Outraged at the CFL leadership.....

I’m sure Hemlock has taken its toll…

just because something ‘is’ doesn’t make it good. but nice try on that naturalistic fallacy meanstreak…
personally i think this particular opinion is ridiculous. make one thing legal because something else is legal that is, in your opinion, ‘more dangerous’ (excuse me for paraphrasing)

lets face it folks, Ricky broke the law, whether or not he was punished legally is a different story. (doing 80 in a 50 is still speeding even if you dont get pulled over…)

regardless of that, he refused to follow mandatory NFL rules (whether they are fair or not is not up for debate) and has shown by his actions that he does not respect rules even if it means potentially losing an 8 million dollar signing bonus.

lets keep the argument civil people, even if you are only posting to get a quick shot in a mikey. its fun, but sometimes it can be good to let one mikey thread slide.

C'mon Espo let a blatant troll like "dog and pony show" and "freak show" slide by?

The CFL and player morality side of the issue is immaterial given the presence of Anthony Davis in camp with barely a whisper from the morality patrol officers.
There are times you let a troll slip by but this one truly deserves comment.

Here's an article (see below) from the Vancouver Sun this morning (June 1st) in which it uses quotes from Wally Buono and Tom Higgins describing this deal with Williams by using such terms as :

---Circus (the author)

---Mickey Mouse (describing what it makes the CFL look like)

---carnival sideshow (the author)

---black eye for our league

I stand by my original post in this thread and agree with Joe Theismann's view as well as Angelo Mosca's....(and now it seems, Coaches Buono and Higgins) I wasn't by any stretch of the imagination trolling but rather only posting my opinion in one neat and tidy post instead of running around to all the other threads arguing my viewpoint. I just don't have the time or energy to do that.....have a nice day all 8)

click here for this morning's Vancouver Sun story

Yes explain your views on women beaters who are allowed to play in playoff games ala Nick Harper ( playoff game last season ) and the list goes on and on and on ....... And wouldnt you know it we have one who is trying out for the Cats this season . Why are these players allowed to play in the NFL and a guy who smokes a low level drug is vilified ?

We proved one thing here.

There are many moralists here
who never took one misstep
in their entire youth. Allegedly.

Ho hum..

Oh, Ricky, you're so fine,
You're so fine you blow my mind.

Hey, Ricky!
Hey, Ricky!

Using blatant provocative statements in order to get people riled up and refusing to explain or support the statements then scurrying off to safety is the very definition of troll.
And using other people's opinions in the hopes to bolster your argument because you cant construct one doesnt make it any less inane.

Canadian Police Chiefs Call for Decriminalization of Marijuana Possession 4/30/99

While it "stands firm in opposing any type of legalization of any and all currently illicit drugs in Canada," the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) announced its support for the decriminalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana and the medicalization of all illegal drugs. Such was the curious admixture of conservative rhetoric and progressive policy recommendations in "Drug Policy 1999," a report released last week by the group.

Brockville, Ontario police chief Barry King, who chairs the CACP's drug abuse committee, explained. "Over the years, there have been a lot of definitions used and interchanged, and in an improper sense in many cases, from decriminalization to harm reduction to legalization to medicalization," he told the Week Online. "What we wanted to do as the Chiefs of Police was to have a foundation for the partners we deal with -- we deal with Health Canada, with Justice, which writes the laws, we deal with addiction research centers, and police -- so we decided to come up with our definition, to put it on the table so that we have a foundation we can all talk from."

One of the reasons the CACP opposes legalization, even for small amounts of marijuana, King said, is because the UN Convention on Narcotic Drugs precludes such a move. Instead, the CACP wants the existing penalty for possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana changed from a summary conviction, which is similar to a misdemeanor but results in a criminal record, to a ticketable offense.

"Our intent was not to change the law, but to give police officers on the front line an option so that they may use discretion like in other investigations," King said. "They'd have the opportunity, depending on the circumstances to give a ticket. The person would have thirty days to pay the ticket and avoid a criminal record. If they failed to do that, then we would enact the same law we have now and apply the criminal charge."

King said the lighter penalties make sense for first time offenders. "There are a lot of people who experiment, and after a short period of time, or if they get caught, they quit. And that's our long term objective, is to get people off it," he said. "But what's happened of course is that under the existing law, even though it's a misdemeanor or summary conviction, it's a barrier to employment. We think there's a far better message given out, not that we're lightening up drugs at all, but that we spend more time on traffickers, distributors, on organized crime. It seems like a reasonable alternative in the '90s."

Last year, some 70,000 people were charged with drug offenses in Canada. 70 percent of those charges were marijuana-related, and 60 percent of those were for possession. "Every time a police officer has to go in and write up a report and dictate a Crown brief, that is time off the road. That's valuable time," King said. Court time and legal fees also add up.

King stressed that CACP's recommendations for decriminalization were made with the proviso that any changes in the law must be accompanied by an increase in spending on prevention, education, and treatment.

The report also clarifies CACP's position on the medical use of marijuana and other drugs. In response to Health Minister Alan Rock's announcement that Health Canada would conduct clinical trials on marijuana's medical use, a policy statement accompanying the report states, "The CACP fully supports it... We realize this is not the first step towards the legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes."

"People say, 'why don't we legalize drugs for medical use?' We're saying, 'bad word.' Don't use 'legalization.' It's 'medicalization,'" King said. "We have morphine today, we have codeine, we have a number of other tranquilizers that are addictive but they have been authorized for medical use. We have no problem with that. Instead of trying to draw us into arguments over medical use of marijuana or heroin or cocaine, we're pointing out that Health Canada has a regulatory responsibility, an approval process, and a scientific based assessment. And if they determine that a given drug is beneficial, that's their responsibility. We're not doctors."

King said CACP's recommendations, which will be presented for approval by the full membership at an annual meeting this August, and then to the Ministries of Justice, Health, and the Solicitor General, and are just common sense. "We were not trying to be radical," he said. "We were not trying to reinvent anything."

Nixon Commission Report Advising Decriminalization of Marijuana Celebrates 30th Anniversary

March 21, 2002 - Washington, DC, USA

More Than 13.2 Million Americans Have Been Arrested on Pot Charges Since Congress Rejected 1972 Policy Recommendations

Washington, DC: Friday marks the 30-year-anniversary of a 1972 federal commission report advising Congress to remove criminal penalties on the possession and nonprofit distribution of marijuana. The National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse (a.k.a. "the Shafer Commission"), appointed by then-President Richard Nixon, formally made its recommendation on March 22, 1972.

"Neither the marihuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety," concluded the report's authors, led by then-Gov. Raymond Shafer of Pennsylvania. "Therefore, the Commission recommends ... [the] possession of marijuana for personal use no longer be an offense, [and that the] casual distribution of small amounts of marihuana for no remuneration, or insignificant remuneration no longer be an offense."

Despite the commission's recommendations, Nixon and Congress ignored the report. Since then, more than 13.2 million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges, including some 735,000 in 2000 - the last year for which federal data is available.

you forgot to double clap twice between the two 'hey Ricky!'s

Commissioner Tom Wright, according to the Winnipeg Sun story posted on this site, has admitted this whole thing occured because of loop holes. The league will take action to stop this from happening before next season. They will tighten up rules for suspended players etc. Read the article, interesting. So what is done is done. Thus endeth the lesson. Amen!

Thanks for that - I’m kinda new to this Internet thing.

While you’re at it, is there a term for a guy or gal that cruises football fans sites year after year, waiting for one particular other guy to post just about anything so he can immediately jump in, hop up on his soapbox, and detail this guy’s flaws - past, present and future - to everyone else that uses the site. With this Internet lingo gettin so particular, there must be a common term for someone like that.

Oh, oh, and is there a term for a guy that does that, and in addition ignores, defends or even celebrates the exact same flaws in countless other posters. There’s just gotta be a term for someone like that.

Thanking you in advance for your help with this.

And the Academy Award for best feigned concern goes to… :roll:

Concern. For…?

Help me here, I’m not sure I follow.

Oh, and that rolling eyes emoticon, she’s a beaut … who needs reason when you’ve got that to work with.

It’s more of a quick double followed by a single, isn’t it?

Hey Ricky… bumbum bum

(bum is a clap sound. I’m not calling Ricky a bum so don’t yell at me)

Yeah, the eye roll is great. smoking cowboy and the head rocker I'm not sure about.

As for leadership goes Tom Wright has actually shown some as he addresses the loophole issue. Critics might say its closing the barndoor after the horse is gone but he at least he is trying.

maybe its a double clap and then three… bah… waste of time i suppose… perhaps it would be more efficient to d/l the song… but then i’d have to put up with the shame of downloading that particular song… yipes… what is a boy to do…