5 minutes ago, binman said:

My post was admittedly a bit confusing Luci.

I was referring to Melksham as having received no admonishment, or punishment for that matter, from the club for hitting may in the head. The point was trying to make was this an indication how out of line May must have been - i mean May was recovering from concussion and Melk broke his hand, if he was in any way in the wrong he would have copped a punishment. 

I don't think there is any question May was paralytic drunk. IIRC there were reports on DL that the group were seen at a boxing match all arvo prior to going to dinner and were drinking heavily. So a big day on the sauce and then off to a restaurant and more drinking. IIRC May admitted he was hammered. 

My underlying point is NOT that the media didn't do enough to highlight a societal 'double standard'.

Again, i was probably unclear.

My underlying point is that there is always a lot of moralizing, from fans and the public (and sometimes, but not always, the media), when a player gets pinged (pardon the pun) for using recreational drugs.

And very little moralizing when a player chooses to drink excessively. Excessive alcohol use only gets raised in the context of an incident that happens, as in the case of Steve May. In May's case i don't recall the club or AFL publicly criticizing May for his use of alcohol, other than in general sense - just his behavior. 

From a moral perspective, not many people had an issue with a big group of players drinking all afternoon and into the evening. But some (thankfully, perhaps less people now than might have been the case 10 years ago), judge Ginnivan for using drugs. 

This morality palaver means players are expected to come out with a pantomime statement saying how sorry they are for their use of drugs - one off, so sorry, let the club and fans down won't happen again blah blah blah. Just as Ginnvan did - despite there being NO suggestion he behaved poorly. 

Look at the rubbish Willi Rioli copped for being caught with a small amount of marijuana. Just ridiculous.  

A player caught using drugs is often criticised because they are 'role models'. Well surely that should also apply to their use of legal drugs such as alcohol. What sort of role models to young kids siting near them were the dees players drinking all arvo at the boxing or to diners at the restaraunt?  

I could care less about a players choice of recreational mood enhancers - be it illicit drugs or alcohol (assuming of course it doesn't impact on their ability to perform). I care about their behavior.  That's where i draw my moral line. 

That clarifies it.  Thank you.

55 minutes ago, Jontee said:

No fish oil tablets????

Interfere with the blood thinners; NO ASPIRIN EITHER. It's now Xarelto, before that Rat Sack, alias Warfarin.

I recall reading Norm Smith's biography in about 2010. I was shocked he was 57 when he died. I mentioned this to a Melbourne supporting cobber  and he pointed out that's when most blokes died in dem days, hence the pension age of 65.Then again, maybe we live longer because of all of the preservatives in KFC and Mc Donalds.

12 hours ago, kev martin said:

Alcohol is a recreational drug.

In the eyes of some, it is a poison.

Delerium Tremens, where is thine sting?

4 hours ago, Demonsterative said:

Yep, you take drugs. No doubt about it… You just justify it and I get it. Your type of drug taking is the socially acceptable type. 

I present Monday's Most perceptive insight for the day.

Just took this off the filth's Big Footy site. It appears they are really setting the bar very high this season.

"I'm not too sure about Ginnivan. If he had mongrel he would be injecting directly into the vein....we'll have to see what emerges from his retraining...."

 

Whatever

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=HSWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fsport%2Fafl%2Fnews%2Fpurported-mother-of-former-collingwood-player-claims-sons-career-was-ruined-after-taking-drugs-at-function%2Fnews-story%2F781b2a6181a6cf93c9ca9d95330d9080&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&BT=sport

Ex-player’s ‘mother’ makes shock Pies drug claim

A woman referred to as ‘Mary’ has made a surprise claim involving her son, a former Collingwood who was introduced to drugs at his first club social event.

Obviously a herald sun paywall article but anyway interesting and if the herald sun want to keep writing about this the go for it. 

5 minutes ago, dees189227 said:

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=HSWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fsport%2Fafl%2Fnews%2Fpurported-mother-of-former-collingwood-player-claims-sons-career-was-ruined-after-taking-drugs-at-function%2Fnews-story%2F781b2a6181a6cf93c9ca9d95330d9080&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&BT=sport

Ex-player’s ‘mother’ makes shock Pies drug claim

A woman referred to as ‘Mary’ has made a surprise claim involving her son, a former Collingwood who was introduced to drugs at his first club social event.

Obviously a herald sun paywall article but anyway interesting and if the herald sun want to keep writing about this the go for it. 

I wouldn’t be surprised if this happened at every club. Young men with a surplus of cash dealing with an unyielding schedule is not the most relaxing lifestyle. They need to have an escape somehow, for some this is it (this wouldn’t have even come out if Ginnivan had been a bit more discreet).

On 2/19/2023 at 5:37 AM, Demonstone said:

Drugs are already out there.  People are taking them.  Prohibition has not stopped and will never stop their use.

The question is then how to deal with it.  It's completely illogical that alcohol (a drug, by the way), which causes more problems in society than all other drugs combined, is legal, readily available and socially acceptable but other drugs are "bad" and illegal.

My opinion is that we should legalise, regulate and tax drugs just like we do with alcohol and tobacco.  These taxes should directed into health services because this is a health issue, not a legal issue.

By doing so, we would free up Police to concentrate on real crime, clear the backlog in the court system and stop the overcrowding in jails.  It would also eliminate the criminal involvement and get the "dirty" back-yard lab drugs off the street.

As to your last point, nobody should be driving if they are impaired by alcohol or any other form of drug.

Do you know how much crime is committed by people who are high on drugs such as cocaine and meth? From my previous previous experience as a first-responder then a Detective, legalising these substances will only increase serious crime. People do hideous things on these drugs, things that unfortunately I can’t un-see. 

On 2/19/2023 at 12:43 PM, Demonstone said:

It's currently a 100% black market.

Legalising the product won't eliminate this entirely, but I'm confident that most people would prefer to buy from a licensed outlet rather than a seedy crim in a back alley.

Which would solve the supply problem entirely.
Which would create more addicts ... Legally.

Edited February 20, 20232 yr by Fork 'em

2 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Which would solve the supply problem entirely.
Which would create more addicts.

1.  There is no supply problem.  Drugs are easy to obtain if you are so inclined.

2.  Taking drugs doesn't necessarily make you an addict just as drinking doesn't necessarily make you an alcoholic.

29 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Do you know how much crime is committed by people who are high on drugs such as cocaine and meth? From my previous previous experience as a first-responder then a Detective, legalising these substances will only increase serious crime. People do hideous things on these drugs, things that unfortunately I can’t un-see. 

I reckon we've had this discussion before, ET.  I acknowledge your first-hand experience, but I think your logic is faulty.

You assume that legalisation will lead to increased usage and a higher crime rate.  Do you have any evidence that this has happened anywhere?  My understanding is that usage and crime rates actually decrease after legalisation.

No doubt you have seen some horrible things.  People do hideous things while drunk as well, but I don't think anybody would seriously propose that we make alcohol illegal.

2 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

1.  There is no supply problem.  Drugs are easy to obtain if you are so inclined.

2.  Taking drugs doesn't necessarily make you an addict just as drinking doesn't necessarily make you an alcoholic.

1. Easy to obtain if you're happy to deal with "seedy crims in back alleys."
What if you're not?
Just nick down the shops .... Easy as.

2. Some people can handle a dabble here and there.
Many can't and go full blown.
Same with alcohol.

I have no idea what points you are trying to make here.

20 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

1. Easy to obtain if you're happy to deal with "seedy crims in back alleys."
What if you're not?
Just nick down the shops .... Easy as.

2. Some people can handle a dabble here and there.
Many can't and go full blown.
Same with alcohol.

As somebody who is relatively uninterested in drugs, I've certainly been offered drugs in many situations through no interest or actions of my own.  Often in fancy office buildings or bars. I look like a nerd, so I don't think my general appearance invites the offer either!

Then again... I am a lawyer, so maybe there is some truth to the stereotype.  Regardless, it certainly seems easy to access in the large east coast cities

41 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

I reckon we've had this discussion before, ET.  I acknowledge your first-hand experience, but I think your logic is faulty.

You assume that legalisation will lead to increased usage and a higher crime rate.  Do you have any evidence that this has happened anywhere?  My understanding is that usage and crime rates actually decrease after legalisation.

No doubt you have seen some horrible things.  People do hideous things while drunk as well, but I don't think anybody would seriously propose that we make alcohol illegal.

It’s no shock that crime rates would decrease, given possession, supplying, trafficking etc are all crimes that keep police and authorities very busy. Offences against people (including infants and children) will increase. People are fooling themselves if they don’t think usage will increase. 

Edited February 20, 20232 yr by Ethan Tremblay

38 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

I reckon we've had this discussion before, ET.  I acknowledge your first-hand experience, but I think your logic is faulty.

You assume that legalisation will lead to increased usage and a higher crime rate.  Do you have any evidence that this has happened anywhere?  My understanding is that usage and crime rates actually decrease after legalisation.

No doubt you have seen some horrible things.  People do hideous things while drunk as well, but I don't think anybody would seriously propose that we make alcohol illegal.

You remove the full weight of the law, then the drugs become much more accessible and cheaper with no legal implications for usage. There is no doubt in my mind that this will ultimately increase drug usage cross the entire population. Whether that translates to serious crime - i cannot say - but increased usage is just about a guarantee. 

@Ethan Tremblay and @Gawndy the Great - I'm interested in your thoughts and pleased that you have responded.  

It's reassuring that we can have a polite, adult conversation about this subject.

However, do either of you (or anybody else) have any evidence/data to support your opinion on what would happen if drugs were to be decriminalised?  Or does anybody have any data that would disprove the notion?

 

8 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

@Ethan Tremblay and @Gawndy the Great - I'm interested in your thoughts and pleased that you have responded.  

It's reassuring that we can have a polite, adult conversation about this subject.

However, do either of you (or anybody else) have any evidence/data to support your opinion on what would happen if drugs were to be decriminalised?  Or does anybody have any data that would disprove the notion?

 

A number of countries have decriminalised marijuana and cannibis type drugs but has there been any significant legalising of the drugs we most associate with crime - coke, meth, ice, heroine etc ?

It maybe difficult to find reliable data of the type you ask for.  

1 minute ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

A number of countries have decriminalised marijuana and cannibis type drugs but has there been any significant legalising of the drugs we most associate with crime - coke, meth, ice, heroine etc ?

It maybe difficult to find reliable data of the type you ask for.  

Except that it has happened in some countries, Portugal in particular, and the data largely supports decriminalization. That other countries are considering some form of decriminalization indicates it's a direction worth considering

1 hour ago, Fork 'em said:

1. Easy to obtain if you're happy to deal with "seedy crims in back alleys."
What if you're not?
Just nick down the shops .... Easy as.

 

LOL. You watch too much TV.

One might argue that it would actually be HARDER to buy drugs from shops since shops have to close at some point in the day, unlike your “seedy crims in back alleys” (lol again) who are open 24/7. 

51 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

possession, supplying, trafficking etc are all crimes that keep police and authorities very busy.

I'm sure this is the case, but isn't that an argument FOR legalisation?

Just imagine if all those massive amounts of money, time and resources were re-allocated to the prevention and pursuit of crimes against people and property.

13 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

@Ethan Tremblay and @Gawndy the Great - I'm interested in your thoughts and pleased that you have responded.  

It's reassuring that we can have a polite, adult conversation about this subject.

However, do either of you (or anybody else) have any evidence/data to support your opinion on what would happen if drugs were to be decriminalised?  Or does anybody have any data that would disprove the notion?

 

Love the preamble... it so hard to get stuck into you when you are being respectful and diffusive :) not that i had any intent to btw. 

I don't see decriminalizing as a binary solution (i.e. legal vs illegal)  - where there is a therapeutic benefit (i.e. marijuana for chronic pain, LSD or MDMA for PTSD treatment) it should absolutely made available. However i draw the line on recreational use. 

As for evidence, i think the lack of cities/states globally implementing decriminalization of hard drugs is proof enough. Yes there are still a handful, but there are not enough to get a statistically significant sample to support a conclusion either way, so we just have to rely on good old common sense. 

 

2 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

However i draw the line on recreational use. 

 So what is it about the use of recreational drugs that is intrinsically "bad" and deserving of being illegal?