2 Steelers RB's charged with possession

[jimnyc]

What a couple of idiots. Their #1 and #2 backs as well. Both charged with marijuana possession, and the #1 back charged with DUI as well.

---

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- Pittsburgh Steelers running backs Le'Veon Bell and LeGarrette Blount will be charged with marijuana possession following a traffic stop Wednesday afternoon.

Ross Township police say a traffic officer pulled over a Camaro operated by Bell around 1:30 p.m. after the officer noticed a strong odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle.

The officer found a 20 gram bag of marijuana inside the car. Bell was taken to a hospital to have blood drawn and is expected to be charged with driving under the influence of marijuana.

Bell, Blount and a female passenger were arrested and are expected to receive notice of formal charges through the mail. The possession and DUI charges are both misdemeanors.

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/steelers-bell-blount-set-face-235535922--nfl.html

[aboutime]

Jim. Honestly? Is anyone supposed to be surprised? Considering the number and growth of states making MJ use legal?

It just reminds me about how our laws, whether people agree with them, or not...DO NOT APPLY anymore.

Lawlessness has reached the very top, and bottom of our society.

Our wannabe, pretender in chief doesn't even enforce them.

SLAPS on the hands, fines, and those two players will carry on.

[Abbey Marie]

Guess I won't be drafting them in my fantasy league.

[jimnyc]

Guess I won't be drafting them in my fantasy league.

Personal is personal and business is business. IF they play normally, I would still take them, as both are great runners. The disposition of their case may not be for quite some time. The league definitely won't take any action until that happens. How the team handles it is left to be seen. I'm torn over it, at least with Bell, as I had huge hopes for him and his future with the team. But what a dumb, dumb decision.

We all make mistakes, some worse than others. I hope these guys realize just how fortunate they are to be playing in the NFL and learn from this. Only time will tell. If they let him play, and he runs for 1500 yards and brings them to the Super Bowl, all will be forgotten! :2up:

[Gunny]

Personal is personal and business is business. IF they play normally, I would still take them, as both are great runners. The disposition of their case may not be for quite some time. The league definitely won't take any action until that happens. How the team handles it is left to be seen. I'm torn over it, at least with Bell, as I had huge hopes for him and his future with the team. But what a dumb, dumb decision.

We all make mistakes, some worse than others. I hope these guys realize just how fortunate they are to be playing in the NFL and learn from this. Only time will tell. If they let him play, and he runs for 1500 yards and brings them to the Super Bowl, all will be forgotten! :2up:

It's a dumb decision only because pot's not legal everywhere. If the worst thing someone does is smoke pot? Not too much different to me than buying a bottle and sucking it down.

I DO think the high n mighty NFL will act before the law though. If nothing else, doesn't it violate the league's substance abuse policy?

[jimnyc]

It's a dumb decision only because pot's not legal everywhere. If the worst thing someone does is smoke pot? Not too much different to me than buying a bottle and sucking it down.

I DO think the high n mighty NFL will act before the law though. If nothing else, doesn't it violate the league's substance abuse policy?

No doubt it does! I'm wondering if they suddenly got tested by the NFL yesterday and it will be used as evidence. As first offenses they are both looking at 4 game suspensions, I think.

[Gunny]

No doubt it does! I'm wondering if they suddenly got tested by the NFL yesterday and it will be used as evidence. As first offenses they are both looking at 4 game suspensions, I think.

They can't legally single those 2 out and test them without a court order. Urinalysis test has to random, or command directed. Command directed requires evidence. There can be no evidence for the NFL without them being found guilty first. They'd have to test the entire NFL just to catch to pot smokers. Not worth it. For a simple misdemeanor possession charge?

On the other hand, the NFL is QUICK to go knee-jerk overreaction and assume more authority than it has.

[fj1200]

They can't legally single those 2 out and test them without a court order. Urinalysis test has to random, or command directed. Command directed requires evidence. There can be no evidence for the NFL without them being found guilty first. They'd have to test the entire NFL just to catch to pot smokers. Not worth it. For a simple misdemeanor possession charge?

On the other hand, the NFL is QUICK to go knee-jerk overreaction and assume more authority than it has.

They can if the players agreement says they can. An arrest might give them the authority to take action regardless of court outcome.

The NFL has a lot of authority for those who agree to become part of its organization.

[Gunny]

They can if the players agreement says they can. An arrest might give them the authority to take action regardless of court outcome.

The NFL has a lot of authority for those who agree to become part of its organization.

True enough.

I think it's a matter of what you're willing to fight. Singling out people is legally discriminatory. I'm thinking neither side wants to spend the money nor time in court for years to fight over a simple possession charge. I'd just take the hit and move on.

So, while I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just wondering how legally binding the NFL's draconian, PC rules are at the Constitutional level.

[fj1200]

True enough.

I think it's a matter of what you're willing to fight. Singling out people is legally discriminatory. I'm thinking neither side wants to spend the money nor time in court for years to fight over a simple possession charge. I'd just take the hit and move on.

So, while I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just wondering how legally binding the NFL's draconian, PC rules are at the Constitutional level.

The Constitution has almost nothing to do with NFL Player Association rules. Singling out players based on a protected status is discriminatory but an arrest throws that out the window. The NFL likely cares not a whit about the possession charge but they have other concerns. The Patriots released Hernandez before even knowing the charges against him.

[Gunny]

The Constitution has almost nothing to do with NFL Player Association rules. Singling out players based on a protected status is discriminatory but an arrest throws that out the window. The NFL likely cares not a whit about the possession charge but they have other concerns. The Patriots released Hernandez before even knowing the charges against him.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just tossing out a "what if ...." It's all a game to me. Just like the one they play. A kid's game. My point is, you can even have a will tossed if you contest it. I understand the employment rules and all that, and these two guys get suspended today, I won't be surprised.

Just my opinion that professional sports organizations take things too far, and react like 3 years olds wanting a cookie. If you really want to bust substance abusers, test everyone, right now for performance enhancing drugs. I've lifted weights for 30 years, and played sports all through school and the entire time I was in the Corps. You don't get that big eating steak and raw eggs. Everyone knows it and turns a blind eye. Because they can't wait to pop on the tube on Sunday, swill beer and watch their favorite team lose.

[Abbey Marie]

Personal is personal and business is business. IF they play normally, I would still take them, as both are great runners. The disposition of their case may not be for quite some time. The league definitely won't take any action until that happens. How the team handles it is left to be seen. I'm torn over it, at least with Bell, as I had huge hopes for him and his future with the team. But what a dumb, dumb decision.

We all make mistakes, some worse than others. I hope these guys realize just how fortunate they are to be playing in the NFL and learn from this. Only time will tell. If they let him play, and he runs for 1500 yards and brings them to the Super Bowl, all will be forgotten! :2up:

My reason is that I can't take the chance that they will miss any games.
I take my fantasy team VERY seriously, and I also have a title to defend!

[Gunny]

My reason is that I can't take the chance that they will miss any games.
I take my fantasy team VERY seriously, and I also have a title to defend!

Uh oh .....:laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

Uh oh .....:laugh:

Lol, you skeered Gunny?

:laugh2: J/K

[fj1200]

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just tossing out a "what if ...." It's all a game to me. Just like the one they play. A kid's game. My point is, you can even have a will tossed if you contest it. I understand the employment rules and all that, and these two guys get suspended today, I won't be surprised.

Just my opinion that professional sports organizations take things too far, and react like 3 years olds wanting a cookie. If you really want to bust substance abusers, test everyone, right now for performance enhancing drugs. I've lifted weights for 30 years, and played sports all through school and the entire time I was in the Corps. You don't get that big eating steak and raw eggs. Everyone knows it and turns a blind eye. Because they can't wait to pop on the tube on Sunday, swill beer and watch their favorite team lose.

You have the NFL and owners on one side and the Players Association on the other and where they meet are the rules that govern player behavior.

[Gunny]

Lol, you skeered Gunny?

:laugh2: J/K

Never let it be said I got between a woman and her fantasy anything. It NEVER works out for me.:laugh:

[Gunny]

You have the NFL and owners on one side and the Players Association on the other and where they meet are the rules that govern player behavior.

Again, I understand what you saying. I understand how it works. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Telling people what they can or can't do on their own time is BS to me. Double jeopardy is BS to me as well.

[Abbey Marie]

I'll tell you one thing: by comparison, these two deserve a lesser punishment than Ray Rice's pathetic two-game suspension for knocking his girlfriend unconscious.

:mad:

[fj1200]

Again, I understand what you saying. I understand how it works. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Telling people what they can or can't do on their own time is BS to me. Double jeopardy is BS to me as well.

Make millions of dollars per year as a public figure and don't be surprised when your private behavior becomes a public issue let alone a DUI. And you probably understand that double jeopardy doesn't really apply here either.

[Gunny]

Make millions of dollars per year as a public figure and don't be surprised when your private behavior becomes a public issue let alone a DUI. And you probably understand that double jeopardy doesn't really apply here either.

Which is crap. But you can pay me the millions. I still won't give a crap. :laugh:

I understand double jeopardy -- punished twice for the same crime. Our government is rather infamous for it even though the Constitution forbids it. They like to play semantics too. local, city, state and federal. By definition, it's STILL the same animal. Oh, and you can add the military in on that. They'll punish you too. Not only you, but your vehicle.

I found that one out the hard way. Had a Marine whose brother got a DUI. The MPs came charging into our CP like we were harboring Charles Manson because the car, not he, had lost it's on base driving privileges. No MPs are more arrogant than civilian police and I had this corporal mouthing off to me until he got put in his place. I was like fuck you, get your Gunny out here pissant. You ain't taking my Marine anywhere.

The point is, there are stupid laws that are unjust. Like revoking a vehicle's driving privileges. The problem you and I have is you like to try and play semantics and I'm arguing right and wrong. You should never try to play semantics with your betters. Doesn't work.

Abbey made a damned good point. That idiot beat his GF unconscious and got a 2 game suspension? If I recall correctly, isn't a substance abuse violation in the NFL a 1 year suspension? Which is the bigger crime?

[fj1200]

Which is crap. But you can pay me the millions. I still won't give a crap. :laugh:

I understand double jeopardy -- punished twice for the same crime. Our government is rather infamous for it even though the Constitution forbids it. They like to play semantics too. local, city, state and federal. By definition, it's STILL the same animal. Oh, and you can add the military in on that. They'll punish you too. Not only you, but your vehicle.

I found that one out the hard way. Had a Marine whose brother got a DUI. The MPs came charging into our CP like we were harboring Charles Manson because the car, not he, had lost it's on base driving privileges. No MPs are more arrogant than civilian police and I had this corporal mouthing off to me until he got put in his place. I was like fuck you, get your Gunny out here pissant. You ain't taking my Marine anywhere.

The point is, there are stupid laws that are unjust. Like revoking a vehicle's driving privileges. The problem you and I have is you like to try and play semantics and I'm arguing right and wrong. You should never try to play semantics with your betters. Doesn't work.

Abbey made a damned good point. That idiot beat his GF unconscious and got a 2 game suspension? If I recall correctly, isn't a substance abuse violation in the NFL a 1 year suspension? Which is the bigger crime?

I never have played semantics with my betters. ;) And so far I'm not playing semantics I'm merely explaining your bringing up irrelevant issues as far as the law is concerned. You bring up discrimination, it's not relevant here. You bring up the Constitution, it's not relevant here. You bring up double jeopardy, it's not relevant here. The point is we can freely enter into contracts but we are then bound by those contracts.

EDIT:

Yes, she did make a good point.

[Gunny]

I never have played semantics with my betters. ;) And so far I'm not playing semantics I'm merely explaining your bringing up irrelevant issues as far as the law is concerned. You bring up discrimination, it's not relevant here. You bring up the Constitution, it's not relevant here. You bring up double jeopardy, it's not relevant here. The point is we can freely enter into contracts but we are then bound by those contracts.

Odd, I thought I brought up discrimination in a different thread. That WOULD make it rather irrelevant in this one.

You ARE playing semantics. I'm trying to have a discussion. Threads progress. You can scroll back up and read the part where I stated I UNDERSTAND. I'm not arguing legal points with you. You can't even shut up when we agree.

I'm arguing ideals.

[jimnyc]

The Steelers lost their preseason game to the Eagles last night, and their shitty playing aside - both running backs played. I'm not sure how I feel about that. While things are getting more relaxed in the world about weed, it's still illegal in the majority of the places, and Bell was driving while stoned. And then they get to start in the game a few days later.

And neither got much yardage. Fuckers. If they had, I might not be posting with as much anger. :)

[fj1200]

Odd, I thought I brought up discrimination in a different thread. That WOULD make it rather irrelevant in this one.

You ARE playing semantics. I'm trying to have a discussion. Threads progress. You can scroll back up and read the part where I stated I UNDERSTAND. I'm not arguing legal points with you. You can't even shut up when we agree.

I'm arguing ideals.

Post #9. A discussion is fine but you keep bringing up things that aren't relevant. Does the NFL/sports have too much power? I won't disagree with that and I don't trust them to make consistent decisions regarding punishments but they do have that ability, that was my point.

[fj1200]

The Steelers lost their preseason game to the Eagles last night, and their shitty playing aside - both running backs played. I'm not sure how I feel about that. While things are getting more relaxed in the world about weed, it's still illegal in the majority of the places, and Bell was driving while stoned. And then they get to start in the game a few days later.

And neither got much yardage. Fuckers. If they had, I might not be posting with as much anger. :)

I'm surprised they don't have some sort of automatic punishment especially with a DUI. Maybe some consistency along the lines would start to actually deter behaviors that they don't want... or say they don't want.

/\ideals :)

[Gunny]

The Steelers lost their preseason game to the Eagles last night, and their shitty playing aside - both running backs played. I'm not sure how I feel about that. While things are getting more relaxed in the world about weed, it's still illegal in the majority of the places, and Bell was driving while stoned. And then they get to start in the game a few days later.

And neither got much yardage. Fuckers. If they had, I might not be posting with as much anger. :)

So if each had gained a hundred yards, being potheads would be okay? :laugh:

[Gunny]

I'm surprised they don't have some sort of automatic punishment especially with a DUI. Maybe some consistency along the lines would start to actually deter behaviors that they don't want... or say they don't want.

/\ideals :)

Now, what if they fight in court whenever that may be and are found not guilty? Would that "automatic punishment" be just?

[jimnyc]

So if each had gained a hundred yards, being potheads would be okay? :laugh:

If these guys were to gain 100 per game apiece, bring us to the playoffs and the bowl - they can smoke till their brains explode for all I care! :420:

[fj1200]

Now, what if they fight in court whenever that may be and are found not guilty? Would that "automatic punishment" be just?

Just as far as the NFL is concerned. They took actions that reflected poorly on themselves and the NFL.

[Gunny]

Post #9. A discussion is fine but you keep bringing up things that aren't relevant. Does the NFL/sports have too much power? I won't disagree with that and I don't trust them to make consistent decisions regarding punishments but they do have that ability, that was my point.

Shut up, huh? You aren't this good. I clearly stated threads progress. I'm discussing ideals, not where you choose to be contrary just because you're in love with your keyboard and looking at your own words.

[Gunny]

If these guys were to gain 100 per game apiece, bring us to the playoffs and the bowl - they can smoke till their brains explode for all I care! :420:

Right? :laugh:

[Gunny]

Just as far as the NFL is concerned. They took actions that reflected poorly on themselves and the NFL.

Yep.

[Jeff]

The Steelers lost their preseason game to the Eagles last night, and their shitty playing aside - both running backs played. I'm not sure how I feel about that. While things are getting more relaxed in the world about weed, it's still illegal in the majority of the places, and Bell was driving while stoned. And then they get to start in the game a few days later.

And neither got much yardage. Fuckers. If they had, I might not be posting with as much anger. :)

They weren't allowed to get high before the game ( punishment by the NFL for getting caught ) :laugh:

[Gunny]

They weren't allowed to get high before the game ( punishment by the NFL for getting caught ) :laugh:

No shit. I could play football stoned off my ass. Matter of fact, I don't remember a game in the 70s when I wasn't. Now, as far as pot being performance enhancing .... I drank a LOT of Gatorade. :laugh:

[fj1200]

Shut up, huh? You aren't this good. I clearly stated threads progress. I'm discussing ideals, not where you choose to be contrary just because you're in love with your keyboard and looking at your own words.

:confused:

[Gunny]

:confused:

You remind me of when I had impetigo. A contagious skin disease that won't go away. :laugh:

[fj1200]

You remind me of when I had impetigo. A contagious skin disease that won't go away. :laugh:

Oh good. I thought it was the overuse of the word semantics without full understanding of what it means. :poke:

[Gunny]

Oh good. I thought it was the overuse of the word semantics without full understanding of what it means. :poke:

How can you over-use a word that is hitting the bullseye every time?

[fj1200]

How can you over-use a word that is hitting the bullseye every time?

Easy.


... without full understanding of what it means. :poke:

;)

[Gunny]

Easy.



;)

You know what's making me LMFAO? You don't realize how dumb your response is. :laugh:

[fj1200]

You know what's making me LMFAO? You don't realize how dumb your response is. :laugh:

You don't give much to work with. Read a dictionary.

[Gunny]

You don't give much to work with. Read a dictionary.

When I need to, I do. I just use my 1st grade speller on you. It's got YOUR ass kicked. :laugh:

[fj1200]

When I need to, I do. I just use my 1st grade speller on you. It's got YOUR ass kicked. :laugh:

I'm getting my "ass" kicked yet you keep agreeing with me. :confused:


True enough.

So, while I'm not disagreeing with you...


I'm not disagreeing with you.


Again, I understand what you saying.


Yep.

But let me guess: Ideals?

:rolleyes: