OT: Steelers WR Martavis Bryant facing a year-long suspension

[DaBruinz]

I agree that employers should absolutely be able to choose employees based on how they behave and perform AT WORK. Testing to see what people do when not at work does not fall under that category. It's truly scary that an adult could possibly believe that financial organizations should be able to screen what employees do when they're off the clock.

If you look at my later responses, I wasn't saying people should or shouldn't do drugs. What I was saying is that people shouldn't give up fundamental sovereignty over their minds or bodies to any organization. Thinking such a thing is ironic betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the topic. You're usually sharper than this. Try taking a step back and re-evaluating.

The problem with you is that you are being myopic and it is you who has a fundamental lack of understanding of the topic. Here are a few examples of actions outside of work that impact your employment.

Taking a hit of your drug of choice before going into work, thereby putting others at risk.
Looking at Child Porn. Particularly if you are a teacher or work with kids in some way.
Selling secrets of your company to a competitor.
Getting arrested for a felony.
Raping someone.

All those are just some of the actions that occur when people are "off the clock". But, according to you, because it doesn't happen at work, the employer doesn't have the right to know. Think about that long and hard..

 

[Galeb]

The problem with you is that you are being myopic and it is you who has a fundamental lack of understanding of the topic. Here are a few examples of actions outside of work that impact your employment.

Taking a hit of your drug of choice before going into work, thereby putting others at risk.
Looking at Child Porn. Particularly if you are a teacher or work with kids in some way.
Selling secrets of your company to a competitor.
Getting arrested for a felony.
Raping someone.

All those are just some of the actions that occur when people are "off the clock". But, according to you, because it doesn't happen at work, the employer doesn't have the right to know. Think about that long and hard..

LMAO! We're talking about sovereignty over one's own mind and body.... Perhaps you should have included murder, torture and arson to support your argument. Funniest post of 2016.

edit:
My argument is purely about body/mind sovereignty. Obviously background checks etc. are legitimate for businesses to check. I'm not sure how far they should go with social media, credit checks etc... My argument is about behavior that has zero effect on the workplace.

 

[BTTA]

Although the idea of gateway drugs has been squashed by most serious researchers, if there was one such drug, caffeine would certainly trump weed.

And caffeine is by far the most used performance enhancing drug in sports today.

 

[Joker]

And caffeine is by far the most used performance enhancing drug in sports today.

If Goodell is any indication I'd say you should probably amend that to LSD.

 

[Observer]

The thing I don't understand is this---if it's not effecting your work, who cares? If it is making you bad at playing football, you'll be cut and replaced by someone who isn't. The NBA, MLB and NHL have no weed policy. Because it isn't necessary.

Because you know.... integrity

 

[XLIX]

In the long run, most of what people choose to fight for is meaningless. Sovereignty over one's own mind and body is one of the few things worth dying for. It is truly sad that so many would surrender it so cheaply.

Gimme a break.

According to your logic, an individual surrenders the sovereignty over their own body when they take any job because, hey, my boss expects me to be in the office tomorrow morning. Doesn't the SOB know this is a free country?!?! He can't tell me where to go and what to do! He can't imprison me in a cubicle for 8 hours on a glorious Monday morning/afternoon! Who does he think he is!! I am not an animal!!!!

 

[Galeb]

Gimme a break.

According to your logic, an individual surrenders the sovereignty over their own body when they take any job because, hey, my boss expects me to be in the office tomorrow morning. Doesn't the SOB know this is a free country?!?! He can't tell me where to go and what to do! He can't imprison me in a cubicle for 8 hours on a glorious Monday morning/afternoon! Who does he think he is!! I am not an animal!!!!

LMAO! Someday you may actually understand the argument I am making. Some of us have spent decades working 60+ hours a week carving out long-term financial security. That's not surrendering sovereignty, it's called building a career. Are you a trust baby?

 

[1960Pats]

Agreed, I'm just tired of people just accepting what they're taught without any critical thought. I was simply responding in kind. This is a huge issue that plenty in this thread have mocked without truly understanding what is at stake. I didn't see you responding to the condescension for people mocking those who smoke. Try looking past your ego at the core of what I am saying, it's pretty ****ing important.

Just to be clear. I'm not saying people should or shouldn't smoke. What I'm saying is that it is foolish to give up sovereignty over our own minds and bodies for any reason, especially something as trivial as money.

For the most part I agree with you, but I think there are cases where some checks are appropriate.

The reason we have drug testing is because some politician lost a relative in a train wreck with a driver who was under the influence. That opened the floodgates to the incredible intrusion that exists now.

Have you ever read the book titled Ur-ine Trouble by Dr Kent Holtorf? I think you might enjoy it.

 

[Galeb]

For the most part I agree with you, but I think there are cases where some checks are appropriate.

The reason we have drug testing is because some politician lost a relative in a train wreck with a driver who was under the influence. That opened the floodgates to the incredible intrusion that exists now.

Have you ever read the book titled Ur-ine Trouble by Dr Kent Holtorf? I think you might enjoy it.

Thanks for the book recommendation, I'll check it out. I am well aware of the dangers of operating heavy machinery while under the influence, and such things are rightly illegal. I once had the unique pleasure of packing a friends fingers in a plastic bag because of an accident caused by the bosses buddy, who drove a fork lift, liked to pound a six pack at lunch every day. Both the ******* who caused the accident and my buddy were subject to a piss test the next day. The ******* who drank at lunch didn't smoke, so he got off without any sort of punishment. My buddy (one of 3 of his fingers couldn't be reattached), even though he was always sober at work, lost his job because he smoked pot on the weekends.

 

[XLIX]

LMAO! Someday you may actually understand the argument I am making. Some of us have spent decades working 60+ hours a week carving out long-term financial security. That's not surrendering sovereignty, it's called building a career. Are you a trust baby?

And someday you may understand that taking drug tests isn't surrendering sovereignty either.

 

[Galeb]

And someday you may understand that taking drug tests isn't surrendering sovereignty either.

Giving any organization authority over what you do with your body or mind when not on the clock is a surrender of mind/body sovereignty. That is not debatable, period.

For the record, I have nothing against trust babies. There are some that are genuinely good people. Of course that assumes a lack of a supreme sense of self entitlement and contempt for your fellow man.

 

[Zeus]

Somehow the NFL is comfortable actively facilitating the players' use of highly addictive painkillers when it suits the interests of the owners. So we're against drug abuse excepts where we're for it.

Okay.

 

[TBR]

Sammie Coates will replace Bryant perfectly (or they'll sign Mike Wallace)

 

[Ross12]

Looks like his year long suspension was just confirmed.

 

[XLIX]

Looks like his year long suspension was just confirmed.

Can't say I'm losing sleep, although I do feel the punishments are a bit draconian.

 

[1960Pats]

Thanks for the book recommendation, I'll check it out. I am well aware of the dangers of operating heavy machinery while under the influence, and such things are rightly illegal. I once had the unique pleasure of packing a friends fingers in a plastic bag because of an accident caused by the bosses buddy, who drove a fork lift, liked to pound a six pack at lunch every day. Both the ******* who caused the accident and my buddy were subject to a piss test the next day. The ******* who drank at lunch didn't smoke, so he got off without any sort of punishment. My buddy (one of 3 of his fingers couldn't be reattached), even though he was always sober at work, lost his job because he smoked pot on the weekends.

The most dangerous people that I used to work with were the drinkers.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

It's funny how jobs will test for pot and booze. Can be a big boozer and pass that test because booze it out of your system so fast...yet you could have smoked a joint with your old college buddies 2 weekends ago at a party and lose your job because of it. What a country. Ass backwards.

I get the NFL is a private organization and can make any rule they want just like a job testing or not but still doesn't make it right.

It;s funny the new job i took didn't drug test and the bosses even said...A it's a lot of money to test and B It's just pot (i got a good laugh). A lot of the people I work with are very successful and I smoke with them on the weekends while having a few beers. Sorry getting off topic. /rant

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

The only sport where weed could be concidered a performance enhancer is competitive eating.

 

[MitchKumstein]

Agree that the policy is absurd. Weed is legal in Denver, but not for the players. Same with Seattle.

The pressure on performers + the pain of playing NFL football make the players especially susceptible to it. More carrots, less sticks. it's a ridiculous policy.

I've read that a few retired players have said that weed really helped their pain from playing football, and they preferred taking a couple of tokes over taking prescribed pain medication. They say that they were concerned about getting addicted to the pills.

Maybe this is true, or maybe its just a few ex players justifying their love of getting stoned. But I do feel that the Marijuana laws in general are draconian, and if there's any chance at all that pot helps ease some player's pain, let them have at it

 

[Seacoast Fan]

Let's not confuse the argument. This isn't about DUI or operating machinery while intoxicated. This is about surrendering sovereignty over one's own body and consciousness to the government and corporations. Those saying "just don't smoke, duh" either don't truly understand the repercussions of such a surrender or they are not fit to discuss the matter on a meaningful level. So just stop it with the "don't smoke cuz of money bro", and leave the truly important matters to those who understand them.

In the long run, most of what people choose to fight for is meaningless. Sovereignty over one's own mind and body is one of the few things worth dying for. It is truly sad that so many would surrender it so cheaply.

The issue is not about surrendering sovereignty to the government or corporations. The issue is, can an employee agree to not use recreational drugs as a condition of his employment. Huge difference.