...You blew the title 'cause you've been smokin' weed

insites insight: The best player on the team got popped in a drug test and can't play. Yet he's obviously still the best player on the basketball team regardless of his smoking habits, otherwise they wouldn't blame him for losing the title.



insites insight: First, they tested positive. They weren't caught with red eyes so that means they could have smoked any time in the last 3-28 days. And besides that fact, the majority of people surveyed after reckless driving didn't pop positive. So where's the correlation?

So, what is up with the Ad Council? Do politicians really believe that their constituents aren't intuitive enough to see through these commercials? Is it doublethink being employed to stop people from questioning the government and accept whatever they say as truth wholeheartedly? Bizarre. I honestly don't know what to make of these commercials, they just seem so stupid.

What about the other 2? Looks like potheads have a better record than non-potheads!


Gotta go, I just ran over a girl on a bike at the drive-thru window..............

I don't agree with the second ad, but do with the first. And for very different reasons than the council wants me to.

You are a part of a team. And you know you will be tested. If your dedication to the team is not as important as smoking it up, you don't deserve to play.

I understand your point; however, he's still the best player on the team. If there is obviously no correlation between performance and smoking weed, then why do they even bother testing? You would think the Ad Council made a mistake with that one if people start to question the "hypothetical" risks involved with smoking weed.

It's like they lead the viewer away from the health issues associated with marijuana and create an entirely different problem, a social one, that the Ad Council invented in the first place. In essence, the Council takes you on a looping journey back to the real problem at hand, them. Why? I don't get it. The Ad Council is blaming itself for this team losing the title if you really get to the bare bones of the issue.

[Edited on 4-7-2004 by insite]

I understand youre point also. I'm not focusing on the weed. It could be caffeine, cheeseburgers, whatever. My point is that if you're the star of the basketball team, you should be willing to give up little pleasures, whatever the reason, to help your team. If you aren't willing to give up something you knew in advance was band, you have no business being on that team.

That is my fav one!!!! "I'll have 38 cheeseburgers"......
where do they get this crap???!!!

Yes but still. Little bells should be going off in people's heads. Why do we test these kids? Why do we jeopardize our teams chance of victory by testing kids that obviously aren't at risk of any of the problems associated with marijuana that we have propagated in the past?

Essentially you are right, Esoterica. If this kid was morally just then he should have put his team at a higher priority than a plant. But the truth is, as the Ad Council points out, we should not have to force students to make a decision like that.

[Edited on 4-8-2004 by insite]

They were probaly drunk and driving under the influence of alcohol...

I have to agree with Esoterica on this one NotTooHappy, oops, I mean Insite. The reason being is that even though marijuana might not be as harmful as the other drugs, and the swimmer is the best on the team, but it is still a controlled substance and therefore illegal. When you a part of a team, you have to think of the team when it comes to something like this.

Although, I think they used an extreme example in that commercial: 4 man swim realy. Missing 1 of a 12 man basketball roster or 1 of a 50+ man football team roster wouldn't drive the point home as well.

I do agree with you on the 2nd one though. The person could have smoked as long as a month ago, that does mean that they are a daily smoker if it stays in that long though.

Edit: Sorry NotTooHappy to confuse your post with insite's

[Edited on 4-8-2004 by nyarlathotep]

Did I just spell 'banned' as 'band' .

Anyway, I do agree that the school's that test for weed are shooting themselves in the foot. I do understand why they may be concerned (Marijuana, while maybe not very physically damaging, has screwed up enough people I know mentally and socially, and not due to stigma or anything associated with it, for me to be wary of it even though I have 'experience' with it ). I'd be happy with it being regulated and legalize at an 18-year age level.

Then again, I doubt the pack of Camel's in my coat pocket allows me to comment on other's little vices

nyarlathotep, though the marijuana is illegal, people at home watching should start asking:

"Why is it illegal? We should stop destroying teams over the formalities of a stupid law. If the drug isn't necessarily 'bad' for you, why is it illegal?"

My question is, did the Ad Council dig themselves into this hole on purpose, or do they assume no one will see the obvious discrepencies between applied law and reality?

Smoking weed makes you lazy, clouds ones thoughts, and leads to junk food. If you dont think it clouds your thoughts just read some of the crap ive posted.

I think just being on ATS clouds your thoughts enough, you don't need to be adding to the damage

But it obviously has no effect on how well you play basketball.

Insite, I do agree with you that weed should be legalized, but not everyone should smoke. Dude, I puff, but I think that there should be anti-drug commercials, even for pot.

It think that some people should not smoke marijuana and that it would be good if the commercial prevented a few kids from trying pot.

I mean let's face it, marijuana is the "stepping stone" drug. Most kids you try it go onto to coke and so on. For me, I never did go past that stage and maybe you too, if you do smoke. However, I think that a lot of kids may try other drugs after trying pot.

I guess I am contradicting myself from my other post by saying that weed should be legalized.

I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no harm done in an anti-drug tv commercial

So this shows that people who get high are half as reckless as everyone else. This sounds like a promotion for weed to me.

DC

That's only true if 1/3 of the people who drive smoke pot.

Let's say we've got 90 people (for ease of mathematics).

Using your logic, 30 of them smoke pot and drive, while the other 60 do not. So if we took 9 of the 90 people, 3 of them should test positive.

However, 1/3 of people do not smoke pot. Let's say that 10% (9 people) smoke pot.

This means that out of 9 people tested, only one should come up postive. But no, 3 of them do. Which means you are more likely to be a hazardous driver if you light up.

They teach fractions in school for a reason

I think it makes feel like I'm doin better than I actually am when I play a sport. Im not a pro athlete so the better I feel doin the better off I am.

Maybe thats why the quality of the play in the NBA has gone down as a result of more and more players gettin' high. The refs must be hittin the bong too because traveling violations and missed fouls/bogus fouls are getting more and more prominant.

- I dig your argument

Well, I can tell you having played football and having been recrueted to div 1 schools that weed is really nice AFTER the game. These running backs in big time HS and college teams (much less pros) take a #ing beating - getting tackled 25-40 times a game. After, they are just one big bruise, and weed helps the with the pain. I know it sounds like i'm trying to make it out like thats the only reason - believe me im not - but I do understand why one would use it as an athlete.

BTW - the NBA has BETTER players then ever before - just more teams so talent on eaach team.