RuntheDamnBall Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I also have trouble with fans defending this offense because marijuana is legal in some states. Every NFL player knows it is against league rules and they face potential suspension. As for marijuana, is it far from a harmless, misunderstood drug! The stuff they are designing now is genetically engineered to be increasingly addictive much like cigarettes were manipulated over time. As opposed to alcohol, it can stay in the system for up to seven days and almost immediately impairs motor skills such that studies are showing it can double the risk of a driver being in an accident. In addition, it is especially dangerous for young adults whose brians are still developing and the long-term effects are just beginning to be researched such as links to mental illness, depression and suicide. I won't continue to go off topic but there are many reasons it is a good idea the NFL does not ignore it just because a few states are making unwise decisions. And it is related because how many young careers have been negatively impacted by marijuana. Have we forgotten about Ricky Williams so fast? Do you mean the same Ricky Williams who had some truly incredible seasons, whose coach rode him into the ground, who was smart enough to get out while he had some semblance of his health remaining? Yeah, he would have been better served developing an addiction to totally legal prescription painkillers. Ricky was a misunderstood and terrific player. And you're perpetuating that notion to serve an agenda. Plenty of high-functioning people in society use this drug without any of the effects you're talking about, and plenty more people are harmed by legal, profitable drugs and alcohol.
PromoTheRobot Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 (edited) I'd like to know the answers to those questions too? Because people like to enter altered states. It's part of our nature. The trick is not to overdo anything. Booze, weed, nicotine, etc. I test it every day that I go to work, my friend. Trust me. So you are saying that you have been pulled over with a cracked-open beer in the cup holder (or something similar) and the cop does nothing? Color me skeptical. PTR Edited August 21, 2013 by PromoTheRobot
nucci Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I also have trouble with fans defending this offense because marijuana is legal in some states. Every NFL player knows it is against league rules and they face potential suspension. As for marijuana, is it far from a harmless, misunderstood drug! The stuff they are designing now is genetically engineered to be increasingly addictive much like cigarettes were manipulated over time. As opposed to alcohol, it can stay in the system for up to seven days and almost immediately impairs motor skills such that studies are showing it can double the risk of a driver being in an accident. In addition, it is especially dangerous for young adults whose brians are still developing and the long-term effects are just beginning to be researched such as links to mental illness, depression and suicide. I won't continue to go off topic but there are many reasons it is a good idea the NFL does not ignore it just because a few states are making unwise decisions. And it is related because how many young careers have been negatively impacted by marijuana. Have we forgotten about Ricky Williams so fast? I don't think Bradham should be cut but it definately should be strike one. It is not harmless but alcohol and tobacco are more harmful and can kill you. I don't know of any marijuana related deaths but many from drinking and smoking. If both of these are legal I see no reason why weed shouldn't be also.
eball Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I can't believe I stumbled in here...and after reading what's going on I'm going to leave quietly.
timtebow15 Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 Do you mean the same Ricky Williams who had some truly incredible seasons, whose coach rode him into the ground, who was smart enough to get out while he had some semblance of his health remaining? Yeah, he would have been better served developing an addiction to totally legal prescription painkillers. Ricky was a misunderstood and terrific player. And you're perpetuating that notion to serve an agenda. Plenty of high-functioning people in society use this drug without any of the effects you're talking about, and plenty more people are harmed by legal, profitable drugs and alcohol. Ricky also had unlimited potential and struggled with mental health issues which he was good about discussing later on. I think we can agree he underachieved and who knows exactly why, however, smoking a lot of marijuana at a young age is proven to have risks and could have contributed to his problems. I agree more people are harmed by drugs and alcohol but if marijuana becomes as legal and prevalent I think we'd have a close race on our hands. I agree different people are impacted differently just like not everyone who drinks alcohol struggles with it as much as others. I don't have an agenda other than I think it's one of those many things it's best to stay away from and the NFL should continue to ban it.
boyst Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I can't believe I stumbled in here...and after reading what's going on I'm going to leave quietly. pull up a stool, have a seat. This is fun...
Chef Jim Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I can't believe I stumbled in here...and after reading what's going on I'm going to leave quietly. HEY!! Get back here with that joint.
papazoid Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 The Buffalo Bills now wait for the NFL to decide whether the recent incident involving LB Nigel Bradham is a violation of the league’s personal conduct policy, and whether any sanctions might be imposed. That’s the word from Bills GM Doug Whaley, who met with the media at noon Tuesday at St. John Fisher College. http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2013/08/20/whaley-says-league-is-reviewing-bradham-incident/
Sig1Hunter Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 So you are saying that you have been pulled over with a cracked-open beer in the cup holder (or something similar) and the cop does nothing? Color me skeptical. PTR Yeah, PTR. That's exactly what I am saying...
Offside Number 76 Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 (edited) More than a citation? Like what? Possession is possession, whether in a little baggie, rolled in a joint, or burning in a pipe. If you are inferring a DUI, there has to be evidence of impairment before that comes in to play - just like drinking a beer while driving doesn't automatically qualify you for the DUI, smoking a fattie behind the wheel doesn't either! Wow. This is completely stupid. Driving while drinking a beer is its own crime. Even if you're on the first sip of the first beer. Driving while smoking a joint, pipe, or whatever also is its own crime. It's incredible that this needs to be explained. Edited August 21, 2013 by Offsides Number 76
Bufcomments Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I have troopers in my family. I know they will pull over a vehicle with dark tinted windows, no matter the race because they can not see inside to know who is operating. So how does this morph into being stopped under "driving while black"? The officer can't see who the driver is? It was Nigel's fault for burning one while driving. I like him and his potential but this was just plain stupid. Wait a minute.... under what law does "they cant see who is driving" fall under?? That to me is unjust cause just to pull somebody over. Do they treat those long limos with deep black tint the same as a normal auto with deep tints??
Offside Number 76 Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 Wait a minute.... under what law does "they cant see who is driving" fall under?? That to me is unjust cause just to pull somebody over. Do they treat those long limos with deep black tint the same as a normal auto with deep tints?? I have yet to see a limo where the driving cabin has the deep black tint. And even if there is one, there might be a different law governing livery than normal cars. Fact is, NYS has a law governing tints. I hate this, too, but the man wasn't following the law, and got caught. That does happen.
Chef Jim Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 Wait a minute.... under what law does "they cant see who is driving" fall under?? That to me is unjust cause just to pull somebody over. Do they treat those long limos with deep black tint the same as a normal auto with deep tints?? The amount of tint is the ruling here and it's how dark it is in the front windows. You can go as dark as you want in the back but not up front. Hence the ability tio go jet black in the limos At least that's the law here in CA.
Sig1Hunter Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 Wow. This is completely stupid. Driving while drinking a beer is its own crime. Even if you're on the first sip of the first beer. Driving while smoking a joint, pipe, or whatever also is its own crime. It's incredible that this needs to be explained. Incredible, eh? Please explain to me these separate crimes (please refrain from using city ordinances as your reply. Those are about as serious as a parking ticket). And, remember that I am a real dolt when it comes to these kinds of situations. Thank you kindly. Wait a minute.... under what law does "they cant see who is driving" fall under?? That to me is unjust cause just to pull somebody over. Do they treat those long limos with deep black tint the same as a normal auto with deep tints?? That's the beauty of it. It matters not what you consider 'just' and 'unjust'. Unless you are a New York State Legislator, I guess. Dark tinted windows are a safety hazard. Ever try looking out side windows that have 10% tint at night when you are preparing to make a left turn? You probably wouldn't see the kid in the road through the window. Ever walked up on a car with dark tinted windows that you have just pulled over at 12am, having no clue who is inside or what they have in their hands? Yeah, didn't think so. They are illegal, and can / will get you pulled over. Don't like it, call your congressman. Hey sig, have you come across THC Wax yet? I came across it for the first time last week on a traffic stop. Saw a bulletin on it. We've been inundated with the synthetic stuff down here.
QCity Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 You remember how Levy used to hand out big sacks of popcorn after the game? Marrone is ramping it up and handing out sacks of weed.
AReed Deep For6 Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 City of Tonawanda representing! I'm more surprised at so many people being from Tonawanda/knowing where the Hell it is than I am at Nigel at this point...
Delete This Account Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I'm not clear what you're saying here John. Care to expound? had a late night. thought i'd just throw that log on the fire. oddly enough, i'm amused by post's meaning, and lack thereof, given the attention it has stirred from at least one poster's response. i'll leave it be, and remain cryptic. jw
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 I have yet to see a stoned person throw down over nothing but have seen plenty of booze bags behave like animals. Glad to see our government is protecting us from these dangerous pot users. Luckily I live in a MMJ state and can use THC based products on my ailments over the addictive and bs pharmaceutical alternatives.
Who is Yuri? Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 There is a lot of talk about following the law. I believe in following laws when they are just, and I would want other people to be following them too, because it would be for the best. We would be safe, and there would be no need for police officers, but we would have them anyway, like out front of Buckingham Palace. Except, in this case, Buckingham Palace would be places like Tonawanda, all across America, with all the pride, pomp, and pageantry that an officer, or any citizen would want. It would be a great place for all, because nobody would be breaking the law, and nobody would be in prison. Prison Guards would be hired, but they would invariably be old geezers with no other object than to play poker and go fishing. That would be swell, so long as a new law weren't created that put previously law-abiding citizens, on the wrong side of the law. Then, all of a sudden, we would have to have fewer parades, because there would be less free time for the officers, with the new arrests that would have to be made. And the Prison Guards would have no time to fish or play poker, and might lose their jobs altogether, in favor of younger men who previously had no other employment than to ride motorcycles and come to the aid of damsels in some sort of distress or other. What about this new law? It's bad for police officers, its bad for security guards, and it's especially bad for mexicans and blacks. When I Googled this law, I came to the opinion that The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was created intentionally as a means to arrest Mexicans and Blacks, and now, not quite a century later, a fair number of "them" (whom we might have called "us") are PISSED OFF. I'm pissed off too, and the only thing that used to help me was hemp flower. I didn't even know the stuff was called mariju-whatsit. If it weren't for that law, I'd still be sitting on Easy Street right now, playing poker, smoking doobers, and enjoying a magnificent parade, brought to us, once again, by those masters of grand spectacle, the police and fire departments, cheering my heart out. FREE BRADHAM!
Recommended Posts