I hope that's not the case. If that's what happening, that's the same bush league stunt that Crean pulled with Troy Williams a couple years ago (or maybe it was another player). If the penalty is 3 games, it should be enforced as 3 games. I would have to think the University has the autonomy to suspend for 3 regular season games over the 2-exhibitions-plus-1-real-game approach. Seems like they're exploiting a loophole that allows for a lighter punishment than what the league intended.
What's the trouble with Basil?
- Thread starter Heiner
- Start date
Hmm. You post the above, and previously posted this:
"I am glad that Painter seems to take these character issues seriously, but who knows what dirty secrets have been kept private in our BBall program. Surely, we cannot be as clean cut as many around here seem to believe."
Troll.
Under the Hillary Defense he should walk untouched. So what if he was careless, he didn't intend to get caught.
Haha, really? There have been threads that have lasted MUCH LONGER than this so I'm surprised you would say that. Trying to end the thread isn't going to change what happened or make it any less discussion-worthy, but I understand your view of it not wanting it to be the top thread. However, if that's the case I suggest you start a new thread on a different topic if you want to ensure that this get buried in the topic mode.
I know it affects some people more than others and in different ways (i.e. mood and temperament). The players you mention had already reached a very high level (no pun intended) of skill and production. Basil Smotherman is not at that level, so it might be better for him to stave off the herb if he wants to improve as a player.
I'm not saying he should smoke. I'm saying the mis information about Marijuana and its damage to the body or mind are just ridiculous. Studies done on subjects in places where it has been legal for years don't show any such relation. I wouldn't suggest that young people (or adults for that matter), get drunk the night before attempting anything either physically or mentally taxing.
I believe that repeated usage does have negative effects on most users (apathy/lack of motivation and in some cases, permanently impaired or delayed thought-processes/decision-making and reaction time).
I know marijuana/cannabis usage doesn't affect EVERYONE to a significant degree over a long period of time but it can still affect plenty of people negatively if the usage is frequent and extended. Not everyone's brain proteins, neural, chemical activity, and so on are built and wired the same, so that makes a difference when it comes to the individual effects on a particular user over time. Every case is different because no one is wired the exact same way as another.
Com'on didn't you see Reefer Madness? It had to be real
They couldn't make that stuff up.This is 100% accurate. I smoked daily for years, and haven't touched it for years. The difference it made for me was drastic. I went from lazy as all get out to one of the hardest workers in my company. It also killed my emotion. I had friends, on the other hand, that would smoke all day and it had little to no effect on their production or personality. I liked smoking, but wouldn't start again if it were legal simply because of how it changes my personality and my work ethic.
In Smotherman's case, I doubt he was just the occasional smoker. Occasional users don't generally have grinders and pipes, because their frequency of use (or lack thereof) doesn't justify the expenditure on paraphernalia. If I'm right, the difference in his game could be drastic depending on how it affects him personally. I think he has a lot of potential and would like to see him reach it; maybe this is the kick in the rear he needed.
Someone who smokes even everyday are no worse off than someone who has a couple of beers. Bob Marley type smoking isn't good for you. But someone who is drunk all day isn't going to perform all that well. As to lazy unmotivated people, there are plenty of those who never use drugs or drink. Maybe that's just the way they are wired. The point is to deny legality to usage of a drug which seems pretty benign overall seems wrong to me. I'll leave this discussion with this thought, most violent crimes are committed by people who are much more likely to be under the influence than any other substance.
The science on marijuana is light years ahead of where it was even 5 years ago. The process of manufacturing it to address certain needs has also progressed. The old mantra that it hurts the brain has been proven wrong now and studies show it actually helps to heal areas of the brain that aren't functioning properly.
I am not trying to make excuses for Basil. But it seems many people aren't keeping up with the advances on the area now that it is finally be studied and old believe have been disproven.
I am not trying to make excuses for Basil. But it seems many people aren't keeping up with the advances on the area now that it is finally be studied and old believe have been disproven.
Family experiences, some tragic, have convinced me that it should not be legal.
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. It isn't for everyone as it is like any other substance we ingest that can be harmful off some.
But it does have its merits and has only recently began clinical testing.
But I don't condone anyone use of any substance that they cannot control their use of, or one that is dangerous to their health.
And I feel the same way at times about alcohol but it isn't the substance, it's the user.
And part of the problem is adults telling kids that there is nothing wrong with it. In my view, adults are responsible for sharing wisdom with youth. There is no wisdom in telling kids that there is nothing wrong with smoking pot.
I don't know any adult who tell kids it's okay to smoke pot. That's a straw man. Perhaps there are some but I would assume kids seeing rheir parents drink alcohol has the same effect.
It's okay to not support it if you don't want to. But there is push back against those who want to continue to spread misinformation about it in attempts to keep it out of the mainstream. It has been saving real lives as of late and belong people when no other pharmaceutical would work. So there is a movement to remove the curtain of lies that has been placed over it since the 60s. Nobody is making you support it. You still have a choice.
Regardless of what your personal stance is on drug legalization or what the science says about weed use, the rules are the rules and if you break them, there are consequences. Whether you agree with the rule or not, it doesn't matter. If the law or coach says "don't do this" and you still do that, don't act like you shouldn't be punished just because you didn't think "that" was any big deal.
How many times do you think Painter has us this talk with the players? Obviously BS didn't take it seriously.
It absolutely is NOT a straw man. For you to even think that, I would say you don't get out much.
On the other hand, if you are correcting all of the "misinformation" by telling kids that it's all good, then what is the message they are receiving? And if it's as good as you say, why WOULDN'T you tell them it's OK? You are sending very mixed messages here.
I actually didn't share an opinion on what Basil did. But since you asked I don't want any of the players smoking anything or drinking alcohol.
My post was referring of how damaging weed is to ones abilities. People who have addictive behaviors should stay away from it. But they should avoid sugar and alcohol and porn and sex and anything else people become addicted to.
But marijuana has been proven to not be the demon it was once considered to be. It has Helen benefits for certain ailments and has been used to save lives. The science is new as studies ajve been outlawed due to the scheduling of the drug. But with what has been discovered so far such as helping people who have siezures, PTSD, dementia and other ailments? I wouldn't be so quick to pigeon hole it into nothing but bad. Opiates are bad, but they have purposes for which they are good if used properly. That's my point.
I assume your spell-checker messed up some of your statements, so some of this is incoherent. But more than once you have stated that pot has been used to save lives. How? What life-threatening disease has been cured with pot? Please provide a link.
How many would you like? Would you like me to list every state that has seen a decrease in opiate overdose deaths since legalizing marijuana? Perhaps stories of soldiers with pstd who were suicidal and marijuana relieved their symptoms? How about the children who had life threatening siezures such as this child, who tried all the drugs, almost died from the drugs and only marijuana have her relief? There are many more like her out there who can it just move to Colorado and is forced to break the law or continue to suffer.
Watch this one and maybe open your eyes.
Of course then you have this. Remember. Studies have been limited by current laws.
http://m.cancer.org/treatment/treat...ects/chemotherapyeffects/marijuana-and-cancer
http://m.cancer.org/treatment/treat...ects/chemotherapyeffects/marijuana-and-cancer
No one is saying there aren't legitimate uses for any drug. But it is irresponsible for you to come to this board and claim that it's OK for Basil and other young people to use it recreationally and to say that all of the reasons they shouldn't is "misinformation".
Even the reports about so-called "correlations" between reduced suicides and marijuana legalization admit that there are studies that show smoking it causes memory loss and amotivational disorders. This should not be a surprise to ANYONE who knows heavy pot users, and it's probably why you didn't provide links. You want to call it misinformation. Fine. Most of these reports supporting pot legalization on the basis of preventing suicides and opioid-related deaths is spurious. You are fighting propaganda on one side of the issue with propaganda of your own.
http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
I'm going to push for a law outlawing margarine to reduce divorces in Maine.
And just to follow up, your first example was a bad one. Colorado legalized marijuana in 2012. There are dozens of articles about the opiate overdose epidemic occurring there. It is considered a crisis.
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/colorado-drug-overdoses-almost-every-county-and-ahead-national-average
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...ted-deaths-increasing-at-epidemic-proportions
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/chart...rowing-heroin-prescription-drug-abuse-problem
I'm not claiming that there is enough evidence to claim a positive "correlation" between marijuana legalization and opioid and heroin use, but I absolutely will not make a false claim that the data shows the opposite effect. And neither should you.
Several studies done years ago indicated that marijuana was not a gateway drug. Most drug addicts begin with alcohol at young ages.
There was no claim here that it is a gateway drug. The implied claim that I disagree with was that somehow marijuana prevented the abuse of other drugs. It saves lives by having the opposite effect, preventing drug addicts from dying of overdoses?
But I have to ask a follow-up question. Do drug addicts move directly from alcohol to heroin, LSD, and meth?
Your study includes heroin which is
There are studies that show it either way. If you add heroin, which has become a problem all over, then you see a rise. If you compare just pain killers and the likelyhood of one abusing them compared to past statistics, you see a decline.
Colorado is an extreme example as it seems to be the haven for those who just wish to escape. So I wouldn't be surprised to see the numbers of heroin or opiate abusers rising at the same rate as the increase in population. But if you take other states that are not seeing the influx that colorado is, you see a decline.
Either way. It has shown benefits and certainly deserves to at least be dropped from a schedule 1 status so it can be studied further.
http://www.attn.com/stories/7829/study-opioid-overdose-down-in-medical-marijuana-states
The bottom line is that you want to push your pro-pot agenda, saying that the science has proven and disproved things when it simply is not true. And you want to back it up with very poor reports. Now you are trying to justify where the data doesn't fit your agenda, with no alternative data to back you up. You can't say that the science has proven something or disproved something when you cherry pick the data and make lame, unscientific attempts to explain away the data that doesn't fit your agenda.
Neither the OP nor I were referring to medical marijuana in this thread when you jumped in with your pro-pot agenda. I get it. You like pot. Don't try to rationalize your own wants with the reports of medical benefits to suffering children. Smoke it if you want. But don't expect everyone to agree with your unfounded belief that it is OK for recreational use by young people, and it should be legal.
Actually, the bottom line is that smoking/possessing weed is illegal. It doesn't matter what the research says, it only matters what the law says.
You can call people hypocritical all you want (yes, I fall into that category because I experimented plenty as a younger person), but the problem is, most people aren't high profile athletes getting a free $150,000 college education whose name is going to make the news if they get caught doing something illegal. There are probably hundreds of regular students busted on a monthly basis for drinking, smoking, etc, but since they don't play football or basketball, we never hear about it. But when an athlete does it, it not only embarrasses himself and family, but also his coach, team and school.
So, whether pot, or crack or heroin or anything is helpful, harmful or totally benign, it doesn't matter if it's illegal.
You can call people hypocritical all you want (yes, I fall into that category because I experimented plenty as a younger person), but the problem is, most people aren't high profile athletes getting a free $150,000 college education whose name is going to make the news if they get caught doing something illegal. There are probably hundreds of regular students busted on a monthly basis for drinking, smoking, etc, but since they don't play football or basketball, we never hear about it. But when an athlete does it, it not only embarrasses himself and family, but also his coach, team and school.
So, whether pot, or crack or heroin or anything is helpful, harmful or totally benign, it doesn't matter if it's illegal.
Wait...you have LSD grouped in with meth and heroin? The point is that initial drug use for most addicts starts with alcohol.
My pro ppt agenda? I have no agenda.
The numbers are raw data. Take them any way you like. Colorado had a decrease like every other state until recently. I know enough about statistics to know that when the population increases rapidly, then other statistics will as well. It's no secret that in the last two years the population of Colorado has exploded. The homeless numbers are up as well. I also know enough about statistics that when the national number increases, like it has with heroin in the last two years, then each states numbers will correlate with the increase.
I have no agenda. I don't work for Cancer.org which states marijuana kills some types of cancer. You didn't read that part did you? I don't smoke pot or sell pot not am I part of any political origination that pushes marijuana laws. I am just not a close minded person who makes a judgment on an entire population because I know someone who smoked pot and made bad decisions. There's your agenda, right there.
Marijuana has shown it has medical benefits and thus should not hold a schedule 1 classification. That's all I said and it remains valid and true. You're trying to make it seem like because bad things happen and pot is around, then pot is bad. That's ridiculous.
Similar threads
