Two Zags Arrested on Drug Charges

[Grizbacker1]

Would it be any different if they were busted for soliciting a prostitute?

Not to me ... that shouldn't be illegal, either. It's not harming anyone else, so I don't care who does it. It's just capitalism at work.

Maybe your idea of "Split the Pot" is different than most of ours too. :thumb:

 

[Ballhog]

It is sad to read all the comments saying that the conduct of the
2 Zags is no big deal. First their behavior is illegal; since when was
a felony something to laugh off? For those who think that drugs
and alcohol are nothing to get excited about visit your friendly
rehab unit and talk to the patients. Many a person will tell you
that MJ started them down the slope.
I can still remeber when cocaine was considered a harmless
recreational drug-I don't think Len Bias's family would be amused.
I feel compassion for the players and their families; Josh has
always had a bit of a attitude; in highschool he often didn't
play defense. He is very talented but he needs to shape up.
As for Montana being a drinking state I wouldn't be too proud-
visit AA some time.

 

[citygriz]

fun thread. probably should be moved, but what the heck.

you can't enforce laws against human nature (as prohibition showed) so why try.

the job of lawmen should be to protect us from assaults, thefts and murders, and not to enforce the behavioral prejudices--drug-taking or consensual sex between adults--of the ruling class. i suspect cops in cheney have far more important crimes to solve and prevent than to bust two kids who are not robbing/assaulting/killing anybody.

the young zag players were stupid to have been doing drugs, or even in the possession of drugs, or even out the night before an important basketball game, but stupid is not criminal.

to waste the time of the police apparatus on such matters while others are being robbed, mugged, murdered, assaulted and defrauded is not just foolish, it's criminal. repeat, criminal.

 

[Grizbacker1]

It is sad to read all the comments saying that the conduct of the
2 Zags is no big deal. First their behavior is illegal; since when was
a felony something to laugh off? For those who think that drugs
and alcohol are nothing to get excited about visit your friendly
rehab unit and talk to the patients. Many a person will tell you
that MJ started them down the slope.
I can still remeber when cocaine was considered a harmless
recreational drug-I don't think Len Bias's family would be amused.
I feel compassion for the players and their families; Josh has
always had a bit of a attitude; in highschool he often didn't
play defense. He is very talented but he needs to shape up.
As for Montana being a drinking state I wouldn't be too proud-
visit AA some time.

You make some valid points, but to try and link MJ as being a precrusor to harder drugs, there is no scientific eveindence to support that claim. In fact, haven't seen that since the movie Reefer Madness. That is almost as absurd as the people who think anyone who read Playboy might rape someone.

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

You make some valid points, but to try and link MJ as being a precrusor to harder drugs, there is no scientific eveindence to support that claim. In fact, haven't seen that since the movie Reefer Madness. That is almost as absurd as the people who think anyone who read Playboy might rape someone.

I don't buy into that 'precursor' type propaganda either; that's about as sensible as the big oil companies that recently spent sixteen million dollars on Madison Avenue campaigning that the 'greenhouse effect' is not caused by automobile emmissions.

In the same vein, though, I wouldn't legalize marijuana either; but I wouldn't make it any more punishable than a five-dollar parking ticket either; one city per state.

Anything heavier one can do as Timothy Leary cited; keep to ones' own 'setting,' so to speak, without endangering anyone else, which also includes not driving a vehicle under the influence.

 

[kalm]

i suspect cops in cheney have far more important crimes to solve and prevent than to bust two kids who are not robbing/assaulting/killing anybody.

Well, actually...

 

[Bozgriz]

Would it be any different if they were busted for soliciting a prostitute?

Not to me ... that shouldn't be illegal, either. It's not harming anyone else, so I don't care who does it. It's just capitalism at work.

What if it was a MALE prostitute? Embarassed yet?

The point is, breaking the law reflects poorly not only on the student athlete, it reflects poorly on all the student athletes at that university...Kind of like if your sister became a hooker, it would be embarassing to your family-

And since it violates the law, it is what it is...

 

[Bay Area Cat]

Would it be any different if they were busted for soliciting a prostitute?

Not to me ... that shouldn't be illegal, either. It's not harming anyone else, so I don't care who does it. It's just capitalism at work.

What if it was a MALE prostitute? Embarassed yet?

Since we are (theoretically) talking about someone else's private conduct that harms nobody else ... I simply don't care ... and don't understand why anybody else (including any police officer) would or should care.

And if this sort of thing wasn't illegal ... then there would be no reason for people's private non-harmful activities to be turned into a public spectacle like this.

 

[Hells bells]

Would it be any different if they were busted for soliciting a prostitute?

Not to me ... that shouldn't be illegal, either. It's not harming anyone else, so I don't care who does it. It's just capitalism at work.

What if it was a MALE prostitute? Embarassed yet?

Since we are (theoretically) talking about someone else's private conduct that harms nobody else ... I simply don't care ... and don't understand why anybody else (including any police officer) would or should care.

And if this sort of thing wasn't illegal ... then there would be no reason for people's private non-harmful activities to be turned into a public spectacle like this.

well actually BAC that is our arugment, this sorta item is illegal and as such, should not be ignored. if you dont like the law change it..

 

[Ballhog]

The truth is that there is much evidence linking use of MJ to a
gateway drug in those populations which are susceptible to
progression. A better point in this case is do you want people who
ae high on the roads? If so you are an idiot. Finally, legallizing any
behavior expands its use. In addition. MJ contains potent carcinogens-there is no justification for illegal behavior in athletes;
so quit falling all over yourselves pleading the case or ask Mike
Chavez. I doubt that the other GU players think its funny.
P.S. I sure wish I had been on a barstool when I was 12.

 

[Grizbacker1]

The truth is that there is much evidence linking use of MJ to a
gateway drug in those populations which are susceptible to
progression. A better point in this case is do you want people who
ae high on the roads? If so you are an idiot. Finally, legallizing any
behavior expands its use. In addition. MJ contains potent carcinogens-there is no justification for illegal behavior in athletes;
so quit falling all over yourselves pleading the case or ask Mike
Chavez. I doubt that the other GU players think its funny.
P.S. I sure wish I had been on a barstool when I was 12.

You keep stating there is evidence, yet you never provide it, which makes your claim pretty hollow. The fact is, it isn't a gateway drug. Do I think people should drive after using drugs? Do I really need t answer that? It is obviously no. But, if you asked me if I would choose someone smoking pot over someone drinking at the wheel, I will take the pot smoker every time. When was the last fatal car accident blamed on pot smoking? The number of people killed on the highways due to alcohol is staggering. My last point, you might educate yourself a little more on the FACTS before calling people idiots, that can come back to haunt you. :thumb:

 

[Griz2k]

So if they got caught with child pornography instead, would that be ok? They're not hurting anyone, just looking at pictures. My point being that the "no harm, no foul" arguement that a lot of you are trying to make is not a valid one.

 

[Sportin' Life]

So if they got caught with child pornography instead, would that be ok? They're not hurting anyone, just looking at pictures. My point being that the "no harm, no foul" arguement that a lot of you are trying to make is not a valid one.

I don't think there is any conceivable way that you could make the argument that there exists child pornography that isn't harmful to someone. The production of child pornography has to be one of the most harmful crimes one can commit.

 

[Griz2k]

So if they got caught with child pornography instead, would that be ok? They're not hurting anyone, just looking at pictures. My point being that the "no harm, no foul" arguement that a lot of you are trying to make is not a valid one.

I don't think there is any conceivable way that you could make the argument that there exists child pornography that isn't harmful to someone. The production of child pornography has to be one of the most harmful crimes one can commit.

I agree with you...but what I'm trying to say is that the arguement everyone here is trying to make is that it's no big deal they had illegal drugs, they weren't hurting anyone. So if they merely had a picture of child porn and they were not involved in taking that picture, who are they hurting? I say the same about the MJ and the shrooms they had, one way or another they are hurting someone. They are supporting the illegal drug trade just as they would be supporting child porn. I just don't understand how people on here can say drugs aren't harmful to people.

 

[Bay Area Cat]

well actually BAC that is our arugment, this sorta item is illegal and as such, should not be ignored. if you dont like the law change it..

Ummm ... not to point out the obvious or anything, but that has been my entire point throughout this whole thread ... and I have stated it explicitly many, many times. The law needs to be changed.

There was never a point at which I wasn't fully aware of people's assertions that it was illegal, and I spoke to the fact that it was illegal myself.

 

[Bay Area Cat]

So if they got caught with child pornography instead, would that be ok? They're not hurting anyone, just looking at pictures. My point being that the "no harm, no foul" arguement that a lot of you are trying to make is not a valid one.

That assertion makes no sense whatsoever. Obviously, the production of child pornography has a victim ... as evidenced by the resulting video footage ... which is the entire point of producing the stuff.

So I thoroughly reject your attempt at using that as an analogy for victim-free drug or prostitution transactions. They are completely apples and oranges.

 

[Grizbacker1]

well actually BAC that is our arugment, this sorta item is illegal and as such, should not be ignored. if you dont like the law change it..

Ummm ... not to point out the obvious or anything, but that has been my entire point throughout this whole thread ... and I have stated it explicitly many, many times. The law needs to be changed.

There was never a point at which I wasn't fully aware of people's assertions that it was illegal, and I spoke to the fact that it was illegal myself.

BAC,

You did point out it was illegal while making your case that the drugs shoul dbe legal. I think it is also fair to point out that you were also adamant that no one was hurt because of their actions. I and many others disagree. Did I miss omething on your part?

 

[Bay Area Cat]

I agree with you...but what I'm trying to say is that the arguement everyone here is trying to make is that it's no big deal they had illegal drugs, they weren't hurting anyone. So if they merely had a picture of child porn and they were not involved in taking that picture, who are they hurting? I say the same about the MJ and the shrooms they had, one way or another they are hurting someone. They are supporting the illegal drug trade just as they would be supporting child porn. I just don't understand how people on here can say drugs aren't harmful to people.

Outside of the violence that results from the CRIMINALIZATION AND BLACK MARKET of the drug trade, who gets hurt from a guy smoking pot or eating a shroom?

The answer: nobody.

Consuming child porn encourages and industry that sexually abuses children as the central and focal point of its revenue. Therefore, it is harmful to society because of what it is (meaning that it is not merely harmful because it is illegal, but is harmful even in the absence of laws against it).

Invalid analogy, without question.

 

[Bay Area Cat]

BAC,

You did point out it was illegal while making your case that the drugs shoul dbe legal. I think it is also fair to point out that you were also adamant that no one was hurt because of their actions. I and many others disagree. Did I miss omething on your part?

Huh?

Let's not let Hell's misunderstanding of the conversation confuse things any more than they have to. Nothing in your post contradicts anything I have said, and I haven't said anything that contadicts myself, so there's nothing more to drill down into on this one -- I was just clarifying things for Hell's benefit.

 

[Grizbacker1]

BAC,

You did point out it was illegal while making your case that the drugs shoul dbe legal. I think it is also fair to point out that you were also adamant that no one was hurt because of their actions. I and many others disagree. Did I miss omething on your part?

Huh?

Let's not let Hell's misunderstanding of the conversation confuse things any more than they have to. Nothing in your post contradicts anything I have said, and I haven't said anything that contadicts myself, so there's nothing more to drill down into on this one -- I was just clarifying things for Hell's benefit.

just making sure, go back to egrizolitics then :thumb: