For what it’s worth, smoking 1 cigarette is most likely to get you addicted than trying meth once. Obviously different consequences if you get addicted
Thanks tips!
Why even post this?
Smoking one cigarette wont kill you. Doing laced or non laced meth might your first time though! Hard to be an addict if you are dead!
You are comparing nicotine to Meth? Like Meth is the safer choice!
"For what its worth"? Please never speak to children!
The Following User Says Thank You to chubeyr1 For This Useful Post:
Smoking one cigarette wont kill you. Doing laced or non laced meth might your first time though! Hard to be an addict if you are dead!
You are comparing nicotine to Meth? Like Meth is the safer choice!
"For what its worth"? Please never speak to children!
The question was would you do meth for a million. That should be a 100% yes from anyone. Saying meth will kill you the first time is just ridiculous. Unless it's cut with 50% arsenic anyway haha
I’m having a hard time understanding the NHL’s position on this. Back in the ‘80s Ric Nattress was suspended for one year for possession of a “small amount of hash”, and Grant Fuhr was suspended for one year for cocaine possession. But Kusnetsov is suspended for three games, not for possession of an illegal substance but rather for “inappropriate conduct”. I don’t understand why such a big difference. Has the NHL changed its stance on illegal drug use in the interim? If so, why? If not, what’s the rationale? It seems like a wild contradiction to me. Why call it inappropriate conduct? That’s equating illegal drug use to being similar to making a lewd gesture. Seems to me James Wisniewski got more than three games for the lewd gesture he made towards Sean Avery. Weird ruling. Wouldn’t they have been better to just say they don’t have jurisdiction on illegal drug use and not suspend him for any games but help him with rehab instead?
I’m having a hard time understanding the NHL’s position on this. Back in the ‘80s Ric Nattress was suspended for one year for possession of a “small amount of hash”, and Grant Fuhr was suspended for one year for cocaine possession. But Kusnetsov is suspended for three games, not for possession of an illegal substance but rather for “inappropriate conduct”. I don’t understand why such a big difference. Has the NHL changed its stance on illegal drug use in the interim? If so, why? If not, what’s the rationale? It seems like a wild contradiction to me. Why call it inappropriate conduct? That’s equating illegal drug use to being similar to making a lewd gesture. Seems to me James Wisniewski got more than three games for the lewd gesture he made towards Sean Avery. Weird ruling. Wouldn’t they have been better to just say they don’t have jurisdiction on illegal drug use and not suspend him for any games but help him with rehab instead?
My theory is that its more widespread than most people think and the clubs know it, having taken internal steps already. So if they I’m pose big penalties for players caught by outside authorities the players affected will say “what about X - you didn’t do anything to him and he does it too”. I know of pretty solid stories about a few Flames and ex Flames who have had team intervention (to the point of involving Ern).
I’m having a hard time understanding the NHL’s position on this. Back in the ‘80s Ric Nattress was suspended for one year for possession of a “small amount of hash”, and Grant Fuhr was suspended for one year for cocaine possession. But Kusnetsov is suspended for three games, not for possession of an illegal substance but rather for “inappropriate conduct”. I don’t understand why such a big difference. Has the NHL changed its stance on illegal drug use in the interim? If so, why? If not, what’s the rationale? It seems like a wild contradiction to me. Why call it inappropriate conduct? That’s equating illegal drug use to being similar to making a lewd gesture. Seems to me James Wisniewski got more than three games for the lewd gesture he made towards Sean Avery. Weird ruling. Wouldn’t they have been better to just say they don’t have jurisdiction on illegal drug use and not suspend him for any games but help him with rehab instead?
It is basically because he lied to the NHL and Caps organization when the cocaine video came out. They took him at his word that he left the room and didn't do the drugs in the video and the he would never do drugs. A couple of weeks later he tests positive for cocaine. Made them look like fools.
The NHL can't suspend a player just because he tests positive for cocaine. But they can definitely suspend a player for lying or making the league look bad.
Last edited by sureLoss; 09-14-2019 at 04:07 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
The question was would you do meth for a million. That should be a 100% yes from anyone. Saying meth will kill you the first time is just ridiculous. Unless it's cut with 50% arsenic anyway haha
You’re making quite the value judgment. There are a great number of things people wouldn’t do for money, and fear of death is far from the only reason.
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
You’re making quite the value judgment. There are a great number of things people wouldn’t do for money, and fear of death is far from the only reason.
There is no fear of death. Hell for a million bucks get a chemist to make you some clean stuff with a team of doctors standing bye haha
The NHL can't suspend a player just because he tests positive for cocaine. But they can definitely suspend a player for lying or making the league look bad.
Fuhr was suspended for a year for testing positive for cocaine though. Has the NHL changed their regulations/stance somewhere along the line?