Vick
-
@mayjay Then why wouldnt such a rule by an employer get totally shot down by an attorney, if it wasnt based in some fact about pot’s effects on human performance, judgement, reaction time? Is that widespread practice based on a vacuum of fact? Because the practice of requiring a UA would have surely disappeared, due to all the lost court cases, right? But I havent seen much change in 20+yrs. But of course, mine is only an anecdotal observation, but nonetheless, what I’m reporting on here is indeed widespread practice currently…
-
@Lulufulu But for the sake of the voting public (the ones who’ll turn that map near-fully green), I would make a gentleman’s bet that most of the public has NO clue about that paper from hemp thing. They arent voting the way they do based on that old situation that is now older than most living people.
You can sway just enough of the swing voters to legalize it by selling the hard fact of BIG $ revenue, always relevant, and relevant right now.
-
“WHY then do we not have BigPharma all over this, and purifying and synthesizing various offshoot cousin compounds that truly enhance those “medicinal uses” in a more potent manner?”
Pharma isn’t about healing or helping people. Pharma is 100% about making profit. I’m not just offering my thoughts on this… all of pharma operates as corporations and through corporate law. It is actually REQUIRED by pharma to be only about profits because it is written in their responsibilities in their corporate charters and bylaws. By their own laws, pertaining to their formation and existence, they are required to seek out profit returns for their stockholders.
In order for pharma to have a drug qualified for sale it must pass through insane amounts of testing and red tape… most of it having LITTLE to do with possible effectiveness or adverse effects. Govt approvals today (I believe) typically cost from $600 million to over $1 billion. Even though pharma complains about the high costs, they then are not only able to monopolize on their medications, they are also able to keep smaller companies out of their business because of the costs.
Pot research has gone on for decades. But none of it qualifies as research by our govt because they intentionally create research scenarios requiring outrageous costs in order that they can maintain their total control and dominance. And… as many think… govt and pharma are ONE! Just research what industry spends the most on lobbying Washington… that would be the AMA and related medical industries, by a long shot! They OWN DC!
Pot and THC have been around forever, and in the general sense, belong as common property with well-noted use for many health-related reasons, making them “obvious” and restricting patent claims. I believe this has already been tested to some degree in patent court.
What I am expecting… perhaps even with President Trump… is the possibility that Trump maintains his promise to be the “law and order” president, translating into “all federal laws will be upheld.” So expect feds to come into all of these pot states and start busting it all up.
Stage two was partially discussed this morning when Trump met with pharma execs. He stated his desire to killing up to 80% of the regulations surrounding pharma. If so, he creates the pathway for pharma to legalize medicinal pot in the same vein as other drugs. So pharma will end up in complete control of weed and THC. Pharma will setup some bogus trials and our govt will decide weed/THC/cannabinoids suddenly have miraculous healing qualities!
In order for pharma to make weed into one of their drugs for selling, they will first make sure they completely “f-up” their new baby. Pharma is based on synthesizing elements and compounds. This is where most “side effects” come from. Drugs are not typically most effective when they are isolated. These elements and compounds need to be with their natural host compounds in order to buffer from many side effects. They can also help stimulate results in some cases, too.
By the way, pharma will patent some of their synthetic versions of THC. This is something they can protect. “Synth pot” is the future for these giants. For all of those who have positive experiences with pot, don’t expect synth pot to be anything as positive.
Here is the kicker… pharma doesn’t want drugs to NOT have side effects! Most patients who are prescribed a drug for ongoing use end up having to take several other drugs to battle the side effects. Pharma does what other for-profit corporations do… they build in functional obsolescence. The formula for big business is NEVER to sell you a product just ONCE!
-
Note for readers: No beef with @Lulufulu or @mayjay ,they contribute a great deal here, always thought provoking, and great reads. Lulufulu just made me think from several angles at once…
To explain my stance, specifically on the “medicinal”, I think it mostly reflects how we were taught to think (at dear old KU), regarding medical practice with patients. One isnt going to go out in the world and be some sort of maverick or therapeutic trailblazer. You dont guinea pig with patients. If you have novel research ideas, you work in medical research to prove your ideas.
So, until there’s some true paradigm-shift with a vast majority-approved & proven way to change what you give to patients, you’ll see practitioners adhere to the standard-of-care, which loosely defined is: what would 19 out of 20 docs do in a given situation? Which also implies, “beware” of that 1/20 guy. And, with your hard-earned license, there is always lurking the chance for scrutiny by the State Board of Healing Arts, which demands adherence to that standard of care for a given symptom. And the KSBHA is a very conservative governing body, as are most.
So, as always, agree or disagree with mine or anyone’s idea, people make up your own minds. We come to discuss & foster thought/ask questions. Any sarcasm is purely contextual, relative, and in that moment.
Apologies for the verbosity!
-
@ralster I was only commenting on the routine drug use tests where unrelated to an injury, but where employers just try to fog it all up. No opinion on pot’s effects. I have seen at least two users close to me who I have long suspected were seriously damaged by heavy pot use in motivation, problem solving skills, and overall judgment. I don’t have any issues with your position.
I believe, however, the liquor industry’s product harms its victims far beyond anything pot has done. Follow the money–to the ABC stores and suppliers for my suspect of who bankrolls the true antilegalization effort.
-
@mayjay You are
% accurate abt the use & abuse of 
. Hands down the most abused & dangerously available drug on the 
planet. It’s so much about the 
money that the business is even owned & operated by the govt in many states. Pot will be as well sooner or later. All in the auspices of revenue enhancement… Yeah right…
-
You guys have some good points on the pot argument. I personally am split on the matter I think the revenue would do good things. But I also have seen first hand that it kills brain cells. One other big issue is that I read about last year is the number motor vehicle accidents involving weed has increased in Colorado and Washington bye nearly 50%. They have no way to tell how much is too much like the .008 for alcohol and it is causing fatal accidents, not saying that we don’t have the same issue with drunks.
-
@kjayhawks Accidents due to weed = fender benders in the taco bell drive through
-
Gee,you should have seen us engineers…
-
@DanR lmao that was good man.
-
Let me preface by saying that I have never smoked pot or done any other drug even when I attended college in the 70s when it was very accessible and you were almost shunned if you did not smoke pot. I did get almost high a couple of time from second hand smoke at the old Kemper arena while attending concerts.
I do understand that under certain conditions, pot can help with pain management and it work by dulling the senses, which could be a desirable thing if you have a terminal condition with a lot of pain but definitely not a good thing if you are doing work that requires full awareness. This is the reason why employers require employees to be drug free, one insurance claim for a company that does not have this policy can make that firm un-insurable. One firm I worked for had a program that drug tested employees at random; if your name was selected, you had 2 hours to get to an approved testing facility. One time when one of my engineers was on his way out of town on company business, the insurance company had a lab tech. waiting for him at the airport in Memphis. This is the way the real world works and if you don’t agree with this type of testing, you have the option of seeking work elsewhere…it is really that simple.
More to the point, I saw one time a discussion panel with pot advocated and medical doctors. The pot advocates indicated that pot was the only feasible solution to many conditions and the doctors unanimously stated that there were drugs available that were considerably more effective than pot for most conditions and a lot of the so called medicinal uses are just excuses to smoke pot.
I really don’t have an issue if someone wants to smoke pot as long as that usage does not place my well being at risk, say, by driving while under the numbing effects of pot. I have seen first hand way too many people ruin their lives by pot addiction and even more so, by graduating to heavier drugs when pot was not enough. Now, as long as the laws of a state dictate that use of pot/drugs is not allowed, them you need to obey the law, work towards changing it or move to another state…your choice…but as long as the law is the law, we must all respect it and be willing to live with consequences if we don’t.
Coach Self indicated in his presser that the staff is constantly reminding students about rules, regulations and the law, so it is safe to assume that Bragg knew he was breaking the law and by doing so, he placed not only himself and his future in a bad spot but the program as well. Unfortunately, we seem to be living in a place and time where personal responsibility is no longer the law of the land and individuals now expect someone else to do the hard work to pay for their needs with no effort on their part…free tuition, free cell phones, free cars, free house, free everything seems to be the new entitlement and most of us that work hard for a living seem to be ones paying for it…
This is my rant for the day, no offense intended to anyone.
-
9 times out of 10 it recreational. Same as alcohol. It’s just different legally. The problem isn’t the legality it’s the morality. The problem is, if you don’t agree with the law you change it. Don’t break it. Difficult to get thru a young one’s head while they are bullet proof.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Agreed 100%. What my 83y/o immigrant dad picked up from the then-in-charge ww2 generation (in 1961) was: In America, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. You work for everything you have. You get but a chance, an opportunity to make your dreams come true.
Dad made lifelong friendships with some of his professors at NMSU, then later at UNM. Very dear old folks (to me) with an ingrained sense of what was right and a sense of properness & decorum. They knew their manners.
Those qualities have seemed to dwindle in subsequent generations, & the nation has paid/is paying the price. I almost want to ask some, not all, BabyBoomers (flower kids), “just how much do ya wanna rebel? Are ya happy now?” We were all teenagers & young adults who challenge the status-quo, we get that, everybody goes thru that phase. Most figure out then, how the world really works, & then strive to find their place in it.
My generation, the genX’ers have have a vantage pt in the middle: knew their GParents (ww2 Gen), saw what their parents did, then what? I see a varaition & split in my own gen. Many didnt pass along proper parenting skills & knowledge, thats for dang sure (what is a common cold?) I think this crossroads generation (genX) shares some blame for some of the incredulous beliefs put forth by some Millenials, about free everything, as they would be our kids. Hey, we tried to give the world 80s hair metal, which worked for about 10yrs, haha…(but wait…those guys could actually play their guitars…). The cliche now on Millenials is they want everything free. Uh, work ethic? Any understanding of economics? During this strange-candidate election cycle, I watched with utter disbelief as they threw their lot in for Bernie, a man who, at the height of McCarthyism & the ColdWar, actually chose to honeymoon in the then-USSR. The Soviet Union, as in jackboots crushing your face, 50,000 tanks, & NO freedoms. And Bernie was enamored with that? I thought he, as a concept, was far more dangerous to America as we know it, than HRClinton, who is simply an establishment politician, nothing more, as became obvious. But her leaked audio recording during Democrat Primaries needs to be heard by ALL Millenials: “…he’s (Bernie) making all sorts of promises. Cant have everything for free, just not economically possible. Its not reality…”…& this from a Democrat. As I told many friends last year, I wish I could put a friendly arm around dear Bernie, and say "my good man–What were you thinking? Do you need a class in ‘Americanism’?! Have you forgotten what America is, & what its stood for? Or are you just wholesale rejecting this nations ideals, for that other one? Do you know why the Colonies broke from Grt.Britain, in the first place?
See how far we’ve come from what the ww2 generation knew, practised, & believed? No nation is perfect, but its all relative, man! Go visit the 3rd world, or some communist countries firsthand, then come back to good ole USA with a grownup perspective.
For the nation, its not about Bernie, Hillary, Donald, Ted, or Marco. Its about the living generations somehow coming to a consensus for the sake of the nation. And its got to be American values, not anybody elses, that drives it. People also need to realize mankind is hundreds of years not ready for some pie-in-sky borderless utopia, why? Because our warlike, territorial tendencies as a species, would destroy some ideal utopia. Proof? Look at the 20th century. How far have we come since ancient times, with our mentality? Hmm? That same ww2 generation actually broke the will of Japan. I didnt realize that the napalm fire-bombing of civilian areas of Tokyo killed est150-200,000 in 1 raid. And this was prior to actually using 2 atomic bombs that killed 50,000 apiece. The ethics of the time was trying to save 500k-1mil US lives in an invasion of Japan, who was preparing to lose 10’s of millions in homeland defense.
Occasionally, I still get to help a 90yr old ww2 veteran. The Millenials need to figure out how the world works, find their place in it, and get to work on their dreams, like the rest of us pions and ants are doing. Life is short. And America has already been set up (& saved & preserved) for you, by generations prior, so you’d have your opportunity too.
What did Self say about “caretaker of the legacy”? Respect for the program & how far its come. Same applies to the USA.
-
So, trying to bring this discussion to a close, I dearly hope Mr. Bragg, since all lives do indeed matter, isnt making bad choices that will hurt him and his chance(s) to become successful at whatever he sets his mind to. I’ve been hard on him, partly because I have a 28yr old, and an 18yr old, & I just hate to see kids making dumb mistakes, especially the kind that permanently close doors/opportunities for the kid. I hope he turns it around.
RCJH
-
In my layman’s opinion, it would by definition NOT be an ILLEGAL conspiracy to use the rules LEGALLY to stop someone or group in any field of activity. A team plays defense on the court, because the rules allow it. It is not a conspiracy to play defense. Similarly, it would not be a conspiracy to seek out KU violations of rules in order to defend against KU setting a record number of consecutive conference titles. Ergo it would not be conspiracy theorizing to speculate that someone else might be doing what you were concerned about. Instead, it might be called using reason.
The mil-int-media complexes reputed half century long misinformational and mind control use of “conspiracy theory” continues to confuse a lot persons.
I hope we have done nothing wrong warranting taking away a title, if we are lucky enough to set the record.
Rock Chalk!
-
Right on.
I could be wrong… but it just looks like he hasn’t been selective about his inner circle. Hang with a bad crowd and bad things happen.
He really needs our team leader/captain on his arse 24/7. From this moment forward he doesn’t have a personal life… he has a team life… so he is always with another responsible player.
I suspect that he lacks maturity and the ability to say “no” so he needs someone around, 24/7, to say no for him.
-
@drgnslayr said:
I fought girls off every second I was in college. At least… I did in my dreams.
I am sure that in your dreams you no doubt failed to fight them off… Unless you were the odd duck who fantasized about not “gettin’ some”!
-
@jaybate-1.0 said:
Similarly, it would not be a conspiracy to seek out KU violations of rules…
Ah, but it would be illegal to conspire to obtain documents protected as private under the law, or to inveigle (thank you, 30 Days To A More Powerful Vocabulary, circa 1971-72) persons with a duty not to disclose confidential matters to do so.
-
Isn’t a conspiracy by definition illegal? I am not sure you can have a “legal conspiracy”…if it is legal it is not a conspiracy, right?
-
Does anyone remember Vicks short interview not to long ago? He said Frank always calls to check on him, if he goes to the mall Frank calls to see if he made it. And then again to see if he got home. Hmmmm maybe now we know why.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Well, I think it is legal to conspire, as you dream by the fire, and face unafraid the plans that you made, walking in a winter wonderland…
-
Context appears significant. In a legal context it would appear conspiracy would refer to pursuit of an illegal end . Outside a legal context, I would have to guess that maybe the CIA’s attorneys told them that outside a legal context they could use “conspiracy” and “conspiracy theory” in media to mean anything they wanted. But it’s just a guess.
-
Check out the time line
-
Yes, but why would some one commit a felony to prove we violated some eligibility regulation?
Seems an improbable tradeoff.
Hypothetically speaking, the minute they did that then they would be at our mercy.
-
This timeline is not an issue I am qualified to explore fruitfully.
I try to explain things without assumptions of illegalities of conspiracy and let the legal experts handle the rest.
-
Seriously… I was a late bloomer. But I finally blossomed and was stung by my loving bee!
-
“Isn’t a conspiracy by definition illegal? I am not sure you can have a “legal conspiracy”…if it is legal it is not a conspiracy, right?”
To “conspire” is totally legal. That is why you hear charges against a conspiracy explained with a “tail” behind it.
“…conspiracy to commit a felony”
“…conspiracy to defraud the government”
“…conspiracy to kill the President”
I believe only certain, specific conspiracies are crimes in themselves. Conspiring to kill someone (the President or anyone else) is a crime.
You can conspire to do something legal… for example… you conspire with your wife this morning to share a picnic in the nice weather today.
In the dictionary “conspire” is defined first around doing something wrong, evil or illegal. This definition is first since it is usually USED in context with something wrong, evil or illegal.
The second definition is more general… “to act or work together toward the same result or goal.”
-
“He said Frank always calls to check on him, if he goes to the mall Frank calls to see if he made it. And then again to see if he got home.”
That is interesting. I don’t recall reading that.
Maybe Frank is more of a leader for this team than I give him credit for!
-
@drgnslayr probably saw it on spectra sports, old twc
-
Source below which includes Vick’s comment about Frank!
http://www2.kusports.com/news/2017/jan/17/tom-keegan-lagerald-vick-interesting-book-quiet-co/?print
-
@drgnslayr yeah there is a lot of stuff we don’t see. From hearing Bill talk, I think he views Frank as the leader despite his non vocal nature.
-
By definition the term conspiracy applies only when more than one individual act together towards an illegal end. If you are acting towards a legal end then it is not a conspiracy…you agree to go to the movies, you team up…you plan…you schedule…you decide…but you don’t conspire…unless he individuals are minors and plan to sneak In to watch an X-rated movie…which is illegal. Using conspiracy when the end is legal is done frequently but still a misuse of the word.
-
verb (used without object), conspired, conspiring.
- to agree together, especially secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal: They conspired to kill the king.
- to act or work together toward the same result or goal.
However… we just don’t hear it in use for anything besides evil.
-
I think Bill sees this as “Frank’s team.”
I think basketball mimics the culture that surrounds it.
Bill is from Oklahoma. People in the Midwest tend to be “independent minded.”
Bill definitely believes in “team defense” and “team offense” but to just a point. His hardcore support for M2M defense is based most on guys being held “personally accountable.” I’m not trying to say there is an extreme difference, but it just feels like he is a blended philosophy of independent responsibilities along with team responsibilities.
Zone defense is very much a dependent, team-flavored defense. I believe one of the positives of playing zone is that it may help players get into more of a team concept and it might even promote higher motivating moments as a team. I think it feels more like “team defense” over M2M, even though there has to be weak side help to some level to be successful at M2M. And, of course, a high-pressure M2M can involve double-team traps, etc.
This is a bit abstract in thinking.
I’m curious how people in here feel and think about it?
-
@drgnslayr I think your view on zone defense is pretty accurate. M2M is entirely predicated on how well guys can guard one on one. If they can’t then M2M isnt for them.
I want Bill to go to it when he has to, but only then. If we can get a W tonight, Saturday and our two road games next week with M2M, then do it. I feel as though we should only use it to throw our opponent off guard at critical moments, such as in an elite eight game. I know this team has the potential to be a really good zone team, but the element of surprise is always something to consider. Now if we are down ten tonight and we can’t get a stop, then of course we try something different. But until then, I say only use it situationally.
-
@HawkChamp I think if we have to protect ll we go zone
-
@Crimsonorblue22 right, but only if we are in danger of losing. If we maintain a 5-10 point lead through the second half, then there is no need to switch.
-
Actually, the best case scenario for tonight might be that we have LL get in foul trouble and we substitute players and shift defense around to accommodate the situation. It’s good practice and experience for us moving forward because we will always battle with post depth the rest of this year.
I want to see Dwight and Mitch rack up some minutes. They need to face tall, quality bigs.
If we can do all of that and still nail the “W” that sounds PERFECT to me!
