Tim Lincecum Caught With Marijuana

[seitas]

What people do on their own affecting nobody else is their business to me.

What bothers me most about illegal drugs is the violence and problems it causes in other countries (especially Mexico and Latin America), and this includes pot.

I definitely agree. Not just because of the violence in Mexico/Latin/South America, but knowing that some drug money funds terrorist activity. I don't know if that's a true (or as big as portrayed) thing, or if it was just put out by the war on drugs, but the thought alone bothers me.

The ***** trade helps fund middle eastern terror cells. marijuana is prevalent in mexican criminal activity/gangs. And yes some of them are infiltrating american borders and growing and polluting in our national parks. Legalization of marijuana would all but make them irrelevant and eliminate the black market and their ability to profit off of it.

 

[card-treasury]

Can somebody please smoke this thread?

 

[predatorkj]

Am I the only person who finds it hysterical that the guy who seems to have the biggest problem with weed on this post (predatorkj) is a huge Bagwell collector?

He is not a known PED user.I personally believe he did use them and for that, yes I do think he was a *******.If it ever came about that he was using them...I would have no problem whatsoever saying it either and you can quote me on that buddy!

But I also collect many players for what they did on the field not off it.I have never heard of a player using on the field and since I have no idea where to draw the line on what was enhanced and what was not, performance wise, I will never know exactly how god they were.I collect Bagwell because I watched him growing up and love his swing.Is there anything else you feel you need to know about me?

 

[predatorkj]

Honestly, just plain stupidity on his part for smoking while driving and speeding...

But then again, its not like he was doing crack or meth. Its weed..

But that is the danger with weed. It's not that harmful by itself, but it is a gateway drug and can lead to the use of more dangerous illicit drugs.

LOL, I'm not even going to touch that one. Totally false and unsubstantiated claim.

Psychological studies have shown that the typically progression is: alcohol -> marijuana -> other illicit drugs.

It has substantiation.

EDIT: I can find a few publications if you need them. I have no opinion on whether marijuana should be legal or not and I'm not against its recreational use whatsoever.

You are confusing a correlation between users of various drugs with causation. There is absolutely no evidence that marijauna is a gateway drug that causes use of other drugs any more than getting out of the bed in the morning is a gateway to anything that happens during the day. Obviously most people who have used harder drugs started out on softer drugs, but concluding that the softer drugs are a causative agent of hard drug use is ridiculous.

The users of marijuana who go on to harder drugs constitutes a vast minority of marijana smokers.

Honestly...oddly enough...I have to agree with this.From what I have read...he is right on.

 

[predatorkj]

This thread is just further proof of how misinformed the general public is about marijuana and drugs in general.

I agree 100%.

Some of the idiotic things I have read in this thread are just hilarious. The scary part is people actually believe it.

Guess what people, at one time it was legal to OWN a black man. It was also legal to go out in the street and have a duel ending in death.

It was also illegal to have a drink at the end of the day, drive faster than 55mph, and now it's illegal to download a song you like and don't want to spend $15 on a cd.

Those who blindly follow all laws are actually doing their country a disservice. You should make decisions for yourself and then, if possible, fight for what you believe in.

I have smoked a LOT. I've drank a LOT. The alcohol led for far more problems than any joint. Now I only drink once every few weeks but still smoke frequently. I have a beautiful wife, a degree from a good university, and a solid entry level job that looks great on a resume. I've saved thousands of dollars in the last few months and paid off a very large portion of my student loans. I've purchased hundreds of sacks over the years from all sorts of people and never once got anything "laced".

I don't think it's a good idea to wake up every morning with a bowl and be lazy all day but one at the end of the day is a much better idea than stopping at a bar and having a few drinks then driving home. I'm sure some of you will lose respect for me after reading this but you are probably the same people that will do whatever the "authorities" tell you to do no matter what.

Lets just say...I'll do whatever keeps my ass out of jail or without a fine.Now if that isn't a worry for you then that is your deal.But don't think I am a *******, or anyone else for that matter, for trying to follow the law and keep out of trouble.

So isn't it very hypocritical of you to call everyone who smokes pot a *******, yet you collect Bagwell a known PED user.

Nope.I have done some ******* things at times and will admit that.Should I disown myself?Have I disowned anybody here?I am still talking to all of you right?I don't run away from people because I don't agree with them.But I will speak up.

Based on what you are saying...I shouldn't collect anybody who has ever played the game because at one point or time they may have done something dumb.Please...find another argument.

 

[predatorkj]

What people do on their own affecting nobody else is their business to me.

What bothers me most about illegal drugs is the violence and problems it causes in other countries (especially Mexico and Latin America), and this includes pot.

I definitely agree. Not just because of the violence in Mexico/Latin/South America, but knowing that some drug money funds terrorist activity. I don't know if that's a true (or as big as portrayed) thing, or if it was just put out by the war on drugs, but the thought alone bothers me.

Now honestly...I think the weed supports terror(and I have seen the slogans) is bull crap.I know in some small way it might to a degree but to insist it has a huge impact and that by worldwide stoppage, it would negatively impact any terrorist organization is dumb.That was political the whole way through.

 

[AKT74]

Am I the only person who finds it hysterical that the guy who seems to have the biggest problem with weed on this post (predatorkj) is a huge Bagwell collector?

He is not a known PED user.I personally believe he did use them and for that, yes I do think he was a *******.If it ever came about that he was using them...I would have no problem whatsoever saying it either and you can quote me on that buddy!

But I also collect many players for what they did on the field not on it.I have never heard of a player using on the field and since I have no idea where to draw the line on what was enhanced and what was not, performance wise, I will never know exactly how god they were.I collect Bagwell because I watched him growing up and love his swing.Is there anything else you feel you need to know about me?

Well guys this sums it up. As you can see there is no debating this guy. He is correct no matter what and you are wrong, and you should just admit he is the smartest guy EVER.

Dude I want to know nothing about you, you have proven yourself to be very uneducated and someone who is not willing to learn or admit when wrong. I am sure when you get out of your teens you will realize the world is full of people who disagree and can INTELLIGENTLY debate things without name calling and the inabillity to see the other persons side.

 

[predatorkj]

It's weed, not acid or any other hallucinogen.

Although I see your point and obviously pot doesn't make you hallucinate, but technically alters your reality (although not a lot in relative terms) and has some of the properties of a hallucinogen.

It's actually more hallucinogen than a depressant, stimulate, barbiturate, etc...

Just a little fact.

To quote:

A recent study of long term effects of Marijuana use has also correlated smoking marijuana with an increased risk of psychotic behavior, with a greater risk for heavy users.(Moore et al., 2007).

 

[predatorkj]

Am I the only person who finds it hysterical that the guy who seems to have the biggest problem with weed on this post (predatorkj) is a huge Bagwell collector?

He is not a known PED user.I personally believe he did use them and for that, yes I do think he was a *******.If it ever came about that he was using them...I would have no problem whatsoever saying it either and you can quote me on that buddy!

But I also collect many players for what they did on the field not on it.I have never heard of a player using on the field and since I have no idea where to draw the line on what was enhanced and what was not, performance wise, I will never know exactly how god they were.I collect Bagwell because I watched him growing up and love his swing.Is there anything else you feel you need to know about me?

Well guys this sums it up. As you can see there is no debating this guy. He is correct no matter what and you are wrong, and you should just admit he is the smartest guy EVER.

Dude I want to know nothing about you, you have proven yourself to be very uneducated and someone who is not willing to learn or admit when wrong. I am sure when you get out of your teens you will realize the world is full of people who disagree and can INTELLIGENTLY debate things without name calling and the inabillity to see the other persons side.

Get out of my teens?Dude...I am not a teenager and I own my house.I am an adult in all manners of the word.

I never said I was the smartest person ever.This is getting ridiculous.Basically I responded to your argument and now, since you have nothing else to say, you feel the only thing to do is start attacking me on another level.Is that really the best you can do?Seriously?That's it?I expected a little more.At least a few of these guys gave me a little bit more of a challenge.Arguing with you leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[AKT74]

Am I the only person who finds it hysterical that the guy who seems to have the biggest problem with weed on this post (predatorkj) is a huge Bagwell collector?

He is not a known PED user.I personally believe he did use them and for that, yes I do think he was a *******.If it ever came about that he was using them...I would have no problem whatsoever saying it either and you can quote me on that buddy!

But I also collect many players for what they did on the field not on it.I have never heard of a player using on the field and since I have no idea where to draw the line on what was enhanced and what was not, performance wise, I will never know exactly how god they were.I collect Bagwell because I watched him growing up and love his swing.Is there anything else you feel you need to know about me?

Well guys this sums it up. As you can see there is no debating this guy. He is correct no matter what and you are wrong, and you should just admit he is the smartest guy EVER.

Dude I want to know nothing about you, you have proven yourself to be very uneducated and someone who is not willing to learn or admit when wrong. I am sure when you get out of your teens you will realize the world is full of people who disagree and can INTELLIGENTLY debate things without name calling and the inabillity to see the other persons side.

Get out of my teens?Dude...I am not a teenager and I own my house.I am an adult in all manners of the word.

I never said I was the smartest person ever.This is getting ridiculous.Basically I responded to your argument and now, since you have nothing else to say, you feel the only thing to do is start attacking me on another level.Is that really the best you can do?Seriously?That's it?I expected a little more.At least a few of these guys gave me a little bit more of a challenge.Arguing with you leaves a lot to be desired.

Sorry but you sure came off as someone in their teens. What you don't seem to understand is that this is not a black/white issue. It is an open to debate. However when you start your first post calling anyone that supports weed a ******* you have just lost all credability and have taken your debating skills down to the level of a teenager.

PS please learn that you should double space at the end of a sentence, your typing is starting to give me a headache.

 

[rico08]

I actually am not backwoods but thanks for being an a-hole about it.Figures it would be some California jerk to say something like that.Luckily I know that you don't represent your state entirely.I'd hate to think a such a large state was filled with idiots.

As far as what you said about the conflicting studies...once again we have reading comprehension problems.I said that from what I see, the evidence shown in the textbook only seems to be provable stuff.Things that are a little more black and white.Not too much conjecture and the book has been really good about bringing up alternative viewpoints on all subjects.Oddly enough while I see a myriad array of other subjects(some as sensitive as homosexuality)there is always different viewpoints offered and the book is fairly new and up to date. In every case where there seems to be some disagreement on the actual knowledge of a subject, there are always both sides or at least more than one side represented.This is why I figure it gives a pretty even view of things.If something is up for debate the author always notes it.And this is the kind of book or study I would look for when basing a personal decision.But my decision was not derived from just this book and I am a little tired of being told it was.

Now like I said, if you guys want to say there is another side to the coin then I will agree there is.But whether or not it is solid is where I don't agree.

I called it back-woods logic because of thing you've said:
"I have a psychology book in front of me right now that proves you wrong...."
"It can cause you to go to jail, lose your job...maybe keep you from getting a job.There is nothing particularly cool about it and the only, AND I MEAN ONLY, people who advocate using it recreationally are the ******* potheads who like to smoke it.They have no good cause to use it nor do they have any good cause for it to be legal other than their own motivations.Its called dope for a reason."
"Maybe you don't understand what weed does to you.Its just like drinking except its a little quicker than that.It impairs you.It also can cause hallucinations and if used heavily, psychotic behavior."
"Plus...most people don't drink as fast as they smoke...so how the hell is it worse than alcohol.You smoke a joint faster and therefore can become impaired faster."
"I am no expert myself but I just finished the chapter and had a test over the info on drugs.Its very fresh in my mind.Some of the things people are saying is idiotic."
"They all say the same old worn out dumb, incorrect lines.Its like a gag reel in here."
"No son, I have invested in an education.Something you obviously are too "high" to have gotten.I read about it, and you just spout BS.And I have called you on it."
"Ever had a ******* shoot a round from a handgun off on accident right next door while you were sleeping?I have.Then you go out to find out what happened and they are high as kites.Yeah...that kind of shat makes me hate weed and makes me pretty damn mad at people who think its not harmful."
"This is a college textbook with facts backed up by research in it."
"I have never seen weed do a damn thing for anybody let alone a good thing for anybody."
"this and this alone ought to prove my point: If you do weed and know that it can cause you to lose your job or cause legal trouble for you...doesn't that sound like a dumb thing to do?"
"So knowing that these can be the consequences...you would still contend that its okay?No worries?That in itself speaks volumes."
"They were fooling around with a gun and , of all things, had it loaded.They thought it was hilarious and as soon as I walked outside...I could smell it.I went over anyways to see if anyone got hurt.Luckily nobody did."
"Instead of just shooting your mouth off...go read a book.And not the kind you are obviously reading."

And on and on.

Anyway, you're basing your point of view from either unreliable or flat out wrong information. Whether you can admit that to yourself is another thing, but you sound pretty satisfied being misinformed.

 

[rico08]

To quote:

A recent study of long term effects of Marijuana use has also correlated smoking marijuana with an increased risk of psychotic behavior, with a greater risk for heavy users.(Moore et al., 2007).

Any college level psychology course worth paying for will teach you that correlation does not mean causation.

It would be interesting to note what the study defined as a "heavy user."

 

[predatorkj]

Am I the only person who finds it hysterical that the guy who seems to have the biggest problem with weed on this post (predatorkj) is a huge Bagwell collector?

He is not a known PED user.I personally believe he did use them and for that, yes I do think he was a *******.If it ever came about that he was using them...I would have no problem whatsoever saying it either and you can quote me on that buddy!

But I also collect many players for what they did on the field not on it.I have never heard of a player using on the field and since I have no idea where to draw the line on what was enhanced and what was not, performance wise, I will never know exactly how god they were.I collect Bagwell because I watched him growing up and love his swing.Is there anything else you feel you need to know about me?

Well guys this sums it up. As you can see there is no debating this guy. He is correct no matter what and you are wrong, and you should just admit he is the smartest guy EVER.

Dude I want to know nothing about you, you have proven yourself to be very uneducated and someone who is not willing to learn or admit when wrong. I am sure when you get out of your teens you will realize the world is full of people who disagree and can INTELLIGENTLY debate things without name calling and the inabillity to see the other persons side.

Get out of my teens?Dude...I am not a teenager and I own my house.I am an adult in all manners of the word.

I never said I was the smartest person ever.This is getting ridiculous.Basically I responded to your argument and now, since you have nothing else to say, you feel the only thing to do is start attacking me on another level.Is that really the best you can do?Seriously?That's it?I expected a little more.At least a few of these guys gave me a little bit more of a challenge.Arguing with you leaves a lot to be desired.

Sorry but you sure came off as someone in their teens. What you don't seem to understand is that this is not a black/white issue. It is an open to debate. However when you start your first post calling anyone that supports weed a ******* you have just lost all credability and have taken your debating skills down to the level of a teenager.

PS please learn that you should double space at the end of a sentence, your typing is starting to give me a headache.

I know its not a black and white issue as a whole. I just think that based on what a lot of you are saying...you really don't have a good argument. I am also tired of people acting like its okay to use it because THEY think it is because they use it. I have already said it but I will say it again: most people who use tend to follow a pack mentality and never really give a good reason but never really have to because they tear into somebody who doesn't agree.Well if that is the case feel free to tear in to me.I don't care.But I am not going to sit here and keep my mouth shut because you don't like it.

 

[andyduke86]

I actually am not backwoods but thanks for being an a-hole about it.Figures it would be some California jerk to say something like that.Luckily I know that you don't represent your state entirely.I'd hate to think a such a large state was filled with idiots.

As far as what you said about the conflicting studies...once again we have reading comprehension problems.I said that from what I see, the evidence shown in the textbook only seems to be provable stuff.Things that are a little more black and white.Not too much conjecture and the book has been really good about bringing up alternative viewpoints on all subjects.Oddly enough while I see a myriad array of other subjects(some as sensitive as homosexuality)there is always different viewpoints offered and the book is fairly new and up to date. In every case where there seems to be some disagreement on the actual knowledge of a subject, there are always both sides or at least more than one side represented.This is why I figure it gives a pretty even view of things.If something is up for debate the author always notes it.And this is the kind of book or study I would look for when basing a personal decision.But my decision was not derived from just this book and I am a little tired of being told it was.

Now like I said, if you guys want to say there is another side to the coin then I will agree there is.But whether or not it is solid is where I don't agree.

I called it back-woods logic because of thing you've said:
"I have a psychology book in front of me right now that proves you wrong...."
"It can cause you to go to jail, lose your job...maybe keep you from getting a job.There is nothing particularly cool about it and the only, AND I MEAN ONLY, people who advocate using it recreationally are the ******* potheads who like to smoke it.They have no good cause to use it nor do they have any good cause for it to be legal other than their own motivations.Its called dope for a reason."
"Maybe you don't understand what weed does to you.Its just like drinking except its a little quicker than that.It impairs you.It also can cause hallucinations and if used heavily, psychotic behavior."
"Plus...most people don't drink as fast as they smoke...so how the hell is it worse than alcohol.You smoke a joint faster and therefore can become impaired faster."
"I am no expert myself but I just finished the chapter and had a test over the info on drugs.Its very fresh in my mind.Some of the things people are saying is idiotic."
"They all say the same old worn out dumb, incorrect lines.Its like a gag reel in here."
"No son, I have invested in an education.Something you obviously are too "high" to have gotten.I read about it, and you just spout BS.And I have called you on it."
"Ever had a ******* shoot a round from a handgun off on accident right next door while you were sleeping?I have.Then you go out to find out what happened and they are high as kites.Yeah...that kind of shat makes me hate weed and makes me pretty damn mad at people who think its not harmful."
"This is a college textbook with facts backed up by research in it."
"I have never seen weed do a damn thing for anybody let alone a good thing for anybody."
"this and this alone ought to prove my point: If you do weed and know that it can cause you to lose your job or cause legal trouble for you...doesn't that sound like a dumb thing to do?"
"So knowing that these can be the consequences...you would still contend that its okay?No worries?That in itself speaks volumes."
"They were fooling around with a gun and , of all things, had it loaded.They thought it was hilarious and as soon as I walked outside...I could smell it.I went over anyways to see if anyone got hurt.Luckily nobody did."
"Instead of just shooting your mouth off...go read a book.And not the kind you are obviously reading."

And on and on.

Anyway, you're basing your point of view from either unreliable or flat out wrong information. Whether you can admit that to yourself is another thing, but you sound pretty satisfied being misinformed.

haha, great post.

 

[predatorkj]

I actually am not backwoods but thanks for being an a-hole about it.Figures it would be some California jerk to say something like that.Luckily I know that you don't represent your state entirely.I'd hate to think a such a large state was filled with idiots.

As far as what you said about the conflicting studies...once again we have reading comprehension problems.I said that from what I see, the evidence shown in the textbook only seems to be provable stuff.Things that are a little more black and white.Not too much conjecture and the book has been really good about bringing up alternative viewpoints on all subjects.Oddly enough while I see a myriad array of other subjects(some as sensitive as homosexuality)there is always different viewpoints offered and the book is fairly new and up to date. In every case where there seems to be some disagreement on the actual knowledge of a subject, there are always both sides or at least more than one side represented.This is why I figure it gives a pretty even view of things.If something is up for debate the author always notes it.And this is the kind of book or study I would look for when basing a personal decision.But my decision was not derived from just this book and I am a little tired of being told it was.

Now like I said, if you guys want to say there is another side to the coin then I will agree there is.But whether or not it is solid is where I don't agree.

I called it back-woods logic because of thing you've said:
"I have a psychology book in front of me right now that proves you wrong...."
"It can cause you to go to jail, lose your job...maybe keep you from getting a job.There is nothing particularly cool about it and the only, AND I MEAN ONLY, people who advocate using it recreationally are the ******* potheads who like to smoke it.They have no good cause to use it nor do they have any good cause for it to be legal other than their own motivations.Its called dope for a reason."
"Maybe you don't understand what weed does to you.Its just like drinking except its a little quicker than that.It impairs you.It also can cause hallucinations and if used heavily, psychotic behavior."
"Plus...most people don't drink as fast as they smoke...so how the hell is it worse than alcohol.You smoke a joint faster and therefore can become impaired faster."
"I am no expert myself but I just finished the chapter and had a test over the info on drugs.Its very fresh in my mind.Some of the things people are saying is idiotic."
"They all say the same old worn out dumb, incorrect lines.Its like a gag reel in here."
"No son, I have invested in an education.Something you obviously are too "high" to have gotten.I read about it, and you just spout BS.And I have called you on it."
"Ever had a ******* shoot a round from a handgun off on accident right next door while you were sleeping?I have.Then you go out to find out what happened and they are high as kites.Yeah...that kind of shat makes me hate weed and makes me pretty damn mad at people who think its not harmful."
"This is a college textbook with facts backed up by research in it."
"I have never seen weed do a damn thing for anybody let alone a good thing for anybody."
"this and this alone ought to prove my point: If you do weed and know that it can cause you to lose your job or cause legal trouble for you...doesn't that sound like a dumb thing to do?"
"So knowing that these can be the consequences...you would still contend that its okay?No worries?That in itself speaks volumes."
"They were fooling around with a gun and , of all things, had it loaded.They thought it was hilarious and as soon as I walked outside...I could smell it.I went over anyways to see if anyone got hurt.Luckily nobody did."
"Instead of just shooting your mouth off...go read a book.And not the kind you are obviously reading."

And on and on.

Anyway, you're basing your point of view from either unreliable or flat out wrong information. Whether you can admit that to yourself is another thing, but you sound pretty satisfied being misinformed.

Oh...sorry that you don't like the way I speak.Remind me to pm you later and get a crash course on how I should write my posts from now on so I don't seem backwoods.Sorry for the problems I ahve caused.

And I'd sure like to know...what exactly and where exactly should I get my information.Please do tell.I had no idea you knew where all the good info is kept.I must have missed it somewhere.

By the way...I do have a book in front of me and the reason it was brought up at all was because I was doing my homework and it was relevant to the discussion.And I hate to bring this up again but I really do trust a textbook more.Sorry if that sounds stupid.

 

[Card Magnet]

Jeez, you guys need to light one up and relax...

 

[predatorkj]

To quote:

A recent study of long term effects of Marijuana use has also correlated smoking marijuana with an increased risk of psychotic behavior, with a greater risk for heavy users.(Moore et al., 2007).

Any college level psychology course worth paying for will teach you that correlation does not mean causation.

It would be interesting to note what the study defined as a "heavy user."

And...your point?I just agreed with Andyduke on as much.I am not implying this is the cause but surely its relevant.

 

[Johnny G]

This is still going on huh? I think I'll pop a handful of muscle relaxers and post a bit.

 

[rico08]

Oh...sorry that you don't like the way I speak.Remind me to pm you later and get a crash course on how I should write my posts from now on so I don't seem backwoods.Sorry for the problems I ahve caused.

And I'd sure like to know...what exactly and where exactly should I get my information.Please do tell.I had no idea you knew where all the good info is kept.I must have missed it somewhere.

By the way...I do have a book in front of me and the reason it was brought up at all was because I was doing my homework and it was relevant to the discussion.And I hate to bring this up again but I really do trust a textbook more.Sorry if that sounds stupid.

No, no. Reading comprehension: the things you've said, not how you speak. Besides being afraid of the space bar, you're fine. Do you turn in homework without spaces too?

You're clearly entrenched in your opinion. Anything you read that supports your opinion you like. Anything that goes against your opinion you reject. Or call idiotic. Or a California jerk.

 

[bodiaz]

[quote="Card Magnet":35kdi32x]When weed starts to improve your physique and gives you an edge, I'll view it as negatively as I do steroids.

You are missing the point.

There are many things that are performance enhancing. Let's start with water. A severely dehydrated player would definitely not perform at peak level. You can throw protein powder, watching tapes, lifting weights, etc. into the mix.

So, how do we decide what is acceptable for an athlete to use?

1) Whether it's illegal or not. If it's illegal, an athlete shouldn't use it.
2) Whether the MLB has a strict policy against it or not.

#2 was missing for the 1990's and the early part of the 2000's as evidenced by the fact there were no baseball sanctions in place against steroid use. So, the argument people used to nail guys like Bonds and other early users of steroids was the fact they were doing something illegal. And, as I noted at the time, if you want to attack players using that argument, that's fine. But, that means we should bring the hammer down on players who do anything illegal, like Lincecum in this case. That is what bodiaz is getting at.

Man, as always, exactly right! I wish I could express it as well as you do! It gets so frustrating arguing with these guys because they don't get it! They always act like steriods is some magic pill, and call it "cheating" even though there was no penalty against it. They rather stick up for a lazy, hippy lettuce wearing, unshaven pothead, (probably because they can relate) and dog the guy that puts 8 hours a night in the gym for "cheating"! Unreal how clueless some of these people are!

Steroids illegal in 1991. Regardless of if a penalty was layed out for it, they were illegal.

The fact also is that marijuana doesn't have a direct impact on increasing a player's physical limits. PEDs do.Your argument just makes you sound like an angry old man yelling about nonsense just because the "damn kids" are different. By the way, young pot smokers aren't really hippies - that's a thing of the past, and a pot smoker isn't a hippie. There's much more that makes a person a hippie. Do you often sit on your porch and tell people to get off your lawn?

One more thing on Lincecum - he is clean shaven isn't he?

I don't care if a person puts in 23 hours in at the gym every day - a PED gives them more than they actually earned.

All of that being said, he of course deserves to be punished since it's illegal.[/quote:35kdi32x]



This is not true! It is likely that Lincy burns a blunt before he pitches to calm his nerves. If so, that enhances his performance illegally. Fans for the most part won't have a problem with that because they can relate, being lazy potheads themselves. Makes the player a "regular guy", and fans like that, see Mickey Mantle! Fans cannot relate to guys like Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds because they have no idea how difficult it is to stay on a strict diet on and off season, and train 8 hours a day all year long. It makes fans feel bad about themselves because they KNOW they would never have the discipline to be that dedicated to anything! So the cry "cheater", and try to bring down accomplishments that they would never be capable of achieving. Makes them feel better about themselves.