views and they were likely settled years ago.

Here's hoping we progress as a culture and find some effective ways to deal with a very tough issue.

 

[yimyammer]

Actually, I don't drink alcohol or smoke weed for the same reasons. I believe a sober-mind is better than a drug-influenced mind. If I had my way, alcohol would be treated the same as marijuana and harder drugs.

But herein is the difference:

1. You can drink without getting drunk - and many people do.
2. You smoke marijuana particularly because of the sensation it gives you. I don't know of too many people - if any - who smoke merely to smoke. If so, you can smoke something other than pot. No, people generally smoke pot because there's an chemical in pot that impacts your brain chemistry and makes you feel light-headed, tranquil, etc.

Second, the alcohol fight was lost long ago. We're not going back to the days of Prohibition. But that doesn't mean because we lost one fight we need to capitulate to legalize marijuana. This is not an either/or situation, as some want to make it. We (I use this term to collectively for those who oppose the legalization of pot) continue to flight against the legalization of marijuana for reasons I've stated in another post. And if we lose, we move on from there.
Again, I agree with you that alcohol has been more devastating to our culture than pot. But that doesn't mean if we don't fight against alcohol we should support the legalization of marijuana.

Third, I don't know if I would say kids can get pot easier than alcohol. Even so, as I stated before this is not a pot vs. alcohol debate. But if you legalize pot, kids will be able to get their hands on it much more. So the comparison should be ...
Illegal pot = X pot users who are kids.
legalization of pot = X (x) X pot users who are kids.
When you legalize something, you signal to society that it is okay to do. And in time, more people in society will partake in what a society makes legal.

I forgot who it was but years ago, I heard a wise man (actually he was a comedian) say he'd never seen a bunch of potheads break out into a violent bar fight, the worst thing they'll do is eat you out of house and home.

~food for thought~

 

[Nightman]

NFL announced RGregory failed a test in Feb, his 5th failure as it resulted in a 4 game suspension
It is unclear if he appealed this test
He failed another test in July resulting in a 10 game suspension
He then entered rehab instead of staying at Training Camp
He rejoined the team in mid-September and started working out
He then dropped the appeal of his 10 game suspension on Sept 20th
On November 11th word leaked his missed/failed another test
He quickly appealed the latest missed test and finished his 14 games suspension
He was not allowed to return 2 weeks early to begin practicing because NFL said he was "not in compliance"
He returned for Games 15 and 16 while still appealing his newest failure
His appeal was heard on Jan 3rd and the ruling that he lost was read on Jan 5th
He is now suspended indefinitely and can first apply for reinstatement next Nov 6th at the earliest

 

[tyke1doe]

thanks for your reply

I come from a similar belief system and while I agree with many of the things you mentioned as they pertain to myself, what I don't feel I have the right to do is force my belief system on others even when I believe it may benefit them.

Here's the problem - and the fallacy - with such a position. We ALL force our beliefs on others. The man who believes alcohol should be legal forces his beliefs on those who don't.
How? By promoting and practicing his belief, which then has consequences on others beyond himself. So when an accident occurs involving a drunk driver and some dies or when taxpayer funds have to be devoted to rehabilitation programs, when insurance rates go up that impacts others who may not drink. And on and on and on.

Because we are social beings in social relationships, whatever actions we partake in, we force our beliefs and actions on others - either directly or indirectly.

So when a society says, we will legalize alcohol or we will legalize marijuana, the consequences don't affect only those who smoke and drink. It affects those who don't smoke and drink.

That's why we have a right and duty to shape society.

 

[tyke1doe]

The big man upstairs let me flounder around for years and wallow in the consequences of my choices until the light finally went on. I feel others deserve the freedom to hopefully one day find the grace I received. I dont know why so many people that enter into the belief system you mentioned feel they have the right (or obligation) to dictate to others how they should live. As for me, I've always been far too consumed, struggling to deal with all the planks in my eyes, to find time to try to tell others how they should live.

Reading your post reminded me of an argument I make to those who say we shouldn't judge (as if we should never make judgments about anything, which is not what the teaching suggests).
There's a difference between perfection and responsibility.
Perfection says we can't do anything or correct any wrong unless we are totally free of wrong ourselves. Of course, this is impractical because then we wouldn't be able to correct anyone. And, of course, society would collapse.

But responsibility says even though I am imperfect, I have a responsibility to my family, my friends, my community, etc. to continue to work for what is good and what is best for my family, friends, community, etc.
So, let's say I'm an imperfect parent and I have things I have to work on. I still have the responsibility to teach my kids what is right and wrong, how to be good citizens, etc. I can't say, "Well, because I'm not perfect, then I can't instruct anyone else." No, such a response is irresponsible.

Now to answer your question, the reason why so many people with a belief system similar to mine take the position that they do is because, ultimately, the decisions that people outside our belief system will impact us, and that negatively. I tell people, "Okay, I will stop forcing my beliefs and views on you if you can promise me that your actions will ONLY impact you and that I won't in any way be dragged into helping solve problem created by you and those who believe as you do. So that means none of my tax money goes towards finding cures or funding programs that help solve problems you've created for society. If you can promise me that, I'll stop forcing my views and beliefs on you."
Of course, they can't make that promise. And neither will I stop trying to shape society to reflect what I believe.

Many on your side see just your personal rights. You don't see the consequences your actions will have on yourself, your family, your friends, your community and society in general.

Now, there's a balance we have to maintain, sure. But we're talking about policy issues, and all taxpayers and citizens have a right to shape policy.

 

[yimyammer]

Here's the problem - and the fallacy - with such a position. We ALL force our beliefs on others. The man who believes alcohol should be legal forces his beliefs on those who don't.
How? By promoting and practicing his belief, which then has consequences on others beyond himself. So when an accident occurs involving a drunk driver and some dies or when taxpayer funds have to be devoted to rehabilitation programs, when insurance rates go up that impacts others who may not drink. And on and on and on.

Because we are social beings in social relationships, whatever actions we partake in, we force our beliefs and actions on others - either directly or indirectly.

So when a society says, we will legalize alcohol or we will legalize marijuana, the consequences don't affect only those who smoke and drink. It affects those who don't smoke and drink.

That's why we have a right and duty to shape society.

this is the rabbit hole I was trying to avoid so I'll stop here and simply say, your position is duly noted

 

[yimyammer]

Reading your post reminded me of an argument I make to those who say we shouldn't judge (as if we should never make judgments about anything, which is not what the teaching suggests).
There's a difference between perfection and responsibility.
Perfection says we can't do anything or correct any wrong unless we are totally free of wrong ourselves. Of course, this is impractical because then we wouldn't be able to correct anyone. And, of course, society would collapse.

But responsibility says even though I am imperfect, I have a responsibility to my family, my friends, my community, etc. to continue to work for what is good and what is best for my family, friends, community, etc.
So, let's say I'm an imperfect parent and I have things I have to work on. I still have the responsibility to teach my kids what is right and wrong, how to be good citizens, etc. I can't say, "Well, because I'm not perfect, then I can't instruct anyone else." No, such a response is irresponsible.

Now to answer your question, the reason why so many people with a belief system similar to mine take the position that they do is because, ultimately, the decisions that people outside our belief system will impact us, and that negatively.

Many on your side see just your personal rights. You don't see the consequences your actions will have on yourself, your family, your friends, your community and society in general.

Now, there's a balance we have to maintain, sure. But we're talking about policy issues, and all taxpayers and citizens have a right to shape policy.

like I said:

Lastly, I don't say any of the above as attempt to sway your views or pass judgement. I'm just throwing it out where I'm coming from as an FYI, fully understanding, you've probably thought long and hard about your views and they were likely settled years ago

your position is duly noted

 

[tyke1doe]

like I said:

your position is duly noted

Fair enough. Just trying to explain from my perspective.
Peace.

 

[yimyammer]

Fair enough. Just trying to explain from my perspective.
Peace.

I got you

The topic is too deep and complex to address with keystrokes (IMHO) so I would only venture further down this road in person. So, should our paths ever cross, we can resume this over a beverage (or vittles) of your choice, on me.