Law weighs in on DUI

[GatewaySnayke]

Yes, but the problem is that it has no business being in the article in the first place. There's always going to be someone who has a radical opinion. Out of the millions or so Cardinal fans across the globe, how many actually believe that La Russa should have gotten off?

The opinion is far from extreme. I heard numerous people give similar excuses. Maybe not along the lines of him getting off completely, but them downplaying it big time. In fact, I specifically remember those exact lines being given ("he was tired," "he has long days," etc).

Yes, but the person in question of Law's article thinks TLR should have gotten off. I am confident that Cardinal fans are smart enough to know that what La Russa did was extremely wrong, and that the people who think he should have gotten off are in an extreme minority.

See? Not only does Law have no idea how to write, he DOESN'T EVEN KNOW THE LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!! Guillermo Mota was NOT cheating in sports, he was breaking the g-darn law!

This is just a leap in assumption.

Is it? Law said that Mota was cheating in SPORTS, when he was actually cheating both sports AND the law.

[GatewaySnayke]

While Law doesn't condone steroid use, he's trying to downplay the severity of it. Should something be done to players or managers who are given DWI's? I'm not sure.

He does not downplay the severity of it whatsoever. He just says that it pales in comparison to drinking and driving, which I think is pretty much indisputable.

If he's not downplaying it, where is his article condemning those that are abusing anabolic steroids, thus setting a horrible example for the teenagers playing sports in this country? Given the circumstances, I'd say both are pretty dangerous right now, yet Law seems to be only concerned about drinking and driving. I agree that it's a serious problem -- there's no doubting that, but he insults the heck out of our intelligence by saying, "oh, three people died" and "Mota does steroids and gets 50 games, Chacin gets a DUI and gets nothing." Then there's the jab at Congress for having the nerve to take these steroid using freaks to task for their irresponsibility. The audacity!

[mcgee51taguchi99]

I'm finally convinced Keith Law was created solely with the intent of everyone on this board turning against one another.

[Popeye_Card]

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--

[ghostrunner]

I'm lost as to how even some Cardinal fans feel about this is at all relevant.

As far as the role model issue goes, has the MLB indicated any concern about this? Have the fans? Have the owners? If this were the NFL, and the players were shooting up strip clubs and ringing up assault violations, they probably should.

Almost everyone has driven over the legal limit at some point or has a friend who has. It may not excuse anything, but it's significant in understanding how most people look at this issue. Even in the context of celebrity/athlete infractions, it ranks pretty low on the totem pole.

I wouldn't lose my job over a DUI. I wouldn't be docked pay. There's no reason a baseball manager should either.

[JohnnyJay]

"Why do I have to be an example for your kid? You be an example for your own kid."

-Bob Gibson

[Go_Crazy_Folks]

Just like the value and support of your parents is going to influence whether or not you take steroids.

You will fear the consequences of being suspended from the sport you love so dearly.

The argument can be made for both situations.

But the lure of money and fame may make me chuck my morals to the side. It won't do me a whole lot of good though if I'm caught and suspended, not making money anymore.

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 just think steroid use and sports are closely related. Drunk driving and sports may be connected, but all walks of life are involved with drunk driving. 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.

--P--

Popeye: that is along the lines of my problem w/ this article. Drunk driving is a huge problem. Everyone on this forum probably knows of someone injured or killed by a drunk driver. But to say that b/c a big league manager was arrested for a DUI that baseball should stiffen it's policy to be on par w/ steriods is laughable. The game needs to take care of problems that are associated directly. It just seems Law was on a witch hunt here after being proved wrong by this team last year.

Kyle: you made some very good points as well. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a policy against DUI's just that MLB shouldn't have to approach it in the same manner as steriods and that Law shouldn't be the one writing the moral code for what is right in wrong in the game. Like it or not, that is to be left up to Selig (gasp!), the owners and players. Law really did paint the Card's fans as idiots looking past the severity of the issue.

[skmsw]

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.

[G. Keenan]

This article was complete fluff. For starters, it is premised on the notion that MLB has an epidemic DUI problem, and then uses LaRussa as the latest example of how MLB is not handling the problem correctly. What evidence does Law provide to prove this claims? A few anecdotes. That is hardly proof. This article did absoultely nothing to prove that drunk driving among professional baseball players is any worse than it is among the general population.

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.

Law moralizes here, but is completely unrigorous, despite his sanctimonious tone. If one of my students turned this in as an argumentative essay I would give it a C, and that's only because of grade inflation.

[Popeye_Card]

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.

Nobody is excusing anything.

Nothing that has come out of LaRussa's incident--the media talking about it, Keith Law recommending suspensions, etc.--isn't going to change the way people drink and drive in this country.

LaRussa is just one of the crowd breaking the law, and putting people in danger. The problem is not LaRussa. The problem is that there's a large crowd, and apparently the controls in place are not doing the trick at reducing the crowd to an acceptable number.

--P--