Gold Coast Drug Culture

[Machsy 2,858]

This saga demonstrates to me, not so much the folly of having Hunt in a leadership role, but rather Ablett.

It's not a leadership issue is considered before, although Ablett's faith made me roll my eyes.

The contrast is stark between the 2 options: saint or sinner.

Unless you're willing to join the Jesus freak cult, what other option do you have but to run with the bad boys?

That may be an extreme view, but it's options a kid is faced with when he comes to that club.

Bible group isn't a popular option with most free thinking people.

Ablett's bent leaves no clear middle ground, where you can just be a normal human who tries to do his best.

You either choose Jesus, or you're already one of the others.

Shaun Hart's presence wouldn't help the situation either.

[Arrow 1,257]

I don't know for sure as I can only comment on my own experience, but I theorise that people have always been willing to break the law when it suited them, it's just that historically this has been masked by the closer alignment of the laws and people's moral compasses. I don't think the disrespect is growing per se, just the divide between social progress and the law.

Happy to agree to disagree - particularly on the matter of whether socially we are progressing or regressing.

For mine, it purely comes down to risk analysis.

150 years ago, people caught stealing bread for their malnourished families were punished by being shipped from Europe to Australia as convicts. The harsh punishment surely deterred the majority leaving the only ones to commit the crime as the men/women who thought it was life or death. If they got caught, it was worth the risk as they would lose their family if they didn't attempt it.

Today, we are flooded with stories and articles about the justice system letting down the victims at sentencing and furthermore overcrowding is seeing current criminals released before their due date so to speak.

I don't for a second think people are committing crimes knowing they'll only receive a lighter sentence, but the fear factor is no longer there. Whether you believe it was right to execute the two Australian's in Bali or not (I was strongly opposed), the principal of it, is that you can nearly be assured no-one or very few will be doing it again. The punishment was brutal and the fear factor is now in full force.

Hypothetically, if these one punch kills from street fights came with a locked in 20 year jail sentence, would I get to the level of intoxication I do currently? I've seldom been in a fight but if I saw my friend involved in one currently, I would run in and get involved as that is my fight or flight reaction.. Whilst obviously my intention would never ever be to put someones life at risk; would I run in knowing an accident will have me in jail for the rest of my life? Would there have even been the scuffle in the first place if there were stricter penalties on crimes?

I believe in many ways with Nasher in that simply, the law isn't having the desired effect it used too. People are relying on their principals and values to make decisions, not on the fear of penalty.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Arrow

[DeeSpencer 23,183]

Getting back to the subject...

It's going to be interesting to watch how the AFL handle this. It was obvious from the start that it wasn't just NRL players involved, so far Dill and his crew have been able to sweep things under the carpet.

Can they isolate it to the Suns and find a scapegoat or will they come clean. I doubt it.

AFL and integrity don't really go together at all.

They have their scapegoat in Hunt.

What do people expect them to do? Name and shame fellow players for a minor illegal offence in their own time that they can't really prove unless the Gold Coast players (who correct me if I'm wrong aren't under any legal obligation to talk) own up to it.

AFL players from every team use drugs, especially at the end of seasons when they are letting their hair down.

Hunt has dobbed in his mates and much more importantly his dealer and other connections. It says a lot about the story that the Crime Commission seems to have moved on and isn't interested in the Gold Coast players. If that's the case then maybe we should move on as well.

[KingDingAling 3,612]

For mine, it purely comes down to risk analysis.

150 years ago, people caught stealing bread for their malnourished families were punished by being shipped from Europe to Australia as convicts. The harsh punishment surely deterred the majority leaving the only ones to commit the crime as the men/women who thought it was life or death. If they got caught, it was worth the risk as they would lose their family if they didn't attempt it.

Today, we are flooded with stories and articles about the justice system letting down the victims at sentencing and furthermore overcrowding is seeing current criminals released before their due date so to speak.

I don't for a second think people are committing crimes knowing they'll only receive a lighter sentence, but the fear factor is no longer there. Whether you believe it was right to execute the two Australian's in Bali or not (I was strongly opposed), the principal of it, is that you can nearly be assured no-one or very few will be doing it again. The punishment was brutal and the fear factor is now in full force.

Hypothetically, if these one punch kills from street fights came with a locked in 20 year jail sentence, would I get to the level of intoxication I do currently? I've seldom been in a fight but if I saw my friend involved in one currently, I would run in and get involved as that is my fight or flight reaction.. Whilst obviously my intention would never ever be to put someones life at risk; would I run in knowing an accident will have me in jail for the rest of my life? Would there have even been the scuffle in the first place if there were stricter penalties on crimes?

I believe in many ways with Nasher in that simply, the law isn't having the desired effect it used too. People are relying on their principals and values to make decisions, not on the fear of penalty.

Actually, I think it comes down to cost analysis. But you make a good point about Bali, not that I would agree with the harshness of capital punishment, but at least Bali have some deterrence measures in place, Australia doesn't. Offenders will be lining up to go to prison is things start getting tough economically.

[rjay 23,922]

They have their scapegoat in Hunt.

What do people expect them to do? Name and shame fellow players for a minor illegal offence in their own time that they can't really prove unless the Gold Coast players (who correct me if I'm wrong aren't under any legal obligation to talk) own up to it.

AFL players from every team use drugs, especially at the end of seasons when they are letting their hair down.

Hunt has dobbed in his mates and much more importantly his dealer and other connections. It says a lot about the story that the Crime Commission seems to have moved on and isn't interested in the Gold Coast players. If that's the case then maybe we should move on as well.

I expect the AFL to take the drugs issue on and not just hide it behind their dodgy not really 3 strikes policy. They come out and tell us everything is under control and base it on some rubbery stats.

We shouldn't move on and need to demand more from our players.

These guys are not part of normal society, although the AFL community would have as believe they are time and again when the issue suits. These are well above average athletes who get paid way above average for what they do.

[PaulRB 5,962]

A bit off topic and opportunistic, ...

but are there players at Gold Coast that would be more keen to walk to another club as a result of the issues they are having and the season we're in?

And can we play this before our next game vs Gold Coast at the G?

https://youtu.be/fdDhV45lYHU

Edited June 29, 2015 by PaulRB

[nutbean 8,837]

If you decriminalise everything you could wipe out crime overnight.

I am definitely going to borrow this line ( pardon the pun)

[Sir Why You Little 34,554]

This saga demonstrates to me, not so much the folly of having Hunt in a leadership role, but rather Ablett.

It's not a leadership issue is considered before, although Ablett's faith made me roll my eyes.

The contrast is stark between the 2 options: saint or sinner.

Unless you're willing to join the Jesus freak cult, what other option do you have but to run with the bad boys?

That may be an extreme view, but it's options a kid is faced with when he comes to that club.

Bible group isn't a popular option with most free thinking people.

Ablett's bent leaves no clear middle ground, where you can just be a normal human who tries to do his best.

You either choose Jesus, or you're already one of the others.

Shaun Hart's presence wouldn't help the situation either.

Ned Flanders or Snake

I know which one i would be hanging out with....

[Moonshadow 16,234]

An inaccurate, and delusional post.

The fact that such drugs are illegal, is EXACTLY the reason why many young people never go near the stuff.

Of course being illegal wont stop many. There are idiots and losers everywhere.. It still helps to prevent so many young and old from trying the garbage.

Do you include the Greens on your list of the "smart" people advocating legalisation? Lunatics one and all.

And you think it will happen? really? ALL drugs?

Not in your lifetime, or even your grandkids lifetimes.

The Libs rang Faulty. They want Tony Abbott's brain back.

[daisycutter 28,569]

The Libs rang Faulty. They want Tony Abbott's brain back.

tell them to check gumtree, moonie

[Bossdog 2,002]

New York City used to be the leader of the world in crime...Drugs....Murder....Rapes....Assaults

The Mayor brought in a no tolerance policy and over 10 years it has become the safest city in the USA.

I was there a year or so ago and it is the safest I have felt in a major city except for Melbourne

If you legalise drugs such as heroion, ice, ect.....It will lead to more deaths and violence.

45 years ago I took up smoking....To be one of the cool guys...It was legal I have an addiction that I still cant rid myself of.

Anyway just my opinion.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Demonland definitely needs a footy game this weekend.

the AFL definately needs a State of Origin game this weekend.

[Moonshadow 16,234]

tell them to check gumtree, moonie

I heard that Joe Hockey has it in a cigar box dc

[daisycutter 28,569]

I heard that Joe Hockey has it in a cigar box dc

think about it moonie - a match box for sure

[dee-luded 2,958]

think about it moonie - a match box for sure

could it be in here?

[DeeSpencer 23,183]

I expect the AFL to take the drugs issue on and not just hide it behind their dodgy not really 3 strikes policy. They come out and tell us everything is under control and base it on some rubbery stats.

We shouldn't move on and need to demand more from our players.

These guys are not part of normal society, although the AFL community would have as believe they are time and again when the issue suits. These are well above average athletes who get paid way above average for what they do.

There's over 800 players in the AFL. Some are on a million per season, some are on 50k.

They players already demand more from each other by submitting themselves to a whole bunch of illicit drug testing. Yes they have 3 strikes and yes they keep the results under wrap but they are doing more than pretty much any other athlete. Yet alone politicians, lawyers, doctors and so on.

Rockstars, movie stars and pretty much any other celebrity besides sports stars are almost celebrated for their poor behaviour. Yet sports stars have to be saints? Why?

[PaulRB 5,962]

Do the police, judges, politicians, media personalities get tested for recreational drugs as part of their professional obligations?

If its performance enhancing it's relevant to be tested and penalised for it, if it's not performance enhancing it's no ones business but the player themselves...

[KingDingAling 3,612]

Do the police, judges, politicians, media personalities get tested for recreational drugs as part of their professional obligations?

If its performance enhancing it's relevant to be tested and penalised for it, if it's not performance enhancing it's no ones business but the player themselves...

The AFL is a business first - a sport second.

And as a business, it cannot afford to be perceived by members of the public, as participating in illegal activities.

Any matters AFL related is everyones business. This is a mass market now, media, etc. People have mouths to feed, that's the reality of it.

It is not going away, there is no point hiding anything anymore. Sam Mitchell understood this on the weekend, James Hird could learn a thing or two from Mitchell.

[PaulRB 5,962]

Same could be said for News Corp, the Labor Party, the Victorian Police, etc...

The AFL chose to claim a moral position for PR benefits and is now mired in the inevitable mess of vested interest, hypocrisy and grey moral areas, that are well beyond it's scope. The AFL's poor handling of the Essendon doping, and antagonism to the organisation specifically created to handle it, show they are not in it for the integrity but damage control and manipulation of their audience.

The AFL should have stuck to it's knitting, running a football competition, and let the social instruments that monitor and moderate the behavious of the rest of the Australian public take care of the social activities of the employees of the clubs.

[rjay 23,922]

Same could be said for News Corp, the Labor Party, the Victorian Police, etc...

The AFL chose to claim a moral position for PR benefits and is now mired in the inevitable mess of vested interest, hypocrisy and grey moral areas, that are well beyond it's scope. The AFL's poor handling of the Essendon doping, and antagonism to the organisation specifically created to handle it, show they are not in it for the integrity but damage control and manipulation of their audience.

The AFL should have stuck to it's knitting, running a football competition, and let the social instruments that monitor and moderate the behavious of the rest of the Australian public take care of the social activities of the employees of the clubs.

I actually agree with this but now they've put their bit in they need to see it through. But....

They will as usual deflect and use wonderful words like integrity and such fabulous ideas as match day experiences and cheap chips as part of the smoke and mirrors.

[rjay 23,922]

Rockstars, movie stars and pretty much any other celebrity besides sports stars are almost celebrated for their poor behaviour. Yet sports stars have to be saints? Why?

The music industry these days is probably cleaner than the sports industry 'George'. To much money invested and time put in to build a career for it to go up in smoke.

Keith is a dinosaur and even he has changed his ways somewhat.

[PaulRB 5,962]

Ironically, it is the AFL's insistence to impose a special rule on players and recreational drugs, and test for them that, creates the results that then tarnishes their brand as inevitably some players get caught.

That the AFL only imposes these tests and sanctions on players and does not impose these measures on it's management and staff, highlights that they are not doing it out of care for their employees, but to manipulate and build a "brand of care", when in fact there is none.

And that's going to come unstuck every time...

It also belittles and overshadows the work done by government and social organisations to find and implement the best practices to address and minimise the damage that can result from taking drugs.

[daisycutter 28,569]

Same could be said for News Corp, the Labor Party, the Victorian Police, etc...

The AFL chose to claim a moral position for PR benefits and is now mired in the inevitable mess of vested interest, hypocrisy and grey moral areas, that are well beyond it's scope. The AFL's poor handling of the Essendon doping, and antagonism to the organisation specifically created to handle it, show they are not in it for the integrity but damage control and manipulation of their audience.

The AFL should have stuck to it's knitting, running a football competition, and let the social instruments that monitor and moderate the behavious of the rest of the Australian public take care of the social activities of the employees of the clubs.

it's not just a legal or moral issue

clubs don't want players turning up to pre-season, training or games pizzed or stoned, so in this case its a (under)performance issue

personally i don't care what they do in their spare time as long as it doesn't affect their football

[PaulRB 5,962]

it's not just a legal or moral issue

clubs don't want players turning up to pre-season, training or games pizzed or stoned, so in this case its a (under)performance issue

personally i don't care what they do in their spare time as long as it doesn't affect their football

That would make it an personal issue between club and player, not the AFL, not the media.

[Ethan Tremblay 28,423]

Do the police, judges, politicians, media personalities get tested for recreational drugs as part of their professional obligations?

If its performance enhancing it's relevant to be tested and penalised for it, if it's not performance enhancing it's no ones business but the player themselves...

I can only speak for WA but police here do. Edited June 29, 2015 by Ethan Tremblay