PonyFans.com

Actually, Pelini was lucky. In Tx, a women can be subject to a full body cavity search on the side of the interstate for littering and/or having the smell of weed in the car. Riding without a helmet probably subjects the rider to 10 years of hard labor. By contrast, Pelini just lost a sucky job. Glad to be in CA.

stallion - under democratic what? I assume you meant Pres? Spending bills originate in congress. If you tracked when deficits go down based on when dems were in control of congress than it would paint an entirely different picture. Also - deficits can go down by taxing too much - and that is a bad idea. Not that this belongs on a football board, so apologies to the OT.

MV pony wrote:

Arkpony wrote:Why would you feel sorry for an adult in a responsible position getting caught knowingly breaking the law?

Speeding and littering are against the law. Are they firing offenses?

Murder and rape are against the law. Are they firing offenses? See how that works?

I can always count on Mrydel to put things in proper perspective!

mrydel wrote:

MV pony wrote:

Arkpony wrote:Why would you feel sorry for an adult in a responsible position getting caught knowingly breaking the law?

Speeding and littering are against the law. Are they firing offenses?

Murder and rape are against the law. Are they firing offenses? See how that works?

No, I don't see the comparison Must be Arkansas reasoning.

Well let's spell it out for those who have trouble with reasoning. Partaking of an illegal drug is not littering, nor is it speeding, nor is it rape, nor is it murder. So out of those four would any of them be cause for firing. I would guess, and it is just a mere guess mind you, that 2 of them would and two of them would not. (You may pick whichever two you want.) So by logic one could say that some offenses warrant firing and some do not. Now the real question is not whether speeding or littering or murder or rape are firing offenses, but rather whether or not use of illegal drugs is. My humble opinion says yes it is. Why? Because they fired him.

"I know it when I see it"

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart

Apparently, drugs weren't the only issue: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.co ... signation/

Stallion wrote:I've never been into the weed-at all- but the country is quickly coming to the conclusion that the consequences from weed are less significant than the consequences of criminalizing the conduct of a large percentage of the country. Do we really want to spend money on the criminal justice system and more prisons-do we really want convictions harming the records and job prospects of our kids when some of the most successful people in the world probably did it in college? I want to tax the hell out it. I see decriminalization sweeping the country in the next decade

You are right in your comments; however, the statistics are huge that for many weed it is merely the introduction into addiction and the next step is hard drugs. From all perspectives of prevention of addiction the continued criminalization of weed is a means of signifying to users the dangers involved.

According to my sources, he allegedly left Nebraska for reasons that had nothing to do with getting a head coaching gig. He was supposedly paying attention to some of the boosters wives (while being married himself at the time), some coeds, and a had few alleged incidents involving alcohol.

MJ is not addictive. Alcohol is.

MJ has no debilitating side effects (other than muchies). Alcohol causes cirrhosis of the liver, among many other things.

High>Drunk

We need to decriminalize all drugs and focus the enormous human and financial resources elsewhere:

http://www.cato.org/publications/white- ... g-policies

mrydel wrote:Well let's spell it out for those who have trouble with reasoning. Partaking of an illegal drug is not littering, nor is it speeding, nor is it rape, nor is it murder. So out of those four would any of them be cause for firing. I would guess, and it is just a mere guess mind you, that 2 of them would and two of them would not. (You may pick whichever two you want.) So by logic one could say that some offenses warrant firing and some do not. Now the real question is not whether speeding or littering or murder or rape are firing offenses, but rather whether or not use of illegal drugs is. My humble opinion says yes it is. Why? Because they fired him.

I believe Pelini resigned.

ponyinNC wrote:MJ is not addictive. Alcohol is.

MJ has no debilitating side effects (other than muchies). Alcohol causes cirrhosis of the liver, among many other things.

High>Drunk

Tell that to my fraternity brothers who spent all their time smoking weed. Most of them eventually dropped out.

MV pony wrote:

mrydel wrote:Well let's spell it out for those who have trouble with reasoning. Partaking of an illegal drug is not littering, nor is it speeding, nor is it rape, nor is it murder. So out of those four would any of them be cause for firing. I would guess, and it is just a mere guess mind you, that 2 of them would and two of them would not. (You may pick whichever two you want.) So by logic one could say that some offenses warrant firing and some do not. Now the real question is not whether speeding or littering or murder or rape are firing offenses, but rather whether or not use of illegal drugs is. My humble opinion says yes it is. Why? Because they fired him.

I believe Pelini resigned.[/quote]

While technically true, he was forced to resign. There is no doubt about that.