Should MLB suspend players for 50 games for marijuana?

[ledzepp8]

No, its a strawman.. it's practically a textbook example of a strawman argument.

That's exactly what he did there, he didn't attack the position directly, he just responded with "I guess you never broke any laws" how is that in any way relevant to the vary narrow discussion on DUI penalties vs Marijuana penalties. He's basically asking him to defend penalties for everything and anything, when that's not what the discussion is about.

Edit: And he still continues to go down the road of bringing other laws/penalties into the discussion that have no relevance to the original argument (See: All posts about speeding); He can't possibly defend his original assertion (because he was wrong and misunderstood what was said), so he has to resort to bringing up things not relevant to the discussion (Posters themselves breaking the law) and attack the other position via the strawman argument; when the other position can't possibly defend it because that's not what the original discussion was about.

Yeah I still fail to see the strawman you're accusing him of making. Nor do I see where you get the idea that he was making the "everybody breaks laws" argument in reference to the comparison between DUI and Pot use. He was saying everybody breaks laws on a regular in response to the "It's against the law people" argument. Seems to me its a very good argument to point out that people who blindly say pot use is bad simply because it's illegal, are most likely breaking some kind of law on a daily basis (seeing as how there are probably thousands of trivial, antiquated laws on the books).

Do we really need to get into why pot is illegal anyhow? Or how many other things that are now legal, used to be illegal for years?

[blid]

Yeah I still fail to see the strawman you're accusing him of making. Nor do I see where you get the idea that he was making the "everybody breaks laws" argument in reference to the comparison between DUI and Pot use. He was saying everybody breaks laws on a regular in response to the "It's against the law people" argument. Seems to me its a very good argument to point out that people who blindly say pot use is bad simply because it's illegal, are most likely breaking some kind of law on a daily basis (seeing as how there are probably thousands of trivial, antiquated laws on the books).

Do we really need to get into why pot is illegal anyhow? Or how many other things that are now legal, used to be illegal for years?

I agree with you, apollod is actually kind of annoying me by acting like Professor of Debates while being quite off-base imo.

A strawman is when you knock down an argument your opponent never made. That's not what sdmarkakis is doing here. Just like ledzepp said, people arguing that pot use is bad because it's "against the law" probably violate traffic laws routinely. How is pointing that out a strawman? How is it attacking an argument that was not actually being made? It's pointedly attacking an argument that was being made. It's challenging the notion that just because something is against the law means that it's wrong, or that people must always or do always follow all the laws. How does MLB decide to suspend for marijuana, while not suspending players for other law violations? I don't know, but I disagree with whatever rationale they're using because marijuana use does not merit suspension.

[waroriole]

I don't think they should suspend guys for smoking weed. That said, it's incredibly stupid to be smoking weed when you're paid millions of dollars to play a game where reaction time is the most important thing. So, I can understand why they would do it.....to discourage people from being stupid.

[Barnaby Graves]

I don't think they should suspend guys for smoking weed. That said, it's incredibly stupid to be smoking weed when you're paid millions of dollars to play a game where reaction time is the most important thing. So, I can understand why they would do it.....to discourage people from being stupid.

Who says they're high when they play?

[waroriole]

Who says they're high when they play?

That's not what I'm saying. The effects could linger over. When the difference between a hit and an out is so small, you shouldn't want anything like that messing with your reaction times.

[byrdz]

Marijuana isn't a criminal activity in many circumstances in my state (California.)

Well yes and no. It isn't according to Cali law, but it still is according to fed law.

On Rowell, a DUI should get hm a 50 game suspension before the grass. One can give you the munchies and make you watch too much TV. The other can get you murder charges.

[waroriole]

Well yes and no. It isn't according to Cali law, but it still is according to fed law.

On Rowell, a DUI should get hm a 50 game suspension before the grass. One can give you the munchies and make you watch too much TV. The other can get you murder charges.

You can DUI of weed, and get the same murder charges. It's more about the decisions you make when you take either substance. Which, not surprisingly for Rowell, are poor decisions.

[Pedro Cerrano]

[waroriole]

2-3 with a 5.77 ERA.

[apollod]

I agree with you, apollod is actually kind of annoying me by acting like Professor of Debates while being quite off-base imo.

A strawman is when you knock down an argument your opponent never made. That's not what sdmarkakis is doing here. Just like ledzepp said, people arguing that pot use is bad because it's "against the law" probably violate traffic laws routinely. How is pointing that out a strawman? How is it attacking an argument that was not actually being made? It's pointedly attacking an argument that was being made. It's challenging the notion that just because something is against the law means that it's wrong, or that people must always or do always follow all the laws. How does MLB decide to suspend for marijuana, while not suspending players for other law violations? I don't know, but I disagree with whatever rationale they're using because marijuana use does not merit suspension.

Clarifying..

Can_of_corn's position: They are both illegal activities involving drugs, that is similar enough to make a comparison.

sdmarkakis response: BTW, on any given week the majority of the population breaks some law. & I guess in your eyes smoking weed is the same thing as shooting up heroin too. Some of us can look at things a little deeper than "ITS AGAINST THE LAW!!!".

can_of_corn's argument was limited to illegal drugs; sdmarkakis expanded it beyond that by making can_of_corn defend a position ("breaking any and all laws are bad") he never made. can_of_corn wisely bowed out of the discussion at that point. Everybody else continued the discussion at that point; sdmarkakis effectively used the strawman to steer the conversation/discussion into an easily defensible position for himself, because he's requiring anybody who wants to counter to defend every law on the books. So yeah, if you're looking at the discussion on page 2 and after, his arguments are perfectly valid in the context of what the discussion is on page 2, but that's not where the original position was on page 1, because he was effective in using the strawman to steer the discussion into a favorable position for himself.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Apollod is correct about the strawman imo.

This thread blows.

[Barnaby Graves]

This thread blows.

What the ****? Why?

Everyone here seems to want to talk about everything except if banning guys for 50 games is the right way to handle a positive drug test.

[OFFNY]

This thread blows.

What the ****? Why?

Everyone here seems to want to talk about everything except if banning guys for 50 games is the right way to handle a positive drug test.

This thread is great because it gave me a chance to talk more about my beloved Billy Rowell, albeit in a very negative manner.

[kman123]

1) On Rowell: This is his second offense. He knows the rules(well, maybe he didn't, but he should have known them) and he failed to abide by them. On his part, he made a poor decision and won't get any sympathy from me.

2) MLB can set whatever penalty they please and enforce their rules at their own discretion. If players don't like it then the player's union should complain and get something done about it.

3) I think the penalty is too harsh considering it is not a PED. I also see no reason why MLB should care if players are smoking weed in the first place, but they do so tough s...

[Anonsnides]

IMO, Marijuana should be legal, anyone who disagrees is greatly misinformed or ignoring facts.

However when it comes to a PRIVATE organization (which the MLB is), they can legally suspend and employees (which the players are) for whatever they want.

No matter how stupid anyone thinks the law is, players agree to the league rules when they sign their contracts.

Those rules must not be too much of a problem in the players minds because the players haven't changed them yet.

Finally, as a person who has smokes pot somewhat frequently, I have no idea why a baseball player would want to smoke....if your gonna do it in the off season then it is a different story, but i have no clue why he would have been smoking pot during spring training, a time when you are supposed to be focusing on the season ahead and getting your skills sharp if he actually was smoking at that time. (I know cannabis stays in your system for up to 4-5 weeks so its possible that it WAS done in the offseason.)