NFL and NFLPA joint agreement on pain management, potentially including marijuana

[Cowboy06]

"Joint" agreement huh?

 

[Reid1boys]

I seriously doubt it. Remember the stadium opens 2 hours before kickoff and you still can’t buy a beer until Noon.

I attended games at Texas Stadium for much of 3 decades where no alcohol was sold or permitted.

We simply just didn’t associate consuming alcohol with attending football games as we couldn’t and still can’t for Amateur games either. Very sophisticated professional sober crowd . I recall going straight from church to games for Noon kickoffs many times. My father still dressed in a suit. If it was hot he’d take off his tie.

IM prety sure I discussed this when it happened a few years back. The Cowboys were allowed to sell beer before noon for the early playoff game.

 

[Diehardblues]

IM prety sure I discussed this when it happened a few years back. The Cowboys were allowed to sell beer before noon for the early playoff game.

You may have but I don’t recall . You sure that wasn’t on a Saturday? I don’t recall a 11:30 Sunday playoff kickoff.

 

[America's Cowboy]

it would cease causing "problems at the border" if it were legal. suddenly no one is warring over weed anymore because it's legal to buy.
"cannabis overdose" literally is not a thing. maybe someone took an edible and didn't realize how strong it would be and is paranoid and freaks out and calls 911...that is not an overdose. you cannot overdose on weed.
it is not a gateway drug.
marijuana alone has not "ruined families." you're making stuff up. no one thing alone "ruins a family."

You're spewing nonsense probably because you are a pot smoker yourself. I've shown links scientifically and medically proving today's cannabis' potency and devastating usage results. You've provided nothing but heresay simply because you don't like those results and obviously because you see it as a threat to your bad habit of getting high. You don't care how it affects anyone else, as long as you get your high. Thanks for contributing to the destruction of human life simply for your own selfish yet destructive purpose.

 

[Jake]

You're spewing nonsense probably because you are a pot smoker yourself. I've shown links scientifically and medically proving today's cannabis' potency and devastating usage results. You've provided nothing but heresay simply because you don't like those results and obviously because you see it as a threat to your bad habit of getting high. You don't care how it affects anyone else, as long as you get your high. Thanks for contributing to the destruction of human life simply for your own selfish yet destructive purpose.

You continue to assume that anyone who isn't as opposed to marijuana as you are has to be a pot smoker, which simply isn't true no matter how many times you post it. Here's something else you can rage about:

 

[America's Cowboy]

You continue to assume that anyone who isn't as opposed to marijuana as you are has to be a pot smoker, which simply isn't true no matter how many times you post it. Here's something else you can rage about:

That's funny. I provide links to scientific studies from several reputable websites. You...provide a graph? It still doesn't change the fact that marijuana is a gateway drug to other illegal drugs, is very addictive, is 17x - 32x more potent today than it was 20+ years ago, destroys lives and communities, causes so many other ailments to one's body, etc. Just so you can get high, eh? To hell with who it affects as long as you get your high?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You're spewing nonsense probably because you are a pot smoker yourself. I've shown links scientifically and medically proving today's cannabis' potency and devastating usage results. You've provided nothing but heresay simply because you don't like those results and obviously because you see it as a threat to your bad habit of getting high. You don't care how it affects anyone else, as long as you get your high. Thanks for contributing to the destruction of human life simply for your own selfish yet destructive purpose.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/marijuana-research/

NIDA studies are BS.

 

[America's Cowboy]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/marijuana-research/

NIDA studies are BS.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Is this supposed to compel anyone to your side of the argument? Reads to me like you have no idea how to respond so instead resort to trolling.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Is this supposed to compel anyone to your side of the argument? Reads to me like you have no idea how to respond so instead resort to trolling.

That article was written for those in need of medical help and how cannabinoid medicine can help them live/survive. I've got no beef whatsoever with that. Actually, I support it. But it's another thing when addicts and users who only use it to get their high abuse such a product that can also be so destructive not only to themselves but their surrounding communities. Can you not tell the difference in my argument or do you not care since you might be one of those who only want to get their high? Which is it?

 

[G2]

Finally! I rule named after a Cowboy, but for something good!

The Randy Blazing Gregory rule.

 

[RoboQB]

Say it till the Cows come home, for all I care. You have no proof of what you claim. I already posted that you were probably right with regards to the speeds of most accidents but you would rather zero in on this one small thing. Whatever, it's your time to waste but you aint wasting mine. You didn't look up the studies and you didn't bother to research any of the data that shows it's unsafe to drive, while under the influence of weed apparently.

Why would you want a survey of a thousand pot heads? I mean, you have access to an actual 20 year study on the matter. Lastly, the "debate" is about sports and weed, not about speeding and weed. I mean, the thread is only 17 pages long and here you are, confused about what the thread is about?

Are you mentally ill? I was having a discussion with you, specifically, about your ignorance towards
motor vehicle operation while high on pot. I must've missed where you conceded to my comment
because it was probably hidden somewhere in your babble about studies.

As for 20 year studies and 17 pages on a fan board, I'd rather listen to someone who has smoked it before
than anyone trying to re-publish Reefer Madness. There are plenty of people far more intelligent than
either of us who smoke pot.

Rather than admit your error and move on, you try to be an Internet warrior with your comments.
People can disagree without being jerks toward one another. You should try it sometime.
Start by not taking yourself so seriously. Good luck to you, ABQ.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That article was written for those in need of medical help and how cannabinoid medicine can help them live/survive. I've got no beef whatsoever with that. Actually, I support it. But it's another thing when addicts and users who only use it to get their high abuse such a product that can also be so destructive not only to themselves but their surrounding communities. Can you not tell the difference in my argument or do you not care since you might be one of those who only want to get their high? Which is it?

I see you are big on ad hominem too. It's amusing to watch you try to demonize and delegitimize those who smoke pot.

Colorado has had it legal for quite some time and completely disproves your claims. Traffic violations, accidents, and fatalities are unchanged. Use in children is down. Use of cocaine/heroin is down. etc.

But have fun waving your hands at NIDA studies prior to 2015. Fact is that NIDA would turn down any hypothesis that did not have a negative prediction from 1972-2015.

 

[RoboQB]

I see you are big on ad hominem too. It's amusing to watch you try to demonize and delegitimize those who smoke pot.

Colorado has had it legal for quite some time and completely disproves your claims. Traffic violations, accidents, and fatalities are unchanged. Use in children is down. Use of cocaine/heroin is down. etc.

But have fun waving your hands at NIDA studies prior to 2015. Fact is that NIDA would turn down any hypothesis that did not have a negative prediction from 1972-2015.

Fuzzy, I'm so happy to be on the same side as you on this debate/discussion/argument.
You bring the facts to back up common sense.
I think I'm just going chalk this up as a win right now... lol.

 

[Wolf2k5]

You can’t make it legal in the nfl when most of the teams reside in states where it’s illegal.

You can’t make it “legal” but you can just stop testing for it and stop suspending people for using it.

 

[cowboy_ron]

Is this supposed to compel anyone to your side of the argument? Reads to me like you have no idea how to respond so instead resort to trolling.

Those that oppose legalization due to being uninformed rely on others that are equally uninformed for their side of the debate........stats mean nothing to them.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Are you mentally ill? I was having a discussion with you, specifically, about your ignorance towards
motor vehicle operation while high on pot. I must've missed where you conceded to my comment
because it was probably hidden somewhere in your babble about studies.

As for 20 year studies and 17 pages on a fan board, I'd rather listen to someone who has smoked it before
than anyone trying to re-publish Reefer Madness. There are plenty of people far more intelligent than
either of us who smoke pot.

Rather than admit your error and move on, you try to be an Internet warrior with your comments.
People can disagree without being jerks toward one another. You should try it sometime.
Start by not taking yourself so seriously. Good luck to you, ABQ.

I must be, I keep reading your drivel. Exactly what do you think I have failed to recognize? Seriously, what do you think it is?

Look, if you wanna be stuck on the speed at which accidents are taking place, be my guest. If you want to rely on the opinion of career weed smoker, knock yourself out. I'm just going to discuss what has some sort of credibility behind it, which are studies conducted on the matter. Like it or don't, nobody is going to care one way or the other.

 

[America's Cowboy]

I see you are big on ad hominem too. It's amusing to watch you try to demonize and delegitimize those who smoke pot.

Colorado has had it legal for quite some time and completely disproves your claims. Traffic violations, accidents, and fatalities are unchanged. Use in children is down. Use of cocaine/heroin is down. etc.

But have fun waving your hands at NIDA studies prior to 2015. Fact is that NIDA would turn down any hypothesis that did not have a negative prediction from 1972-2015.

Where is your proof? @ColoCowboy is from there, and he said that recent Colorado studies proves otherwise.

 

[RoboQB]

I must be, I keep reading your drivel. Exactly what do you think I have failed to recognize? Seriously, what do you think it is?

Look, if you wanna be stuck on the speed at which accidents are taking place, be my guest. If you want to rely on the opinion of career weed smoker, knock yourself out. I'm just going to discuss what has some sort of credibility behind it, which are studies conducted on the matter. Like it or don't, nobody is going to care one way or the other.

I'm not stuck on it. More like keeping you from ignoring the fact that you have no idea what
you're talking about. You rely on biased studies and have no actual knowledge on the topic.
But that's fine. Run along now. Go do your keyboard warrior bit, tough guy.

 

[Haimerej]

If the joint creates a situation where a patron gets injured or dead and the employee has received permission to get high from McDonalds then you bet they are.

That would be a first.