If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Inter Lake)   High school football player's suspension for being near marijuana violated his constitutional right to go to college on football scholarship   (dailyinterlake.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, athletic scholarship, preliminary injunction, constitutional rights, Oregon State University, public institutions, citizens of the United States, equal protection, procedural law  
•       •       •

8634 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Oct 2010 at 11:41 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-10-02 10:28:37 PM  
Any court decision against bullshiat Zero Tolerance rules is a good ruling in my book
 
2010-10-02 11:04:21 PM  
This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop? And secondly why is he being punished because one of the passengers in the car had a bowl and probably a dime bag of weed in his backpack that he maybe didn't know that was there? The rule that is being used to remove him from the team is one of those rules that was put in place to punish players for being at parties were drugs and alcohol are being openly used. Using it in this situation is an example of some administrators swinging their dicks and making an example out of this kid.
 
2010-10-02 11:44:15 PM  
Not even in college, and already in trouble? Yeah, he'll go far
 
2010-10-02 11:46:54 PM  
I don't see how the school's drug policy is at all reasonable. How could the kid know that one of his friends had bud on his person?
 
2010-10-02 11:46:57 PM  
ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop? And secondly why is he being punished because one of the passengers in the car had a bowl and probably a dime bag of weed in his backpack that he maybe didn't know that was there? The rule that is being used to remove him from the team is one of those rules that was put in place to punish players for being at parties were drugs and alcohol are being openly used. Using it in this situation is an example of some administrators swinging their dicks and making an example out of this kid.

Yep. Utter bullshiat.

EmployeeOfTheMinute: Not even in college, and already in trouble? Yeah, he'll go far

Stick your attitude up your ignorant ass.
Or, 8/10
 
2010-10-02 11:48:59 PM  
Weee Mary Jane trifecta! A common trifecta as trifectas go, but a trifecta none the less.

/trifecta
 
2010-10-02 11:50:21 PM  
This is a simple fix. In most states, all high school athletes are subject to drug testing without notice. If the kid tests positive for marijuana use, he's off the team. Otherwise, he gets to play.

The lawsuit is right that the rule is too vague. The kid who got cited is out of luck, but the others shouldn't be punished.
 
2010-10-02 11:50:40 PM  
ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Now, this is just a hunch but probably he got pulled over and searched for DWB (driving while black) Just my assumption though.
 
2010-10-02 11:51:23 PM  
"Flathead High School".

We're done here.
 
2010-10-02 11:52:24 PM  
AbbeySomeone:

I'm being serious. He can't keep his nose clean, and he's banking on a football future?
 
2010-10-02 11:52:48 PM  
FMLYHM: ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Now, this is just a hunch but probably he got pulled over and searched for DWB (driving while black) Just my assumption though.


DWT - driving while teenaged
 
2010-10-02 11:54:24 PM  
ArkAngel: Any court decision against bullshiat Zero Tolerance rules is a good ruling in my book

i236.photobucket.com
 
2010-10-02 11:56:44 PM  
EmployeeOfTheMinute: AbbeySomeone:

I'm being serious. He can't keep his nose clean, and he's banking on a football future?


Sounds like he has a great football future ahead of him.

/boring article is boring
 
2010-10-02 11:57:55 PM  
ill say it again and get steamrolled for it,marijuana should be legal. and i wont even try to play it against alcohal. it should be legal just in its own right. there is no solid reason for it to be illegal,just some prejudices against it.
 
2010-10-03 12:00:22 AM  
EmployeeOfTheMinute: AbbeySomeone:

I'm being serious. He can't keep his nose clean, and he's banking on a football future?


For the record, I agree with you. It'd be nice to think he didn't know what the passenger in his car had, but we were all high school students once and I know that probably isn't true.
 
2010-10-03 12:01:06 AM  
FMLYHM: ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Now, this is just a hunch but probably he got pulled over and searched for DWB (driving while black) Just my assumption though.


I found his picture & I think it's safe to say that DWB doesn't apply.

a.espncdn.com
 
2010-10-03 12:04:51 AM  
I don't even think he violated the policy. It just says he cannot be in a place where drugs are being used. Having the drugs tucked inside a container is not active use. Unless they were smoking it right there in the car, I fail to see how this is actionable under their own guidelines.
 
2010-10-03 12:12:15 AM  
He passes a drug test, he gets to play again. If not, he and his mom can go to hell.
 
2010-10-03 12:13:22 AM  
Surool: He passes a drug test, he gets to play again. If not, he and his mom can go to hell.

I'm gonna bet the kid doesn't want that
 
2010-10-03 12:18:19 AM  
Bathia_Mapes: FMLYHM: ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Now, this is just a hunch but probably he got pulled over and searched for DWB (driving while black) Just my assumption though.

I found his picture & I think it's safe to say that DWB doesn't apply.


hahahah the fark race card denied!!
 
2010-10-03 12:18:43 AM  
It's college. You're supposed to do drugs.
 
2010-10-03 12:20:13 AM  
The kid goit popped for pot just like thousands of kids do every year.
Difference here being that his parents were able to afford a good lawyer that found a loophole in the policy that the kid agreed to abide by. Any other person would have faced the same consequences. BS that he's innocent. Maybe he didn't actually puff and pass but he knew what was going on.
The biggest thing here was that he's a star athlete. His parents are counting on him getting a free ride thru college. This would have screwed that up so they figured it was worth the investment to find a good lawyer to figure a way out of it.
Most likely his chance at the free ride is going to be withdrawn over this now anyway. You can bet the college knows all about it and has been following it closely. There's a hundred more kids just like him looking to score the shot.
He's a stupid HS kid. And they are going to do stupid things. That's why there are rules with consequences. He should have followed the rules. He didn't and got caught. Now instead, thanks to his parents and a lawyer. He has learned a valuable lesson.
Money is king. And with it. You can get away with anything.
 
2010-10-03 12:26:32 AM  
DownDaRiver: The kid goit popped for pot just like thousands of kids do every year.
Difference here being that his parents were able to afford a good lawyer that found a loophole in the policy that the kid agreed to abide by. Any other person would have faced the same consequences. BS that he's innocent. Maybe he didn't actually puff and pass but he knew what was going on.
The biggest thing here was that he's a star athlete. His parents are counting on him getting a free ride thru college. This would have screwed that up so they figured it was worth the investment to find a good lawyer to figure a way out of it.
Most likely his chance at the free ride is going to be withdrawn over this now anyway. You can bet the college knows all about it and has been following it closely. There's a hundred more kids just like him looking to score the shot.
He's a stupid HS kid. And they are going to do stupid things. That's why there are rules with consequences. He should have followed the rules. He didn't and got caught. Now instead, thanks to his parents and a lawyer. He has learned a valuable lesson.
Money is king. And with it. You can get away with anything.


Why am I not surprised you're from PA?
It was a bullshiat call to begin with. Good for them for challenging it, and yes, money fixes things.
 
2010-10-03 12:28:05 AM  
DownDaRiver: The kid goit popped for pot just like thousands of kids do every year.
Difference here being that his parents were able to afford a good lawyer that found a loophole in the policy that the kid agreed to abide by. Any other person would have faced the same consequences. BS that he's innocent. Maybe he didn't actually puff and pass but he knew what was going on.


Yeah, clearly if he was driving he must have searched all the other guys' pockets and bags. He must have known one of the other guys had drugs on him. Otherwise how would the car start? He's GUILTY!
 
2010-10-03 12:33:40 AM  
ArkAngel: Any court decision against bullshiat Zero Tolerance rules is a good ruling in my book

THIS. I can't send Lactaid to school with my lactose-intolerant kid, and they can't be bothered to read the label when they give her a snack containing milk. Gee, thanks.
 
2010-10-03 12:40:16 AM  
ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Because (a) when you think you're cleverly hiding your intoxication is exactly when it's really farking obvious and (b) the driver for some reason consented to the search, because he's a dumbass.

And secondly why is he being punished because one of the passengers in the car had a bowl and probably a dime bag of weed in his backpack that he maybe didn't know that was there?


He wasn't charged with anything. He's being punished for having his name come up in a police report and having a friend who's a druggie. It's about the school's reputation more than an impression that he's using himself (though, he's a high-school jock: on that alone the chance he isn't is virtually nil).

The guiding principle in regulations related to PR is "don't get caught". That means that you're in trouble for getting caught up in something by association with the actual violator even as it means that not getting caught for actually doing something is just fine.

The rule that is being used to remove him from the team is one of those rules that was put in place to punish players for being at parties were drugs and alcohol are being openly used. Using it in this situation is an example of some administrators swinging their dicks and making an example out of this kid.

The rule is intended to keep athletes away from crime in general, since they're much more capable of making the school look bad (for some reason) than the average student. Honestly, penalizing them for hanging out with criminals seems like it's entirely in the spirit of such rules. And damn right they're making an example, that's the entire point. Hell, that's 90% of the reason the football team exists in the first place in most schools, to set an example.

While I remember being pretty upset about similar rules when I was that age, in retrospect the schools' paranoia about these things is not entirely unjustified given how they are funded and their various legal vulnerabilities.
 
2010-10-03 12:50:21 AM  
porterm: ill say it again and get steamrolled for it,marijuana should be legal. and i wont even try to play it against alcohal. it should be legal just in its own right. there is no solid reason for it to be illegal,just some prejudices against it.

img25.imageshack.us
 
2010-10-03 12:51:35 AM  
DownDaRiver: BS that he's innocent.

In the country I live in, accused people are considered innocent until they're proven guilty in a court of law.

Most likely

You can bet


Ya know, when someone uses phrases like "most likely" and "you can bet", it just shows that, at the very least, they're lazy thinkers, and usually that they're completely full of feces.
 
2010-10-03 12:54:37 AM  
What a BS policy anyway. I played football when I was 21-23 years old and half the team smoked. I didn't, and I could still go to all the parties and hang out with all the guys and there was no problem ever. When people lit up I would find some air and someone was always ready to assure a suspicious toker that I was "cool".

There were straight edge Mormons, other devout Christians, guys on probation or getting drug tested for some reason who also could not or would not partake, all mixing together socially because our bond as a team superseded the conventions we normally lived with.

I think that's the "evidence" (reason) for this policy - try to keep people with different backgrounds from playing games with your precious children that you think you have control over.
 
2010-10-03 12:56:36 AM  
FTA: Connor Thomas, who was driving the vehicle during a lunchtime break,* denied inhaling marijuana* or owning any of the devices used to smoke it.

His car, they were smoking.


And what does living in PA have anything to do with it.
Pot is everywhere ya frickin idiot.
 
2010-10-03 01:03:51 AM  
I might agree that a high school kid should know what his friends were up to; but I also have to agree with the court's decision on this fine example of a really vague and unreasonable zero-tolerance policy:

The school district's chemical-use policy states that a student cannot use drugs of any kind "or be present for any length of time at a gathering or location where the use of or the possession of drugs is illegally taking place during an activity season."

That is what we in the law biz call "unconstitutionally vague," and the kid's parents and attorney were right to challenge it. It is so poorly worded that ANY athlete at ANY location ANY time could be kicked off the team.

For instance: "any length of time." How long? An hour? A minute? Pulled up at the curb to drop off a friend? "A gathering or location." Really? A "location"? By definition, that could mean that if the student was at one end of the gym, and underage drinking was going on at the other, he would be at the "location" and thus subject to dismissal.

"Use of or possession of drugs." So it doesn't matter if the drugs are being USED in the student's presence, or merely in someone else's possession. Which could mean that the student might not know, unless he interrogates every single person at the "location", if someone might have drugs in his or her possession. And then there's the "illegally taking place" requirement. Seems straightforward?

If there are: Minors present where alcohol being consumed; anyone in possession of prescription narcotics which are not in their prescription bottles; anyone in possession of ANY illegal narcotic; any open containers; any person who gave another person a prescription medication (nobody here has ever done that, right?)--then illegal activity is taking place.

Basically, this unreasonably vague requirement makes it possible to toss any student off of an athletic team if he or she gets caught anywhere someone else gets in trouble; regardless of whether the athlete him/herself was aware anything was going on, and also allows administrators to define what prohibited behavior is after the fact.

So no, I don't think that the school was in the right this time around.
 
2010-10-03 01:04:55 AM  
Jim_Callahan: ongbok: This is crap all the way around. First of all why did the cops search the car and everybody for a simple traffic stop?

Because (a) when you think you're cleverly hiding your intoxication is exactly when it's really farking obvious and (b) the driver for some reason consented to the search, because he's a dumbass.

And secondly why is he being punished because one of the passengers in the car had a bowl and probably a dime bag of weed in his backpack that he maybe didn't know that was there?

He wasn't charged with anything. He's being punished for having his name come up in a police report and having a friend who's a druggie. It's about the school's reputation more than an impression that he's using himself (though, he's a high-school jock: on that alone the chance he isn't is virtually nil).

The guiding principle in regulations related to PR is "don't get caught". That means that you're in trouble for getting caught up in something by association with the actual violator even as it means that not getting caught for actually doing something is just fine.

The rule that is being used to remove him from the team is one of those rules that was put in place to punish players for being at parties were drugs and alcohol are being openly used. Using it in this situation is an example of some administrators swinging their dicks and making an example out of this kid.

The rule is intended to keep athletes away from crime in general, since they're much more capable of making the school look bad (for some reason) than the average student. Honestly, penalizing them for hanging out with criminals seems like it's entirely in the spirit of such rules. And damn right they're making an example, that's the entire point. Hell, that's 90% of the reason the football team exists in the first place in most schools, to set an example.

While I remember being pretty upset about similar rules when I was that age, in retrospect the schools' paranoia about these things is not entirely unjustified given how they are funded and their various legal vulnerabilities.


When you're riding in a car and the police pull you over, and someone else has a dime(even if you didnt know it) you all go do jail and have possesion on your records forever because its 'keeping the streets safe'... when you're sitting in the cell, then you can applaud the system
 
2010-10-03 01:13:23 AM  
DVOM
2010-10-03 12:51:35 AM

Ya know, when someone uses phrases like "most likely" and "you can bet", it just shows that, at the very least, they're lazy thinkers, and usually that they're completely full of feces.

***
Print that statement out. Fold it up and stick it in your pocket. Now carry it with you for the next week. Pull it out every time you or someone with you speaks those words.

Check back next week and let me know how you feel about your statement then.
 
2010-10-03 01:23:23 AM  
Tough sh*t. Suffer for your friends. It's the only way to make people choose better friends, and by extension, the only way to make people stop associating with assholes.

On the flip side, he absolutely knew his friend was carrying, and should have walked away if he wanted a scholarship. Don't b*tch about it now, you useless little nancy. One thousand equally stupid high school jocks waiting to fill your shoes. Should have been more careful.

Basically, either way, f*ck you, kid. You threw away your one chance at the only empty meaningless thing you were sort of good at. Might as well go ahead and knock up a mid-level cheerleader and start working at McD's.
 
2010-10-03 01:27:12 AM  
Did the school overreach? Perhaps.

Was the kid in the wrong? Perhaps.

Is he going to learn his lesson? Perhaps, but leaning towards doubtful.

Does anyone care if this particular snowflake in Montana melts down? (Rhetorical)
 
2010-10-03 01:32:45 AM  
porterm: ill say it again and get steamrolled for it,marijuana should be legal. and i wont even try to play it against alcohal. it should be legal just in its own right. there is no solid reason for it to be illegal,just some prejudices against it.



Oh... and what a very sloooooow world we would have.....

What do you suggest we do with all the people that will just sit home and smoke pot all day.... not working because they don't feel up to it? And don't give that crap about all the productive hardworking pot heads.... they are many more who can't finish half a joint without falling asleep or giggling at Judge Judy all day. There are enough people to support who don't have jobs. And when the drug money runs out, guess who will try to steal your TV to get a few bucks for more pot.
 
2010-10-03 01:32:58 AM  
DownDaRiver: DVOM
2010-10-03 12:51:35 AM

Ya know, when someone uses phrases like "most likely" and "you can bet", it just shows that, at the very least, they're lazy thinkers, and usually that they're completely full of feces.

***
Print that statement out. Fold it up and stick it in your pocket. Now carry it with you for the next week. Pull it out every time you or someone with you speaks those words.

Check back next week and let me know how you feel about your statement then.


No need to wait for next week, I've had a list of those lazy thinking phrases in my "pocket" for a long time. They're used by people who like to make assumptions based on preconceived notions, then they proceed to use those assumptions as "facts".

I've used that list to first: clean up my own thinking, and second: to recognize when someone else blowing smoke.
 
2010-10-03 01:40:37 AM  
You are responsible for knowing what is in your vehicle.

If your friend is a pothead, tell him to leave the stuff in his locker or he can walk. If they are truly his friends, they won't jeopardize his scholarship by carrying while in his car.

And why would he possibly be entitled to $200K for "loss of scholarship"? Who says he's going to even play well in college... or keep his grades up? He plays well in high school to earn the privilege to play on the college's dime. He still has to put effort in and prove he's worthy.
 
2010-10-03 01:56:58 AM  
DVOM
2010-10-03 01:32:58 AM

Ya know, when someone uses phrases like "most likely" and "you can bet", it just shows that, **at the very least**, they're lazy thinkers, **and usually that** they're completely full of feces

***
'at the very least' 'and usually that'

Sounds a lot like two different ways of saying 'most likely' to me.

And someone who needs to keep a list of things to check themselves is either a seriously analy retentive blowhard. Or a complete insecure jackass that feels the constant need to spout out why others should feel see inferior around them.
 
2010-10-03 02:46:32 AM  
Gyrfalcon
Well said, sir.

DownDaRiver 2010-10-03 12:56:36 AM
FTA: Connor Thomas, who was driving the vehicle during a lunchtime break,* denied inhaling marijuana* or owning any of the devices used to smoke it.
His car, they were smoking.


Of COURSE! Since he denied ever smoking the devil herb, you, with your superior skills of deduction simply conclude that it HAD to have been in the process of being consumed just prior to the traffic stop.

tukatz
OMG. The stupid - it hurts - make it stop.
 
2010-10-03 02:47:02 AM  
DownDaRiver: FTA: Connor Thomas, who was driving the vehicle during a lunchtime break,* denied inhaling marijuana* or owning any of the devices used to smoke it.

His car, they were smoking.


Nowhere in the article does it say that anyone in the car was smoking. They were stopped, and they were searched. It's unclear whether any smoking was going on. All we know for sure is that one guy had weed and a pipe. You're making assumptions, unless you've read other articles about the situation.
 
2010-10-03 02:51:49 AM  
TheSignPost: Tough sh*t. Suffer for your friends. It's the only way to make people choose better friends, and by extension, the only way to make people stop associating with assholes.

On the flip side, he absolutely knew his friend was carrying,


How would he know? Do you search all your friends every time they get in a car with you?

There's every chance the guy driving didn't know. The guy holding might have been saving it to have with, say, his girlfriend and so wouldn't have mentioned it so that no one would expect him to share, for example. There's absolutely no reason to assume the driver knew anyone in his car was in possession.
 
2010-10-03 03:06:44 AM  
Huh, If I'd signed that paper my friends would not carry that crap within 20ft of me or we would no longer associate. Lets see the buddy or the college scholarship, lets think real hard on this. I could hang out with this guy or I could graduate with no student debt and name recognition. Hmmm. If he knew his friend was carrying, it violates the spirit of the agreement, if not the actual wording. If he didn't know his friend was carrying, he needs to choose his friends more wisely. I hope the kid wises up.

No pot isn't the devil, but why risk it?
 
2010-10-03 03:27:03 AM  
DVOM:
In the country I live in, accused people are considered innocent until they're proven guilty in a court of law.

Most likely

You can bet


Ya know, when someone uses phrases like "most likely" and "you can bet", it just shows that, at the very least, they're lazy thinkers, and usually that they're completely full of feces.


Good point. You can bet it's most likely nobody will believe you, though.
 
2010-10-03 03:44:38 AM  
tukatz: You are responsible for knowing what is in your vehicle.

If your friend is a pothead, tell him to leave the stuff in his locker or he can walk. If they are truly his friends, they won't jeopardize his scholarship by carrying while in his car.

And why would he possibly be entitled to $200K for "loss of scholarship"? Who says he's going to even play well in college... or keep his grades up? He plays well in high school to earn the privilege to play on the college's dime. He still has to put effort in and prove he's worthy.


Ok, I'll play- Lets try for some reading comprehension - he's not "entitled to" 200K, that's the estimated value of the scholarship this incident could cost him. Your use of the term entitled indicates that he's suing the school / state for this amount, which is not the case- he was simply able to prove the financial cost this will lead to, which is why the judge granted the injunction.

And yes, you are primarily responsible for the contents of your vehicle, but sitting in the drivers seat doesn't grant clearvoyance within the confines of the vehicle, you don't automatically become aware of the full contents of the bags and pockets of all of your passengers, or how where they bought their clothes, or how many sexual partners they've had.

As far as disowning pothead friends, sure, under that kind of absurd policy, one would probably want to do that, but you're assuming the pothead bit - there are no details given regarding the other occupents of the vehicle, or the context in which the substances and object(s) in question were discovered. Of course you assume the worst, because that's what you do, how you like to think, but it's also possible that one of his friends had a gram and a little bowl in his bag because he'd confiscated it from a younger sibling (Friend of mine did that, but got to the end of the school day and home without it being discovered) or maybe one of them bummed a half pack of smokes from a friend not knowing the pack had a couple of joints in it. I'm not saying this is how it is, but I have as much proof for my enterpretation as you do for yours.

And finally, no pothead is going to steal a TV for money to buy more pot. TVs are heavy, man. And breaking and entering? So much work, not to mention a terrible RRR (Risk/Reward Ratio). In fact, I think you'll find most stoners (once you disregard the gainfully empolyed respectable memberos of their community you don't believe exist) work menial jobs in retail or food service to support themselves and their recreational habits, and any who have no income of their own simply mooch. Plus, since pot isn't addictive, so if they're out and can't afford more, they won't go into withdrawl, they'll just whine about it until their situation changes and they can get more (just like when they can afford it, but can't find any to buy)
 
2010-10-03 04:00:31 AM  
tukatz: porterm: ill say it again and get steamrolled for it,marijuana should be legal. and i wont even try to play it against alcohal. it should be legal just in its own right. there is no solid reason for it to be illegal,just some prejudices against it.



Oh... and what a very sloooooow world we would have.....

What do you suggest we do with all the people that will just sit home and smoke pot all day.... not working because they don't feel up to it? And don't give that crap about all the productive hardworking pot heads.... they are many more who can't finish half a joint without falling asleep or giggling at Judge Judy all day. There are enough people to support who don't have jobs. And when the drug money runs out, guess who will try to steal your TV to get a few bucks for more pot.


Because I can't say it any better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRQ-97W2b04 (new window)

And because you probably won't watch that, the transcript:


Randy: I can't get stoned, Ricky.

Ricky: What do you mean? It's shiatty work. Everybody does that, all right? Carpenters, electricians, dishwashers, floor cleaners, lawyers, doctors, farkin' politicians, CBC employees, principals, people who paint the lines on the farkin' roads, get stoned, it'll be fun, get to work!
 
2010-10-03 04:13:21 AM  
porterm: ill say it again and get steamrolled for it,marijuana should be legal. and i wont even try to play it against alcohal. it should be legal just in its own right. there is no solid reason for it to be illegal,just some prejudices against it.

Even if it was legal, it would be treated like alcohol. Teens would still not be able to possess it, and he would still get kicked off the team.
 
2010-10-03 04:27:15 AM  
Uh... Guys.

It's an injunction, not a ruling on the merits.

All the judge is saying is "the original order is stayed until the trial has been decided". In this case, that may represent a victory for the kid (insofar as he'll likely be in college by the time it gets decided if it goes all the way to the SCOTUS), but that isn't the same as "see, zero-tolerance is unconstitutional". The former is victory by simple legal shenanigans, the latter would be a real decision.

Of course, since he's going to have all kinds of bad press, I do wonder what school would want to give him a scholarship now.
 
2010-10-03 09:13:50 AM  
High school football player's suspension for being near marijuana violated his constitutional right to go to college on football scholarshipingest a naturally-occurring plant

Fixed for what it should be.

/not a user
//don't mind if you do
 
2010-10-03 10:05:04 AM  
tolallorti: I don't see how the school's drug policy is at all reasonable. How could the kid know that one of his friends had bud on his person?

Exactly. The driver should not be responsible for things they didn't know their passengers were carrying. I once inadvertently violated the open container laws that way (fortunately we weren't stopped, I only discovered it after the fact.) I knew there was a cooler in the car but I thought it only contained soft drinks. My father-in-law had no idea open container laws exist (they don't where he's from) and saw no reason not to have a few beers in there also.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report