SmokinES3 Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 I suppose that depends on the definition of "enhancement." I can say, with 100% certainty, that my performance in bed, and on the ski slopes is much better with a little weed. My performance on an aptitude test?... not so much. Agreed. It's partially psychological but for me in bed and playing the occasional video game is where I miss it most. Love it as much as the next guy and support full legalization. At the same time, I'm not going to risk losing my job over it. It's a no brainer.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 I am not sure if that would be the case. If the real stuff were still prohibited by employers, etc. (even if legal), then there is a market for the synthetic stuff. I think most law enforcement agencies view the synthetic stuff as much worse because it is designed to conceal, and there is something surreptious about it. I bet the NFL would view it the same way, and would not include it in the new rule changes.....and so Dareus would still be screwed. The synthetic stuff is bad for you because it's chemically-altered THC with no testing to see if it has negative effects on people. They beat the system by taking THC and altering it, thereby making it no longer an illegal substance. But you have no idea how that modified THC is going to affect you in the long run.
BillsBytheBay Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 Playing devils advocate is there anything else growing on you backyard you'd dry out and smoke? lol, I trashed it. Than I informed my neighbors about their sons agricultural experiment.
swimtoga Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 How long before cocaine violations are relaxed? It was once used for it's medicinal value as well. This is a slippery slope. You really have no idea what you're talking about. To your first question: my perception about alcohol is that it is frequently abused, even to those that aren't "alcoholics" and in our county, CNY, DWI arrests and convictions are through the roof!! So, in those cases, it was abused and then those people made poor decisions, potentially very harmful ones, and so I'm not "ok" with alcohol abuse but I am fine with its use...such as I stated in my post, I'm "ok" with marijuana use, but I didn't specify abuse, and I should have. "Addicting" has a wide variety of definitions, from clinical to substance abuse definitions to laymen's terms to a real-life scenario in the form of addiction, so that would be a much longer conversation, and not anything we could hash out (haha, I made a pun) on this board...as for "more harmful", again that to me seems to over-simplifying the statement and information that is used over and over again without context, so let's just assume that "more harmful" also has multiple implications...what I WILL say, is that legalizing it is just a matter of time everywhere and I'm less concerned about its use than its regulation....Percocet, Vicodin, and Oxycontin along with Hydrocodone pills are all legal, but their abuse is significant and is one of the fastest growing forms of drug addiction in our country, specifically in the younger demographic, i.e. high school and college age young people, and those pills are regulated and we have laws that impose legal consequences for their illegal use and distribution and that doesn't seem to be stemming the tide of addiction...so, just because marijuana is in some places and most likely will be in all places, legal for consumption and controlled sale, doesn't wipe the issue away entirely, it merely opens an entirely different set of problems and issues...overall, not just in the NFL No over simplification. Its less harmful and not chemically addicting. Religion is more harmful than pot ever could be.
Adam Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 You really have no idea what you're talking about. No over simplification. Its less harmful and not chemically addicting. Religion is more harmful than pot ever could be. +1
BigBuff423 Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 You really have no idea what you're talking about. No over simplification. Its less harmful and not chemically addicting. Religion is more harmful than pot ever could be. Well, unfortunately, I don't think it *IS* that simple. But we shall agree to disagree, and as for "religion is more harmful than pot ever could be" again opens up and enormous can of worms....so, let's just say there are many opinions that set the world on fire, and interjecting drug use into the discussion of religion is adding gasoline to that nepalm explosion, so I will choose to walk away without stating my opinions or thoughts, which are complex.
reddogblitz Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) I suppose that depends on the definition of "enhancement." I can say, with 100% certainty, that my performance in bed, and on the ski slopes is much better with a little weed. My performance on an aptitude test?... not so much. Are you really sure it's better, or you just thought it was better because you were high? Edited May 16, 2014 by reddogblitz
Deranged Rhino Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 Are you really sure it's better, or you just thought it was better because you were high? In the end, does it really matter?
Manther Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 I work for NYS and my employer has a Zero tolerance policy when it comes to illegal drugs.... If I were to be found guilty of possession, I would be terminated..... Excuse me for believing professional athletes are not above the law..... If the rest of us have to obey the laws of our states and country, why shouldn't NFL players? I agree. Goodell wants them to be role models and then is going to lessen the penalty when they break the law?! This is bizarre!
truth on hold Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) It was initially made illegal in the United States due to anti-Mexican racist sentiments: http://brucealanbloc...a-became-legal/ And jazz musicians. Mexicans are cool but jazz sucks so I'm a little torn here I agree. Goodell wants them to be role models and then is going to lessen the penalty when they break the law?! This is bizarre! He's just making it less unjustifiably severe. Its not like they're going to lining up in the "Bong" formation any time soon Edited May 16, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 if you haven't tried it, how the hell can you make any rational argument against it? you can't.
Offside Number 76 Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) if you haven't tried it, how the hell can you make any rational argument against it? you can't. I've more that tried it. Well over 100 times. Mostly in my 20s, but even once or twice in my 30s. I don't like it (at this age), for myself. I think it should be legal, but that doesn't really matter for this discussion. I don't think the NFL should waste its time with it; that's what matters. It's silly to be busting players for grass. How's that? Edited May 16, 2014 by Offsides Number 76
Buffalo Barbarian Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 Report: NFL to change drug policy regarding marijuana use I call BS on pain, dudes just want to get high (not saying it doesn't help pain but the main reason they want and many other Americans want is for getting high)
26CornerBlitz Posted May 16, 2014 Author Posted May 16, 2014 I call BS on pain, dudes just want to get high (not saying it doesn't help pain but the main reason they want and many other Americans want is for getting high) After you experience the equivalent of about 75 weekly automobile crashes for sixteen consecutive weeks then get back to us.
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 I call BS on pain, dudes just want to get high (not saying it doesn't help pain but the main reason they want and many other Americans want is for getting high) I suppose the reason so many players get addicted to legal prescription opiates is also just to "get high" based on your appalling lack of evidence. But what else is new!
machine gun kelly Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 You can just hear Warren Sapp calling Henderson, "man why didn't they do this 15 years ago"
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 I've more that tried it. Well over 100 times. Mostly in my 20s, but even once or twice in my 30s. I don't like it (at this age), for myself. I think it should be legal, but that doesn't really matter for this discussion. I don't think the NFL should waste its time with it; that's what matters. It's silly to be busting players for grass. How's that? Sorry, if I wasn't clear. My comments were for those against pot in general. they want to crucify pot smokers when they have no ideal what it is about. WRT to your post well said good sir. legalities .... rapist serve short sentences, getting busted for pot is time up to 15 years in some states.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 In the end, does it really matter? Perception is reality, except when it's not. How do you justify alcohol being legal when it kills, injures and endangers far more lives than pot. Your probably OK with burning witches as well. Oh, right. Says, "Herb62."
Webster Guy Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 I agree that weed should be legal and I've been known to be a fan. But you're an idiot if you know the policy, already been suspended once, and do it again. He should get suspended for being an idiot. Agreed. The rule is silly, especially in light of the decriminalization approach that most states have now. But you have to be a complete idiot to get nailed twice. Unreal. I feel so sorry for Cleveland fans. What a letdown.
billsfan1959 Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 Interesting topic and I truly do not know where I stand on the issue of legalizing marijuana. I am a retired FBI Agent and work for myself consulting primarily on murder (real crime) trials. However, during the middle part of my career, I ran drug task forces for a number of years. Admittedly, I didn't deal with the casual users of marijuana. I dealt with organizations trafficking in cocaine and, later on, meth. I did deal with some Mexican Cartels trafficking in marijuana; however, the drugs were secondary to the murders, kidnappings, etc., that are always part of these organizations. I did interact with street level drug users purely from an intelligence gathering perspective. I provide this background only to offer a foundation for the following responses. After working in the drug world for 11 years in the above capacity, to me, marijuana compared to powder cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, meth, PCP, etc., is like comparing apples to oranges. I have no moral opposition to the legalization of marijuana. I do not subscribe to the "slippery-slope" theory in terms of the subsequent legalization of other drugs. I also look at the idea of marijuana being a "gateway" drug much as I do with the idea that violence on television and in video games leads to violence in children and young adults: Generally speaking, research shows it is not true; however, for specific individuals it is true. I am a big believer in personal responsibility. I am also a big believer in looking at things realistically. The reality is this: (1) The vast majority of people use alcohol in a responsible manner and they would probably do so with marijuana. (2) Marijuana is much like cigarette and alcohol use in regard to physical harm. The casual user is probably not going to suffer major problems. Habitual use can cause severe health problems just as habitual use of cigarettes and alcohol. (3) For a minority of people, marijuana can be psychologically addicting. In the end, most of the reasons I hear to not legalize marijuana are pretty specious - but I am still trying to decide where I stand. As a side bar in response to a couple of posts I read: I never arrested anyone, nor do I know of any other law enforcement officer arresting anyone, so that the prisons in this country could profit.
Recommended Posts