Posted on 02/03/2009 1:45:19 PM PST by King of Card Games
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Olympic superstar Michael Phelps could face criminal charges as part of the fallout from a photo that surfaced showing the swimmer smoking from a marijuana pipe at a University of South Carolina house party.
A spokesman for Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott, who is known for his tough stance on drugs, said Tuesday the department was investigating.
"Our narcotics division is reviewing the information that we have, and they're investigating what charges, if any, will be filed," said Lt. Chris Cowan, a spokesman for agency.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
You wrote:
“Your basic point in your reply is a distinction between “use” and “abuse,” neglecting to mention that these are terms whose distinction is so plastic that they don’t serve any useful distinction. Remember that as a Christian or a Jew there is no prohibition against the use of alcohol for the pleasurable aspects of alcohol.”
Intoxification is not pleasure, but abuse. That is what Christians, Jews and Muslims believe.
“The prohibition is on using it to the point that it disrupts life. It’s at this point that someone could call it abuse.”
Is Phelps’ life disrupted right now? I would say it is. Your own argument is working against you.
“For that matter, if doing something for the pleasure of doing it is abuse, you cannot logically draw a circle around some things (alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, caffeine, kava, etc.) but not around other practices done simply for their pleasurable aspect (hobbies and sports, taking a Sunday drive for no other reason than seeing the color change in the fall, sexual intercourse when you’re not trying for a pregnancy, having a sandwich or a bowl of ice-cream if you have any extra weight, you know, “comfort food”).”
Completely illogical. Intoxification is the problem. That is what pot is used for criminally in this country and that is exactly why Phelps used it. You can continue to create what are essentially straw men arguments, but that won’t change. Deal with that point or simply start an argument with someone else.
“You’re basing your argument on definitions that are really cases of special pleading for the purpose of ending up exactly where you already wanted to be.”
No. We all know what Phelps was doing and why - especially since he admitted it. Case closed.
Stop making excuses for illegal drug use.
His life isn’t disrupted because of the marijuana itself, it is disrupted because of the stigma in this country about marijuana use. That isn’t the same thing. For two months his life was perfectly fine after that photo was taken, it wasn’t until it was leaked that his life was disrupted.
So how much wine was Jesus limiting people to when he turned water into wine after they ran out?
Also, Phelps didn’t admit to smoking pot, he admitted to regrettable behavior. Presumably about smoking pot, but regrettable behavior covers a lot of ground.
You wrote:
“His life isn’t disrupted because of the marijuana itself, it is disrupted because of the stigma in this country about marijuana use. That isn’t the same thing. For two months his life was perfectly fine after that photo was taken, it wasn’t until it was leaked that his life was disrupted.”
Sorry, but I don’t buy that one bit. That’s like saying a drunk’s life wasn’t disrupted by alcohol, but by the fact that his wife was tired of him coming home drunk.
“So how much wine was Jesus limiting people to when he turned water into wine after they ran out?”
Less than intoxification - that’s how much.
“Also, Phelps didn’t admit to smoking pot, he admitted to regrettable behavior. Presumably about smoking pot, but regrettable behavior covers a lot of ground.”
He was smoking pot. That was the claim. He could have denied it.
In which case the alcoholics life would have been disrupted by the alcohol. The intoxicating nature of alcohol caused problems for him. What proof do you have that Phelps had problems after being stoned? According to the claims of the people there it didn’t look like the first time he had done it. So there is at least a small chance that he managed to win 14 gold medals after smoking marijuana. Doesn’t sound like it was causing him any problems. Camera phones on the other hand...
You wrote:
“What proof do you have that Phelps had problems after being stoned?”
That trouble is EXACTLY what we’re talking about.
“According to the claims of the people there it didn’t look like the first time he had done it. So there is at least a small chance that he managed to win 14 gold medals after smoking marijuana.”
And rock stars made hit albums on heroine. So what? Does that mean they didn’t break the law? The length to which people here will go to excuse drug abuse is amazing. Are you trying to excuse your own drug use by chance?
“Doesn’t sound like it was causing him any problems. Camera phones on the other hand...”
He’s in trouble after smoking pot.
Deal with it.
Alcohol's effects start with the first drop consumed. The first two drinks bring mild relaxation, enhanced sense of well-being, and a feeling of conviviality, and that is why people drink alcohol. They hopefully stop drinking before they reach impairment, but they aren't drinking alcohol just for the taste, as is evidenced by the relatively poor sales of non-alcoholic beer and wine.
Your dichotomy is false.
The main reason people use alcohol is to get high, and one drink alters your mental status:
0.02 - 0.03 BAC: No loss of coordination, slight euphoria and loss of shyness. Depressant effects are not apparent. Mildly relaxed and maybe a little lightheaded.
0.04 - 0.06 BAC: Feeling of well-being, relaxation, lower inhibitions, sensation of warmth. Euphoria. Some minor impairment of reasoning and memory, lowering of caution. Your behavior may become exaggerated and emotions intensified (Good emotions are better, bad emotions are worse)
--http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm _____________________________________
Apparently many so-called conservatives have been tainted by that leftism and mistakenly believe they are standing up for a "freedom" which has no place in conservatism.
Do believe the New Deal view of the Commerce Clause, upon which the WOD is based, is in keeping with the original understanding?
His problems are not because of the drug. His problems are because of drug laws. Do you not see a difference? What would the problem have been if he were using a beer bong in the photo?
No I do not use and have no desire to use. I’m just missing seeing what the great societal benefits of marijuana criminalization is. While I do not use, I know many people who do and they all remain productive members of society.
I especially don’t see how anyone can think it is worthwhile to put any man hours into tracking down evidence to give someone what amounts to little more than a speeding ticket.
The law says abortion is OK. now what?
You wrote:
“...but they aren’t drinking alcohol just for the taste, as is evidenced by the relatively poor sales of non-alcoholic beer and wine.”
Who’s they? I drink both beer and wine and I do it purely for the taste. I’ve never been drunk in my life.
“Your dichotomy is false.”
No, actually it isn’t.
What else will you say to try and excuse drug use? Is it to excuse your own?
You wrote:
“His problems are not because of the drug. His problems are because of drug laws.”
No, it’s his behavior that ultimately is his problem. He apparently has a weakness for mind altering substances.
“No I do not use and have no desire to use. I’m just missing seeing what the great societal benefits of marijuana criminalization is. While I do not use, I know many people who do and they all remain productive members of society.”
Maybe they do now, and maybe they won’t be tomorrow. The people I know who used drugs damaged their lives. I never used and never suffered the same problems.
“I especially don’t see how anyone can think it is worthwhile to put any man hours into tracking down evidence to give someone what amounts to little more than a speeding ticket.”
That fact that you don’t see it, doesn’t make it so.
It isn’t “cops” charging him.
You wrote:
“The law says abortion is OK. now what?”
Is abortion harmful and immoral? Yes. Any law taht says it is acceptable is thereby rendered unacceptable.
He then went on to win 8 Gold medals in the Olympics. Alcohol and pot aren’t performance enhancing drugs.
I agree, it’s no one’s fault but his own. I doubt he’ll lose any ad deals for this since the target audience isn’t going to punish him for getting caught smoking pot.
A DUI and now the latest “pot smoking” doesn’t necessarily mean he has a substance abuse problem.
He then went on to win 8 Gold medals in the Olympics. Alcohol and pot aren’t performance enhancing drugs.
I agree, it’s no one’s fault but his own. I doubt he’ll lose any ad deals for this since the target audience isn’t going to punish him for getting caught smoking pot.
A DUI and now the latest “pot smoking” doesn’t necessarily mean he has a substance abuse problem.
You wrote:
“A DUI and now the latest “pot smoking” doesn’t necessarily mean he has a substance abuse problem.”
He drank too much. Now he is seen using an illegal drug. Sounds like he has a problem saying no to “substances” that are illegal or illegal in the way he used them. If that isn’t a problem, what is?
He’s an idiot, and violated the law (twice) in any case. Oh, he’s a great swimmer, but he’s an idiot.
LOL! Or don’t get caught for goodness sakes.
Personally, I think he’s a little old to be considered a kid but it seems his life was spent training and he didn’t have the high school/college years I had. I made mistakes that fortunately aren’t public knowledge.
I assume the DA will have to prosecute the case, if it gets to that point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.