Re: DRUG TESTING, ETC.

["Nissen, David" <DNissen@ventnds1.telstra.com.au>]

A very well thought out reply Shawn.  If you cannot attack someones 
arguments, attack the person.  Here in Melbourne Australia (which is
probably 
not part of the real world, not being an American colony or Annex), we are 
currently having bad problems with Heroine usage.  I'm kind of sensitive to 
the issue as a close friends sister died of an over dose.  

Every few years studies are done, those studies site results from other 
countries, hard facts from past experience here and else where etc and 
ultimately come up with the conclusion that de-criminalising dope would 
drasticaly reduce heroine deaths (if you want me to spell out the reasons 
why, let me know and I'll send them to you off list) - which has worked well

in a couple of Australian states that have taken such action.

Melbourne's response to such reports is to ignore them and bring in stiffer 
penulties, more random blitzes of known trouble spots etc.  The results, 
Heroine usage goes up, organized crime makes more money and more studies are

commisioned at tax payers expense.  Right now  Deaths from Heroine 
here is in excess of deaths through road accidents.

Now I don't see any reason why the owners and players shouldn't AGREE to add

what ever they want to the list of banned substances, but before you start 
slamming someone and the country in which they have lived for some time,
just 
because that country is taking active steps to try to solve some of its 
social problems, you might want to take a look at yourself and your own 
country.  After all, it was your country that taught the rest of the world a

lesson through prohibition (once again if you need someone to spell out what

that lesson was, let me know and I'll send you some info off list).


        - David N.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

Jim,

  Obvoiusly living in such a liberal country like England, random drug 
testing
  would be an eye opener.  In a country where you can get a "prescription" 
for
  heroine, or pot, or what junk your on, this would be a suprise.  So
welcome
  back to the real world, and if you need any more enlightment, please feel
  free to ask as many questions as needed.

Shawn

P.S.  This is of course, in jest....have a good day.

P.P.S. On a basketball note of my own, Pippen said today that he thought
that
Jordan was retiring and he would probably not be back with the Bulls. 
 Although
he said he wouldn't make a final choice of teams until he could talk with 
"Pink"
Floyd....

Originally from Jim Meninno:
>
> I guess this was directed at me, so I'll answer.
>
> Obviously I am out of touch with current American corporate hiring
> practices.  I lived in England from '91 to '97 and, I'm happy to say, I
> must have been out of the country when they added the brainwash juice to
> the water supply.
>
> We're not talking about coming to work drunk or stoned here.  You don't
> need testing to fire someone for being unfit to do their job.  We're
> talking about checking into people's private lives just to see if they
> happen to be breaking the law.
>
> We're not talking about saving you from your workmate's assault rifle,
> either.  If so, we'd do regular mandatory screenings for depression and
> fire anyone who failed.  Of course maybe that's happening too, and I
> missed it.
>
> If this is a liability issue, as someone has suggested, it is just
> another example of the affects of rampant litigation in the US.  Take
> all the lawyers out and shoot 'em.  (except Jim McMaster.  Sorry, if
> you're not a lawyer, you sound like one).
>
> Being against testing does not make me for drugs.  It makes me for
> people's rights.  And, I'm sorry, but I think I have the right to earn a
> living without being suspected of crimes I haven't committed (at least
> not recently).
>
> Jim
>
> PS On a basketball note, careful readers will also notice that I was in
> England during the demise of Celtic Basketball.  I hope my return, 2
> games before the end of the 15 win debacle, heralded the start of a
> resurgence of the team we all love.
>
> >From: "Dorine" <norine@sover.net>
> >To: "Celtics" <Celtics@igtc.com>
> >Subject: DRUG TESTING, ETC.
> >Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 21:24:24 -0400
> >
> >I work in a bank.  When you are hired you agree to abide by a dress
> code and
> >any other codes they subscribe to.  If you don't want to do this, you
> don't
> >sign and you don't get hired.
> >The NBA simply wants the players to allow Marijuna to be added to the
> list
> >of substances, right?  They probably do test for drugs.  Maybe at
> random,
> >who knows, or maybe it's a regularly scheduled thing.  I've never been
> >tested for drugs, but I would not object if it were required.  Why?
> People
> >who are either spaced out on drugs or loony are walking into former
> places
> >of employment and shooting people at random.  It amuses me that some
> people
> >think smoking regular cigarettes is awful, but smoking pot is not.
> You're
> >still putting smoke in your lungs, aren't you?  I guess this makes
> sense to
> >you, it doesn't to me.  And smoking cigarettes does not alter your
> brain
> >waves as do both pot and alcohol.  I'm not against alcohol, either,
> after
> >all that is legal, but I should think it not unreasonable to expect
> players
> >not to drink for a few hours before they play a basketball game or any
> other
> >professional sport for which they're being paid.  I think bankers could
> >relax their dress codes a little, but until they do, I have to abide by
> the
> >rules.  It was a term of my employment many years ago, and I abide by
> it.
> >You do not have the right to use an illegal substance, even though you
> might
> >think you should.  As long as the law says it's illegal, you're
> breaking the
> >law whether you agree with it or not.  If you're job is to play on a
> >professional sports team for which you're being highly paid, and the
> rules
> >say you won't use drugs and will agree to testing, why should you be
> any
> >different than any other employee?  I think the players should have no
> >objection to having an illegal drug added to the list of substances not
> >allowed.  Makes sense to me.
> >Dorine
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>