Crack is Whack!- Ron Washington tested positive for coke

I wouldn't ever do coke, but I sure as hell would rather see it legalized and regulated than things continue the way they are.

 

He's not saying cocaine isn't harmful, or beneficial.

He's saying that it's dumb to outlaw stuff that is harmful to you, and only you.

 

I don't think you get it. It's not about advocating/defending anything.

read "between the lines" of social stigmas.

If your buddy is an alcoholic you'll understand and support him through rehab right?

But If he has a cocaine problem you'll treat him differently?

 

Au contraire...

 

Moes is correct.... Tobacco and Alcohol destroy lives every day.

mar1juana does not kill people. It may make some lazy to the point where they end up working in drive throughs and playing Xbox all day, but it does not kill people.

Plenty of good Americans choose mar1juana over Alcohol everyday, and do so because they truly believe its better.

My parents live in Montana, my dad has glaucoma (Sp?) the dispensaries have been a blessing to him.

 

it's relevant because you of all people (having supported people great thing BTW) should see the flaw in the classification of what harmful.

But I digress. I guess This this Manager shouldn't be making trips to the mound any time soon

 

There are amazing medical benefits involved with mar1juana usage. It was honestly quite shocking to me to actually research it, since I had been led to believe so many lies about it.

But anyway, staying on topic here... I think there are some people who can enjoy alcohol and say they aren't addicted to it. But I've never seen many "social smokers".

 

What Ron Washington does in his spare time should be his business. However, he signed a contract that most assuredly frowns upon cocaine usage.

He is at the mercy of his superiors.

 

The Rangers have a right to fire him.

But, at the end of the day, the reason he'll be fired is because of US drug laws.

So, it's kind of a two headed argument.

 

Not really true. (Obviously, this only further reveals some of the political rationale behind tobacco and alcohol legality)

 

Explain.

 

now it's going in the D&D.

 

Ya not exactly a good model for Josh hamilton to follow :grin:

 

It harms only his body, true (I suppose second hand crack smoke would NOT be healthy). But his use can impair his judgement such that he ends up harming you, or others. It's the rationalization behind second-hand smoke laws/restrictions, or restricting alcohol sales to minors. Basically, if the risks of use and the corresponding effects on society outweigh the benefit in terms of "citizens' rights", the laws tend to gravitate towards society at the expense of individual freedoms. I don't think that is such a bad thing, although it is fraught with subjectivity, and, accordingly, a great deal of politically charged deviousness.

 

The issue of "doing X is harmful to only me, except when I do Y" is already addressed.

Alcohol is legal.

Drinking while driving is not.

Etc.

 

Before this disappears into the scary basement sub-forum known as D&D, a question:

Why did you assume it was crack?

 

I wasn't trying to start a big debate on all harmful things....but since I apparently did, I'll jump back in!

I don't think it would be all that unwarranted for the friend in your example to be treated slightly differently. Just looking at it from one angle only, some things are legal and some things aren't. In the latter case, not only has the friend managed to become an addict of something harmful to him, but he's become an addict of something harmful that is illegal. We could get into all kinds of debates about the impact of the guys drug habit on the rest of society (through his support of illegal drug trade...and that impact as opposed to his impact on society through support of legal "drug" trade - alcohol, etc, etc, etc.), but ultimately, at this point it time, cocaine is illegal, alcohol isn't. Even if sub-consciously, I suspect a lot of people would ultimately have a shorter fuse with respect to the cocaine addicted friend.

I'm generally pro-legalization. I do happen to think cocaine is a much more serious, addictive and dangerous drug...certainly than mar1juana, and more-so than alcohol. None are directly comparable to eating fatty foods - which I'd agree are also harmful to the eater and to the rest of society as well (through higher health care costs), but still comparing apples to oranges.

I think the alcohol comparison is most appropriate, in that both can have serious and immediate impacts on user and third parties.

But again, one is currently illegal...the other isn't. If I thought laws protecting endangered species were stupid, I'd still expect someone who broke the law to be appropriately punished, whereas someone who hunts within the framework of the law would be fine.

I'd expect to see the Rangers react the way they did if Washington was shown to be an alcoholic. He had a brief drinking problem, he's gotten his act together, but he's on watch. But given that it's cocaine and not alcohol, given the public nature of the sport, his position as coach, etc, etc. I am surprised he wasn't let go.