Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sandman on November 16, 2005, 05:17:03 PM
-
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/baseball/13180708.htm
Congress thought so as well. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Jim Bunning, R-Ky., a former pitcher and member of baseball's Hall of Fame, last week proposed legislation that would have assessed a half-season penalty for a first offense, a full-season penalty for a second offense and a lifetime ban for a third offense.
That legislation would have covered not only baseball but also the NFL, NBA and NHL.
http://www.thehilltoponline.com/media/paper590/news/2005/11/08/Sports/Congress.Revisits.Steroids.Penalties-1049246.shtml
Where do they think they get the authority to dictate policy for private companies?
IMHO, the major leagues should tell Congress to piss off.
-
For once I agree...this to me is along the same lines as telling privately owned resturants that the owner can't decide wether to let people smoke or not.
(though those are brought to you by your local Soviet errm uhh city councils)
-
Originally posted by Sandman
where do they think they get the authority to dictate policy for private companies?
[/B]
You kinda sound like you remember the 1950-60's
shamus
-
Originally posted by Shamus
You kinda sound like you remember the 1950-60's
shamus
No likely... I was born in 1962. ;)
-
clip
Under the current system, the first-time offenders of the steroid policy receive a 10-game suspension, followed by 30-day and 60-day bans for subsequent failed tests. According to the AP, Selig proposed a 50-game ban for a first offense, a 100-game ban for the second and a lifetime ban for the third positive test
endclip
-
I think Selig can propose whatever he pleases for baseball.
-
Congress Out Of Control
Sandy.. outta WHO's control?
I agree, congress oughta keep it's nose outta this.. but if congress can stick it's nose into Enron and Standard Oil, why not 'professional' sporting companies?
As an afterthought.. didn't I see on the news last night that Baseball just adopted a new 3-strike rule? 50 game suspension, first offense, 100 game suspension for the second and a lifetime ban for the third?
Look, I surrendered my class 1 (18 wheeler) license the day congress imposed urine testing on truck drivers for amphetemines and other drugs.. you could be an alcoholic and get away with it, but god help the trucking company caught with a driver hittin an 18 hour day with bennies. I'm not at all annoyed that professional sprots folks fall under the same gun.. Hell, I saw no baseball hero's beyatching when congress came after MY income...
But to be fair.. show me a link to a petition that has wording I can agree with and I'll sign it.. I don't want government yanking any more competent pro's off the roads or the playing field via an arbitrary and likely to fallible testing system that can smear a guy's rep for life just because a lab tech blew a test sequence or mixed up a sample..
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Where do they think they get the authority to dictate policy for private companies?
IMHO, the major leagues should tell Congress to piss off.
They probably do not have well established authority over football, basketball, or hockey, but there is a federal mandate over baseball which has to do with MLB having a shield against anti-trust legislation (since 1922) that other enterprises must follow.
The NBA had to deal with the ABA, the NFL with the WFL, USFL, and XFL, but baseball hasn't had to deal with a competitive league since the demise of the Federal League (1914-1915)
-
Seems like Congress is reaching into an area that really you have to wonder if they have any business messing in. Trying to understand why they are doing this, about the only thing I can come up with is concern that children who view the major league players as heros or role models might want to emulate their performance and when they can, they would also follow the roid path to performance. It's the only thing I can think of, but I think it really should be handled by the leagues themselves.
dago
-
Originally posted by Dago
Trying to understand why they are doing this, about the only thing I can come up with is concern that children who view the major league players as heros or role models might want to emulate their performance and when they can, they would also follow the roid path to performance.
dago
http://www.campuschamps.com/performance_help/stay_healthy/dangers_of_steroid_abuse.shtml
Its definately a concern in the academic dept regarding highschool kids, and the recent explosion of high school GIRLS that are using them is disturbing to say the least....maybe Congress is fearful of the streets being filled with young highschool girls that have moustaches?
-
You mean congress would regulate something that influences millions of american children?
HOW DARE THEY!? :mad:
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I the recent explosion of high school GIRLS that are using them is disturbing to say the least...
Unless it made their boobs bigger. :)
-
Originally posted by Dago
Unless it made their boobs bigger. :)
Maybe they'll legalize estrogen without a perscription? :)
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
You mean congress would regulate something that influences millions of american children?
HOW DARE THEY!? :mad:
I think you overestimate the influence of MLB on children.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
You mean congress would regulate something that influences millions of american children?
HOW DARE THEY!? :mad:
Remember the democrats of the 90's..."its for the children!" :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
They probably do not have well established authority over football, basketball, or hockey, but there is a federal mandate over baseball which has to do with MLB having a shield against anti-trust legislation (since 1922) that other enterprises must follow.
The NBA had to deal with the ABA, the NFL with the WFL, USFL, and XFL, but baseball hasn't had to deal with a competitive league since the demise of the Federal League (1914-1915)
Hmmm... is it illegal for someone to create a new baseball league?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Remember the democrats of the 90's..."its for the children!" :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
The democrats of the 90s have been replaced by the 2K republicans.
The dems were wrong then and the gop is wrong now.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
The democrats of the 90s have been replaced by the 2K republicans.
The dems were wrong then and the gop is wrong now.
I am certainly in favor of less government intervention in private affairs, but this one involves illegal perscription drugs, so maybe it is time to make it "uncool" to do steroids...kids think that taking them can't possibly affect them...after all, they're immortal! ;)
-
If it's illegal, it should be addressed by the police and the courts.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
If it's illegal, it should be addressed by the police and the courts.
And it is. I'm somewhat undecided if Government should intervene with this or not. Convince me. :)
-
I have a rhetorical question based on the title of this thread.
When is congress ever IN or UNDER control????
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hmmm... is it illegal for someone to create a new baseball league?
No... you can start one, but MLB has the federally mandated authority to crush you into dust.
-
so nanny laws are bad if it is something you are interested in that is being restricted of banned or taxed or punished by imprisonment or death?
Hmm... democracy at work I would say... if the MAJORITY of the people (or their representitives) want something... isn't it true democracy in action?
Isn't the constitution a "living document" and "rights" subject to trends and democracy?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Sandman
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/baseball/13180708.htm
http://www.thehilltoponline.com/media/paper590/news/2005/11/08/Sports/Congress.Revisits.Steroids.Penalties-1049246.shtml
Where do they think they get the authority to dictate policy for private companies?
IMHO, the major leagues should tell Congress to piss off.
So it's Congress's fault? It doesn't have a thing to do with Bonds, Palmiero, McGwire, Caminiti, Canseco and the host of others?
I for once agree with nailing people for this. Cheating to allow their bodies to recuperate faster is pathetic.
Karaya
-
I don't care about baseball... if banning it would save me a nickle the I would vote for the ban or any congressman/woman/undetermined... that would promise to ban it and save the children.
lazs
-
I agree %100 too...Your congress gonna dictate drug policy on NHL players?(most of whom are Canadian)..i don't think so.
I'm all for testing and suspending offenders but each sport is different in how steriods are used.
It should be illegal to test for non-sports enhancing drugs like weed...Athletes ain't role models.
If you want to have testing for recreational drugs...start with the politicians. Lets see how they like being role models.
-
Well said Beef! BTW..did u send that money order back yet? I never received it ?
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
So it's Congress's fault? It doesn't have a thing to do with Bonds, Palmiero, McGwire, Caminiti, Canseco and the host of others?
I for once agree with nailing people for this. Cheating to allow their bodies to recuperate faster is pathetic.
Karaya
Not really the point. Is it the responsibility of the Congress to ensure that professional athletes do not cheat?
-
If congress is willing to legislate drug testing, they should be willing to submit to it as well.
That would be more entertaining than baseball anyway.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
IAthletes ain't role models.
Wrong.
When your child gets old enough and *if* he shows an interest in professional sports, you'll understand that athletes, whether they like it or not, are indeed role models...
My oldest, at around age 7, starting bringing home library books on baseball (and now football) stars and stories of such.
They are indeed role models, whether we try to prevent it, or whether they like it or not.
-
Maybe somebody's already posted a reply similar to this, I dunno, didn't read the entire thread yeat, but if they're gonna do this they may just as well consider similar action against the movie industry for the stars' use/abuse of controlled substances. Makes about as much sence.
In other words: BUTT OUT, CONGRESS!
-
Originally posted by Furious
If congress is willing to legislate drug testing, they should be willing to submit to it as well.
That would be more entertaining than baseball anyway.
gawdammed right. and i'd just love to administer the tests and prepare the results. and they would get no damn appeal or retest on failure. just like THEIR ****ed-up program stuffed down our throats 12 years ago.
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
Well said Beef! BTW..did u send that money order back yet? I never received it ?
FiLtHy..I need yer addy.
-
politicians are not subject to the laws they make.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Dago
Unless it made their boobs bigger. :)
like em young huh?
-
Did anyone notice the * on the new policy adopted by MLB?
yadda yadda yadda....LIFETIME BAN*
*possible reinstation after 2 years. Gimme a break. If they consider 2 years a lifetime ban then wtf isn't Pete Rose in the hall yet?
I think congress has MUCH more important issues to devote its time to than substances, performance enhancing or otherwise, intentionally ingested by athletes or anyone else. If some ignoramus wants to have 100 more career home runs than he otherwise would've had at the expense of croaking in his 40s or 50s I say let him do it. We'll be rid of the dishonest sonofabich that much sooner. Basing our self worth as a country on whether or not some overpaid jerkoff dopes himself is just stupid.
Besides...aren't we fighting a WAR or something like that?
-
Originally posted by DblTrubl
I think congress has MUCH more important issues to devote its time to than substances, performance enhancing or otherwise, intentionally ingested by athletes or anyone else. If some ignoramus wants to have 100 more career home runs than he otherwise would've had at the expense of croaking in his 40s or 50s I say let him do it. We'll be rid of the dishonest sonofabich that much sooner. Basing our self worth as a country on whether or not some overpaid jerkoff dopes himself is just stupid.
Besides...aren't we fighting a WAR or something like that?
Totally agree. Might just be a warning shot to the week-knee'd owners to get it cleaned up. Also likely that Bunning is just PO'd that it took so long for him to get in the HOF (and he just barely squeaked in)
-
baseball enjoys a legal monopoly status, That's why congress will tell MLB to kiss its Ars.
look up antitrust.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hmmm... is it illegal for someone to create a new baseball league?
in a word YES