- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So Darron Thomas is in a car...
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:15 pm to fnchdrms87
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:15 pm to fnchdrms87
quote:
It will be legal VERY soon
Riiiiiight...
quote:
Ricky Williams, Randy Moss, Percy Harvin et. al...weed certainly didn't hurt those guys...and certainly didn't hurt Michael Phelps either!
Many could argue that it actually did hurt every single one of those guys.
1
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:16 pm to LSUdm21
quote:
I don't really care one way or the other. However, I 100% believe that if it was anyone else in the entire state of Oregon they would have been arrested.
You don't care one way or the other about what, understanding what the actual situation was???
NO ONE would've been arrested under those circumstances in Oregon because there was not an arrestable offense committed!
Why is this so hard for so many to understand?
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:17 pm to LSUdm21
Maybe we can get ducksfly, bisonduck and a couple other oregon fans to do an experiment. Get stoned while driving 120 until a cop pulls you over. Also videotape it and come back and post it.
If yall get arrested TD will pay all cost and fines.
If yall get arrested TD will pay all cost and fines.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:17 pm to LSUdm21
I'm starting to think maybe the COP was stoned..... 
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:17 pm to CptBengal
quote:
not only that, as a RENTAL car, he would have to be 25 years old and listed on the contract. Likelihood of that? ZERO
Now that you have a serious point. For instance, what about insurance on that rental too? So yes, the cop could of pressed on that rental issue. However, cops in Oregon could care less about rentals, or whose name is on the contract. And cops just assume you have insurance for it some way, if you are renting it. No cop here would press anything deeper when he saw it was a rental. But your right, There are two different issues in theory a cop could of dug deeper about and busted them for. (but it would never happen, lol as they do not care with rentals)
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:19 pm to JDubOregon
quote:
Any Oregon Fan
Why is it when D. Thomas ends up in a car with Oregon players, at least two things happen:
1) Weed will be present.
2) Traffic violations will occur.
quote:
Thomas also was a passenger in the car on June 7, 2010, when Jeremiah Masoli was stopped in Springfield and cited for exiting a driveway without stopping, possesion of one ounce or less of marijuana and driving with a suspended license. Masoli was dismissed from the team shortly afterward for that and previous incidents.
Before that, on Sept. 25, 2008, Thomas was a passenger in a car driven by Eddie Pleasant that was involved in a speed-racing crash in Springfield that sent two teammates to a hospital. Thomas, then a freshman, suffered a bruised elbow on his right throwing arm when he rode in the front passenger seat of a Ford Mustang driven by teammate Eddie Pleasant. Pleasant, then a redshirt freshman linebacker, was cited by Springfield police for reckless driving and speed racing. Jamere Holland, then a sophomore receiver who would later be dismissed from the team for an unrelated incident, was the other passenger.
This post was edited on 8/17/11 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:19 pm to RummelTiger
quote:
Many could argue that it actually did hurt every single one of those guys.
Many could, but it would be an invalid argument.
Weed isn't what hurt those guys, it was the LAW that hurt those guys. there is a distinction. Now if the actual health of any of those guys was directly affected by weed, then yes, you could argue it hurt them.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:20 pm to DucksflyinPAC
Yeah bro your so right on this one and aren't a complete homer. The cop smelled weed in the car and noticed one of them that was still high. Cliff was doing 118 on a suspended license and only the non- football player was the one smoking weed...surrrrreee. One of them said "we smoked it all". Is "we" to you mean only the non-football player?
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:21 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
NO ONE would've been arrested under those circumstances in Oregon because there was not an arrestable offense committed!
Why is this so hard for so many to understand?
For me, it's the combination of all three things.
If they were pulled over and it was just the weed - fine, let 'em go.
If he had been pulled over and it was just the suspended license - fine, just give him a ticket/warning.
If he had only been pulled over for excessive speeding - I would not have agreed to just letting him go, but give him a ticket...whatever.
But, when you COMBINE all three things...seems like something more needed to be done.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:21 pm to Sabertooth
quote:
Why does D. Thomas always end up in a car with Oregon players, at least two things happen:
1) Weed will be present.
2) Traffic violations will occur
Neither one is against the law per the Oregon posters. It would be like us driving around with tabacco.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:21 pm to Tigah32
quote:
Your leader/QB was stoned
What proof do you have that proves our leader(DT) was stoned? Please do not just say, cause you know all Stoners and for sure if one guy was smoking some, for sure every single other guy was. That is not called proof. That is speculation. Last time I checked, we do not arrest people for speculation. And either way, DT could not of been arrested even if he was smoking it but was out and did not have any on him, as he was not driving. But again. What proof do you know about that I do not know, that DT was stoned that night? From a player? There is none. From a cop? There is none. From DT? Nope. SO where is your proof before you accuse?
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:24 pm to LSUdm21
quote:
Why are you ignoring me frickstick?
I am not ignoring anybody. Its just that I am at 5 pages back from the new comments because I am getting bombarded with answering too many questions.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:24 pm to DucksflyinPAC
I see cheech and chong pictures along with dirty cops making some great gameday signs.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:25 pm to DucksflyinPAC
And the cops should have pressed that issue but they didn't...and why would you think that would be?...because the cop didn't want to do anything serious because they were Oregon football players. The cops should have cared about that insurance issue but didn't because he knew they played football and he didn't want to cripple Oregon' s chances this year but it wont matter anyway because they are going to get curb-stomped by LSU
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:25 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
NO ONE would've been arrested under those circumstances in Oregon because there was not an arrestable offense committed!
But there was.
GTA. Try again clown.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:25 pm to RummelTiger
quote:
But, when you COMBINE all three things...seems like something more needed to be done.
Really? Regardless of what the actual LAW states should be done or not done?
There oughtta be a LAW!
We have all these laws in Louisiana that would've thrown that whole carload of men in jail AND have the car confiscated and sold at auction for the PD's profit, and STILL it's more dangerous to drive in Louisiana than Oregon.
Maybe they don't need all those laws in Oregon...?
Let's try letting the government be a little less intrusive, not more, shall we? It seems to be working up there.
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:26 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Many could, but it would be an invalid argument.
quote:
Now if the actual health of any of those guys was directly affected by weed, then yes, you could argue it hurt them.
Oh, so I could have a valid argument.
I could also argue that their training likely suffered do to the effects, as well.
quote:
Weed isn't what hurt those guys, it was the LAW that hurt those guys. there is a distinction.
Yeah, and if they're not smoking the weed, then they don't have to worry about the law, so...
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:26 pm to CptBengal
quote:
But there was.
Why don't you name it?
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:26 pm to DucksflyinPAC
your right man we dont have proof that he was stoned....."They smoked it all"....damn
Posted on 8/17/11 at 1:26 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Many could, but it would be an invalid argument.
Weed isn't what hurt those guys, it was the LAW that hurt those guys. there is a distinction. Now if the actual health of any of those guys was directly affected by weed, then yes, you could argue it hurt them.
It might also be a little too late then. You combine weed with a 20 year-old doing 118 on a public road, and the point you are making is- and should be- invalid.
Anarchy is a losing proposition.
Page 10 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News