Law weighs in on DUI

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Post Reply
greenback44
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 11671
Joined: June 26 06, 8:54 pm
Location: In a Small Town with Jack and Diane

Post by greenback44 »

Popeye_Card wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
He then presents this false choice, accept alcohol rehabilitation or resign. In what world are those the only two options? And if TLR has no alcohol problem his choice is "or resign?" Offering up that dichotomy is an insidious way to imply that TLR has an alcohol problem, a conclusion that there is no evidence to support. But why wouldn't he, if alchohol abuse is so rampant among MLB? Guilty by association.
Yeah, exactly what good with alcohol rehab do for Tony LaRussa? Does he have a drinking problem? I assume no.
I'd put the likelihood of TLR having a drinking problem at something less than 10%. TLR has it so good though that that probability of a drinking problem likely represents the most serious threat to his well-being. I don't know whether he needs help but I know he needed help a week ago. TLR is such a preparation freak that I'd like to think he'd welcome assistance from the most qualified sources just to ensure he is on the right track.

Online
User avatar
ghostrunner
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 28729
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Post by ghostrunner »

skmsw wrote:
The only reason I brought that up before is because it's pertinent to the issue of him falling asleep which Law and ot some sort of proof of just how drunk he was
I think the proof of "how drunk he was" (and of how likely it is that fatigue did or did not play a factor in his "falling asleep") comes from the police report, according to which he couldn't say the alphabet, stand up straight, speak without slurring, or make his eyes both move in the same direction at the same time.
It's simply understandable and relatable in this case
You see it differently than I do, and I'm OK with that, but from my vantage point, no matter who he is (e.g. this could be on the social forum about the guy who lives up the street from me), having a BAL of .09 some three to four hours after his last drink, passing out in traffic with the engine running and the car in gear, being difficult to revive when found, and showing the symptoms I noted above, is not simple, is not understandable, is not relatable. You see it differently; America she's'a great country.
My understanding is that the field tests were about 2 hours after the last drink. I don't know the science well enough to know what he was two hours before, but being .015 over the legal limit probably shouldn't make you pass out.

In terms of it being relatable, I mean the circumstances leading up to it. He went out for dinner and drinks with a few friends and stayed up late talking and had a few too many. Most of us that have done that and of those that have, most of us have probably driven home afterwards at some point in life. If you don't relate to the situation, that's fine, but I think most people do, so one shouldn't be surprised at a lack of indignation over it. Age and exhaustion probably made it worse, and he should've been more careful with his drinking. It's easy to let something like that get away from you once you get to a certain point. He should be more mindful of that in the future and re-examine his habits. I'm sure he probably will.

I guess I don't get what you and/or Law aren't satisfied with here. Larussa was in the wrong, he should be punished as far as the legal system sees fit and I don't see anyone disagreeing with that or suggesting anything less.

WentCrazy
Veteran Player
Posts: 648
Joined: April 21 06, 2:49 pm

Post by WentCrazy »

Did Keith Law just write an article in favor of MLB players taking Anabolic Steroids?

If a standing ovation can be interpreted as a folk hero's welcome, then certainly his column can be interpreted as pro-steroids.

User avatar
PurdueSTL
Veteran Player
Posts: 770
Joined: June 15 06, 8:36 am
Location: Originally: LA (lower Alton); Now: along the Potomac

Post by PurdueSTL »

skmsw wrote:I guess I interpreted the article differently.

Law said the two choices if he has an alcohol problem should be to accept rehab or else resign. He did not offer any input as to what the options should be if LaRussa does not have an alcohol problem.

Again, I don't see why anyone would disagree with that.
This is precisely why (in my mind, at least) Law clearly has an axe to grind: Why trot out the righteous indignation about what TLR MUST DO if he "has a drinking problem" without even acknowledging the obvious alternative that he might NOT?????

I stated this before in another thread, and I'm even more convinced of it now: TLR screwed up (as all of us have) and deserves whatever punishment the FL legal system assigns to a violation of this type.....END OF STORY

IMO those who make anything less of this (such as the Cardinal fans who think the cops should have let this pass, or who insist on trying to conjure innocence out of technicalities);

or those who make anything more of this (such as Law, Carol Slezak, or any other TLR hater who is too dense/biased to understand the difference between empathy and enabling) are dopes.........

User avatar
JohnnyJay
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4917
Joined: April 18 06, 6:37 pm
Location: St. Louis

Post by JohnnyJay »

PurdueSTL wrote:IMO those who make anything less of this (such as the Cardinal fans who think the cops should have let this pass, or who insist on trying to conjure innocence out of technicalities);

or those who make anything more of this(such as Law, Carol Slezak, or any other TLR hater who is too dense/biased to understand the difference between empathy and enabling) are dopes.........
Pretty much sums up EXACTLY how I feel.

User avatar
Go_Crazy_Folks
Everyday Player
Posts: 416
Joined: August 30 06, 3:01 pm
Location: Basement of Busch Stadium
Contact:

Post by Go_Crazy_Folks »

skmsw wrote:
I'm lost as to how even some Cardinal fans feel about this is at all relevant.
Personally, I don't like ANY media discussing ANY off-field crap. This included. It does NOTHING to change my opinion of LaRussa.

My only point remains: if one is to take the position that this entire incident should be ignored as not relevent to sports, I would completely agree.

But if one is to take the position that what happened is relevent to sports fans, BUT can be trivialized away as "he was tired," "maybe he's also on meds," "he's old and works long hours," "what's the big deal he wasn't THAT drunk and didn't hurt anybody," well, whether we're talking about LaRussa or the guy who lives on your block who got pinched, I'll still disagree. With the excuses, the rationalizations, the attempts to minimize the seriousness of the behavior, the belief that because "everyone does it" or "it happens every day" it is somehow less problematic.

Too many people are willing to excuse this because it happened to a Cardinal. Unusually for me, that is actually less important to me than the fact that -- too many people are willing to excuse this because it could have been them -- and the belief that if it is something they do, then it can't be all that big a deal -- the mindset that if I do it, then it is not a serious problem, it is everybody over-reacting.
Steve I agree w/ most everything there. I believe full well that LaRussa screwed up and needs to take anything the legal system hands him. Do the time for the crime. No excuses (which to his credit I haven't seen from him) and let this be over.

I know I may be part of the problem for bringing up the article, but I felt like people might want to see Law's axe once again. I'm sorry if I led this down the wrong path. Fans shouldn't want him off the hook or this swept under the rug. It merely needs to be between him and the REAL law and no one else. This isn't a shallow issue, but it is not our place nor Law's to judge what actions need to be taken next.

User avatar
vinsanity
Chili dog truther
Posts: 8772
Joined: July 3 06, 2:19 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Post by vinsanity »

Popeye_Card wrote:
mcgee51taguchi99 wrote:I'm finally convinced Keith Law was created solely with the intent of everyone on this board turning against one another.
He's the final, greatest creation of the mad scientist that also brought us Yadier Molina, David Eckstein, Adam Dunn, and the Mulder trade.

--P--
You forgot Steve Phillips and Chris Duncan.

User avatar
Bo Hart
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 8796
Joined: April 14 06, 9:50 pm

Post by Bo Hart »

Popeye_Card wrote:Steroid use is also a long-term, calculated mistake you are making. Getting behind the wheel drunk is an isolated, spur-of-the-moment decision. Just like 1st degree murder vs. 2nd degree, the consequences for your actions are different.
I know people -- many people -- that decide before they go out during the night how they are getting home that night. And you know how they're doing it? The same way they got there -- by driving. And I can guarantee you they full-well plan on getting drunk.

Now maybe this is an aberration. I live in the second-highest binge drinking city in the United States, so maybe we're more irresponsible than most.

But amongst the college-aged crowd this, at least in my experience, drinking and driving seems like its a huge problem. And I believe this is because it's viewed as an acceptable thing in America ("well, right or wrong, a lot of people do it").

Why call out baseball for not having tougher policies than all other careers? Just like I expect baseball to have a tougher steroid policy than a trucking company, I expect a trucking company to have a more serious drunk driving policy than baseball. And they do--DOT regulated industries have very strict drug and alcohol policies.
Because like I said: these people are seen on a daily basis by millions and millions of fans. If you get a DUI, the information will not be submitted to the national media.

It's very well possible I am psychoanalyzing here, but I think the more and more we see these famous people on TV -- idols of impressionable people -- the more and more we will view their actions as acceptable.

User avatar
GatewaySnayke
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 11941
Joined: July 23 06, 11:54 pm
Location: GatewaySnaykebird

Post by GatewaySnayke »

I forget who said it, (maybe ghostrunner), but he was right with saying that if he got a DUI, his employer wouldn't fire him. And that's normally how it goes. I know people who have failed drug tests, but are not turned into the authorities. So let's sum it up:

1. Keith Law is a bad journalist

2. Keith Law has no understanding of the law

3. Keith Law has no understanding of the work place

User avatar
obucard
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 8055
Joined: April 18 06, 11:04 pm
Location: Central AR

Post by obucard »

GatewaySnayke wrote:I forget who said it, (maybe ghostrunner), but he was right with saying that if he got a DUI, his employer wouldn't fire him. And that's normally how it goes. I know people who have failed drug tests, but are not turned into the authorities. So let's sum it up:

1. Keith Law is a bad journalist

2. Keith Law has no understanding of the law

3. Keith Law has no understanding of the work place
I thought of the comparison of baseball teams and families. If your cousin gets a DUI, you don't kick him out of the family, never to be seen or spoken of again. You accept his mistake (and his admission that he regrets said mistake) and move on.

Post Reply