I have a Michael Irvin Question for the Board

[Mike 1967]

Per ESPN, Mike caught with "Plastic baggies with marijuana residue were found in a Versace sunglasses case along with a marijuana pipe".

As has been recently discussed here on this board, this resulted in a charge of "misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia ".

This incident has raised questions regarding his character and his status as a HOF candidate. People appear to be widely divided on wether he should be included into the HOF.....but are fairly consistent in stating that they are dissapointed in him, if the marijuana was indeed his.

Before I ask the question, let me first say that I am also dissapointed if the marijuana is his. But my primary dissapointment would come from his lying about it being his. And I would also be dissapointed about him breaking the law....but I would have equally dissapointment if he were caught with an open container of beer in his car. (Something many here have probably been guilty of at some time in their past)

Here is my question (And it is primarily aimed at those who are "strongly upset" about the discovery of the drug paraphernalia in Irvin's car.

Would you feel differently if Mike had been pulled over in Denver, since he would not have broken a law in Denver ?

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.

 

[Shaun]

Per ESPN, Mike caught with "Plastic baggies with marijuana residue were found in a Versace sunglasses case along with a marijuana pipe".

As has been recently discussed here on this board, this resulted in a charge of "misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia ".

This incident has raised questions regarding his character and his status as a HOF candidate. People appear to be widely divided on wether he should be included into the HOF.....but are fairly consistent in stating that they are dissapointed in him, if the marijuana was indeed his.

Before I ask the question, let me first say that I am also dissapointed if the marijuana is his. But my primary dissapointment would come from his lying about it being his. And I would also be dissapointed about him breaking the law....but I would have equally dissapointment if he were caught with an open container of beer in his car. (Something many here have probably been guilty of at some time in their past)

Here is my question (And it is primarily aimed at those who are "strongly upset" about the discovery of the drug paraphernalia in Irvin's car.

Would you feel differently if Mike had been pulled over in Denver, since he would not have broken a law in Denver ?

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.

I think federal law still supercedes state or city law.

But what I can't understand why this should affect his Hall of Fame chances. This minor incident does absolutely nothing to change the fact that Irvin took care of business on Sundays.

 

[theogt]

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.

1. I'm not familiar with the statute but I would assume that this will likely be challenged and found to be inconsistent with federal law.

2. Legality =/= Morality.

 

[sporadic]

Leave it to those Tree Huggin Denver hippies to legalize weed...

 

[mr.jameswoods]

No, I wouldn't feel any differently. Irvin has a family he is responsible for. He has worked hard to erase his past and he has a budding future in sports journalism. He would be an excellent person in the booth. A person in his situation should not be using period. He is not some 20 year old kid in college.

No, it shouldn't affect his Hall of Fame candidacy. And if someone failed to vote him in based on those reasons, they should be removed from the voting panel. The rules explicitly state that candidacy is based solely on what was accomplished on the field. If the rules were more broad, I might think otherwise.

 

[Mike 1967]

No, I wouldn't feel any differently. Irvin has a family he is responsible for. He has worked hard to erase his past and he has a budding future in sports journalism. He would be an excellent person in the booth. A person in his situation should not be using period. He is not some 20 year old kid in college.

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

 

[Mike 1967]

1. I'm not familiar with the statute but I would assume that this will likely be challenged and found to be inconsistent with federal law.

I do believe that State/Federal law supercedes here.

2. Legality =/= Morality.

Exactly the point I am most interested in discussing.

Do you believe this to be true ?

 

[iceberg]

the trouble is, it's been "illegal" for so long and has had so many misconceptions about it over the years.

marajuana doesn't lead to harder drugs, the desire to do drugs leads to harder drugs. marajuana just gets rid of the junk in your fridge that's been sitting there as a science experiment for quite some time but may taste ok just the same.

"reefer madness" - if there was ever a load of hammered moose manure, this is it. getting all energetic and crazy after smoking it? hardly. well, unless taking 10 minutes to reach for the remote then not knowing why is just whacky.

and it's been villianized most all of our lives. those who have not already put that aside and tried it will likely have a negative outlook on it and those who use it.

w/alcohol, people go nuts, drive around and kill people, get into arguments, blow out livers (wonder how much of mine is left anymore - it grows back, right???) but w/weed you just sit around and waste time.

maybe too much of it - that IS a valid concern.

now - what if an NFL player went to amsterdam - could they THEN smoke and it be "ok"? i tend to doubt it because i'd think the policy is NO WEED, not NO WEED WHERE ILLEGAL. but since irvin isn't in the NFL, what would his work say?

in jobs where you're not required to be 24x7 i think a drug law is an invasion of privacy. when i go to best buy and see they're drug free, it does my heart wonders to know that the pimple-faced kid who put the cd's out didn't get high last night.

right, WHO CARES? and why would NOT smoking be a pre-req for a job like this? policeman, fireman, doctor on call - sure. if you may have to "go to work" then you'd better be straight and able to. otherwise, what people do with their own lives is their own business.

smoking and driving - would it bug me if someone was high and ran into my truck because of it? well, no more than the **(#*($&*(*(&@(*$ idiots who must talk on their cell phone and cut over 4 lanes because they're about to miss a turn, drive slow because they're busy talking on the phone and doing hand motions with the other hand leaving the rest of us to wonder what they're driving with.

in short, i don't care what michael does or where. but if illegal and he gets caught, then pay the standard fare and move about your life - that's the law and i'm ok with that.

instead people want to be judge and jury and express a standard of life for others i sincerely doubt they'd hold to for themselves.

now if he was pulled over where legal, then we'd probably never know because he'd just be sent on his way.

 

[superpunk]

Does anyone have a real estate guide for Denver?hboy:

 

[iceberg]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

like i said - some will view the past villianization of weed as a current guideline - and that's fine. but if it should ever become "legal" to where you can buy it when you buy alcohol, then that would fade in time and it would just be "the way it is" like alcohol is today.

 

[Mike 1967]

like i said - some will view the past villianization of weed as a current guideline - and that's fine. but if it should ever become "legal" to where you can buy it when you buy alcohol, then that would fade in time and it would just be "the way it is" like alcohol is today.

I had no issue with what you said.

But I am interested to know what James is basing his position on.

I have discussed enough with you to assume that you are one that holds to no absolute morality. Is my assumption incorrect ?

 

[iceberg]

my morality may or may not fit someone elses. i'm fine with that but many times "they" are not. my morality is my own and in the end, i'll have to pay whatever price there is to pay for "being me".

weed is not an issue of morals to me in the same breathe as say, sleeping with another mans wife, stealing, killing, intentionally harming someone else...all those are moral issues to me i'd NEVER do or want to do. in fact, if you use the 10 commandments as a guide, does it even address drugs?

i guess back to being anal, how do you define someones morality?

 

[theogt]

I do believe that State/Federal law supercedes here.

I'm 99.9% positive a court would overturn the law, especially considering the recent Raich decision.

Exactly the point I am most interested in discussing.

Do you believe this to be true ?

Yes, I believe that morality and legality are not the same. I am disappointed with Mike IF he lied to us about who owned the pipe. It's not illegal for him to go on TV and claim it wasn't his, but it is of course immoral. Should morality play a role in HOF decisions? I think it should to a limited extent (i.e., rape charges), but I believe minor charges such as this should not.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

My personal values! And I understand that my personal values might be irrelevant but you wanted an honest answer and I'm giving you one. Irvin has a history of abusing drugs so for him to show signs that he is using is wrong in my opinion particularly since he has a family and high profile job. I'm studying to be a physician. Medicine has changed in which physicians are asked to do more than merely prescribe medication. We are asked to look after the welfare of our patients. So I see Mike as a former addict who is trying to turn his life around. Someone like that should not be using whether it's legal or not. Fast food is legalized but if I find out a patient with a family history of colon cancer is chompin down on the burgers 3 times a week, you better be sure he is going to get earful from me.

Yes, I think morality should play a role in HOF decisions but if the current standard asks that morality not play a role then it's my job to uphold the integrity of the voting process and abide by it's laws which asks that one only take a player's performance into account.

 

[Kilyin]

Yeah, I was more angry about the stupidity of the whole situation (I'm not a millionaire, but if I owe the Court some money, you better believe I'll find a way to pay it) and the fact I think Mike is lying. Coupled with his past, the whole situation just screams "I'm a *******"

 

[Mike 1967]

my morality may or may not fit someone elses. i'm fine with that but many times "they" are not. my morality is my own and in the end, i'll have to pay whatever price there is to pay for "being me".

weed is not an issue of morals to me in the same breathe as say, sleeping with another mans wife, stealing, killing, intentionally harming someone else...all those are moral issues to me i'd NEVER do or want to do. in fact, if you use the 10 commandments as a guide, does it even address drugs?

i guess back to being anal, how do you define someones morality?

I believe in absolute morals. But that should be evident since I am a proclaimed Christian. Absolute Morals require an absolute standard. An absolute standard requires something in the universe beyond time + chance....specifically God.

But we live in a Humanist society today. So I am always curious how anyone, who does not claim to believe in a personal infinite God, can hold anyone to a "moral standard".

 

[aikemirv]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

That it is impairs your judgement and kills brain cells. Anything that impairs judgement, taken on your own volition is wrong. It does not effect just you, it will effect others too.

As a Christian, your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost - Michael on that basis should not be doing something that "messes up that Temple" as he proclaims to be a Christian.

The Bible does not speak of drug use as far as I know but does speak of alcohol and how it effects your judgement and taken in that manner is wrong, so I would carry that over into any drug use taken recreationally rather than for medicinal purposes.

 

[Mike 1967]

That it is impairs your judgement and kills brain cells. Anything that impairs judgement, taken on your own volition is wrong. It does not effect just you, it will effect others too.

As a Christian, your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost - Michael on that basis should not be doing something that "messes up that Temple" as he proclaims to be a Christian.

The Bible does not speak of drug use as far as I know but does speak of alcohol and how it effects your jus=dgement and taken in that manner is wrong, so I would carry that over into any drug use taken recreationally rather than for medicinal purposes.

Jesus drank Wine.

Paul, in 1st Timothy, tells Timothy to drink wine....for medicinal reasons.

 

[iceberg]

I believe in absolute morals. But that should be evident since I am a proclaimed Christian. Absolute Morals require an absolute standard. An absolute standard requires something in the universe beyond time + chance....specifically God.

But we live in a Humanist society today. So I am always curious how anyone, who does not claim to believe in a personal infinite God, can hold anyone to a "moral standard".

heh, by now you know that i don't believe in absolutes simply because that implies a black/white RIGHT/WRONG w/no situational analysis allowed. neither of us in the grand scheme of things has verifiable proof that our "morals" are exactly what is required and/or needed.

i have my morals and they are absolute to me. but i'd not ask anyone else to live by them because they are not me.

 

[superpunk]

Jesus drank Wine.

Paul, in 1st Timothy, tells Timothy to drink wine....for medicinal reasons.

I believe he was speaking of excesses of wine, and "drunken bouts", which are spoken against. Not just an occasional cocktail, LOL.