I'm saying your analogies are wrong when you look at the explanation you yourself provided to them, which I also quoted, as they made no sense to the discussion. I am not implying that no one has ever been hurt on a track with drugs being a factor at all (please don't misrepresent again, it's getting old) in fact I've asked repeatedly for examples which, if they do exist, are all top secret, ssshhhhhh!
Based on visiting presumably every speedway track but the one that this discussion relates to.
Besides, do you or anyone else really believe that a racer could be competing under the influence of Heroin, Cocaine, LSD, Ecstacy or Meth without it being blaringly obvious to all without the need for a test? Dunno 'bout you cunts but I can usually spot a junkie or a tweaker a lot easier than someone who's had a puff on a doob.
If it has happened, it's not public knowledge. Further, as a non member of any race club I wouldn't tell you if I knew of any.
You can go searching for coroners reports from accidents in the racing arena, I dunno how public they are. Think ya have to have an interest before you can get them though.
You won't get fuck all out of me, other than a smile and a middle finger.
I'm not really pressing you for examples as such, it was something I asked of the poster who suggested that smoking Cannabis, even 6 weeks prior to an event, somehow compromises the sport. The silence from said member is deafening, I assume he's just another drama queen with fuck all like yourself.
Now who's comprehension is lacking?
You don't have a leg to stand on. Get it through the haze and your thick skull.
Because it's illegal to smoke weed, any grievance you or anyone has regarding the testing thereof doesn't have to be taken seriously. And that's just to start. Every other thing you've decided is pro your side of the argument, doesn't excuse the use in the first place.
There are no 'rights' being overlooked, because acting in conflict with not only laws but terms of a signed contract are the prevailing issues.
Please do me a favour read the following four quotes from very recent posts. They are in the correct sequence & are not misrepresented...
WTF? And you're on the "anti-drug" side of the discussion.
You know, on a legal basis I wouldn't be surprised if you were correct. Still doesn't make it right though.Originally Posted by Drew
Have any accidents occurred due to drug impaired racers? Undoubtedly so.
Have I got any examples? No, unless a fatality occurs or a serious injury is being protested and investigated, no one will find out. If it was found out I can bet my left nut no racing organisation wants that info to be well known that they allowed a drug impaired racer on the track.
Not every A class drug user is a crack head. Some heavy drug users can just take a hit every now and then. Have you ever met anyone who is drug free Sunday through Thursday then when they go to town or out partying they do a rail of cocaine or if their mates are doing a few hits of P they grab a needle.
People will want to take drugs before racing, whether to calm their nerves or enhance the buzz.
No one has the right to smoke, there is no right being infringed by urine testing. You have a right to privacy sure, but why is the burden on the organisation to ensure people can partake in illegal activities?
If weed didn't last longer than the buzz in your system, what type of test would you recommend be used?
Urine test is the obvious answer to screen for every drug. Why should the ideal test now be thrown out in favor of a less accurate indicator of all drugs just to allow people to smoke weed?
But by opting for the piss test you're eliminating anyone who may have been impaired to any level within the six weeks or more prior. The test exceeds the requirements.
Again, the reference to needles. Do you seriously think that when you go to the track & you're amongst your peers that you're amongst hyper dermic drug-users? I've been around a little while & I'm yet to come across anyone who has a few hits of P through a syringe and in all my years I've only ever heard third-party reference to cocaine use. Look up some stats, you're waffling on about drug issues that simply don't exist in this country on any significant scale.Originally Posted by haydes55
So use a test that is more relevant to identifying impairment at the time of the sample being taken then if drugs before racing is the issue.Originally Posted by haydes55
There is no burden to ensure people can partake in illegal activities, just as there is probably no burden to drug test in the first place, other than for a duty of care which should be track-safety oriented rather than a lifestyle qualification. The NZ Police do not conduct roadside random piss testing for Cannabis, are they therefore "ensuring people can partake in illegal activities"?Originally Posted by haydes55
Out of the options being discussed here, the same one I'm recommending now.Originally Posted by haydes55
So don't throw it out, I can see how convenient it is from an administrative and cost perspective. A compromise might be to offer an optional mouth swab test at the cost of the racer, to be taken at the same time as the piss sample. Kind of like Drew's suggestion earlier, but less retarded. If they fail the piss test for THC but pass the mouth swab test, perhaps leniency could be applied, all at no cost to the organisation and in the interests of safety & fairness to competitors who may have had an innocent puff of on a Class-C marijuana cigarette some 6 weeks prior?Originally Posted by haydes55
NZDDA will love it! Their sales just went up by 20%. It should stop the moaning within the ranks & I'll shut the fuck up.
What ya reckon?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks