|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 25, 2013 19:30:27 GMT -5
It would be, but again, I'm wondering if that was Sabu's, but that certainly could be true, as that would violate the wellness policy with that.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Feb 25, 2013 19:30:31 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen.
|
|
Celgress
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Superior One
Posts: 19,009
|
Post by Celgress on Feb 25, 2013 19:32:57 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. this
|
|
Sc
Don Corleone
Must think of something witty to put here...
Posts: 1,417
|
Post by Sc on Feb 25, 2013 19:33:53 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. this unfortunately
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Feb 25, 2013 19:36:42 GMT -5
Why unfortunately? What's wrong with a guy just getting what he has coming to him under the law?
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Feb 25, 2013 19:44:14 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. How do we know that action hasn't been taken behind closed doors? Just because he hasn't been taken off TV or had his PPV match taken away from him doesn't mean that this hasn't been dealt with?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 25, 2013 19:45:48 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. I know, I guess it still doesn't make it right. In my opinion, everyone who got a DUI in WWE should have had some disciplinary actions thrown against them. But, I'm dreaming when it comes to that.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Feb 26, 2013 1:00:16 GMT -5
As already stated, I think it's really lame. It shows that it's not what you do that affects your career, but who backs you. I know this political shit happens all the time in any job, but I hate seeing it unfold on TV. He should be losing his Mania payday period. Even him getting squashed, which I really hope happens, doesn't cut it.
|
|
|
Post by kamero00 on Feb 26, 2013 1:04:08 GMT -5
To be fair, he has not be found guilty of anything yet.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,014
|
Post by nate5054 on Feb 26, 2013 3:25:41 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. I hope so. People getting reprimanded for misdemeanors by their employer is stupid (with some rare exceptions like air traffic controller and the like), especially before conviction.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Feb 26, 2013 3:31:02 GMT -5
Again the most likely thing that would happen if anything would be a fine.
And they have never announced who got fined for breaking wellness publicly.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,014
|
Post by nate5054 on Feb 26, 2013 3:31:17 GMT -5
I think we should all give up on the idea that WWE is going to reprimand him in any way. It's just not going to happen. I know, I guess it still doesn't make it right. In my opinion, everyone who got a DUI in WWE should have had some disciplinary actions thrown against them. But, I'm dreaming when it comes to that. The thing is nobody seems to know the facts in this case yet. I've asked this before in this thread but haven't seem to have got an answer. He was charged with a DUI. What was the rationale behind that charge? With booze, the rational tends to be the driver didn't pass a breathalyzer test, or refused to take one, or didn't pass a roadside sobriety check. With pot I don't know how it's determined other than maybe a blood test (and to get deeper into that argument, it just determines if there is THC in the bloodstream and not necessarily impairment, but at least in that case there is something established). With all the articles I've read so far (and maybe some new ones have presented themselves) the best I could find was "an officer determined he was driving under the influence." Well how was that determined? Was there a lit joint in the car? Did the officer smell smoked pot (or to be more accurate, the odor of previously smoked pot) in the car? Did he give Swagger a roadside that he failed? Did Swagger submit to a blood test and fail it? Or did he just charge it because they found a bag of weed in his car and, for a lack of a better way to explain it, put two and two together and gave him that charge. Is the last way even permissible in Mississippi? I have no clue, but some more answers/evidence would be nice.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,014
|
Post by nate5054 on Feb 26, 2013 3:34:40 GMT -5
As already stated, I think it's really lame. It shows that it's not what you do that affects your career, but who backs you. I know this political s*** happens all the time in any job, but I hate seeing it unfold on TV. He should be losing his Mania payday period. Even him getting squashed, which I really hope happens, doesn't cut it. This isn't even necessarily political. In most jobs misdemeanor charges don't cost you anything at your job. If this would have happened to someone at the awful data entry factory I worked in, nothing would have happened, provided the person didn't miss time at work. Like it or not the state of Mississippi classifies everything he did as a misdemeanor (and in case of the speeding and possession charge, even less than that), and did not feel the need to lock up him as some sort of menace to society. If the state feels fines are good enough for him to repay his debt to society, I have no idea why his employer must be obligated to add on to it, or even to make it worse than what the state does.
|
|
|
Post by crowwreak was WRONG on Feb 26, 2013 3:56:08 GMT -5
Maybe his punishment is bumping the WrestleMania payday down to a regular payday?
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Feb 26, 2013 4:00:40 GMT -5
Maybe his punishment is bumping the WrestleMania payday down to a regular payday? Or 18 Seconds II.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Feb 26, 2013 20:56:26 GMT -5
As already stated, I think it's really lame. It shows that it's not what you do that affects your career, but who backs you. I know this political s*** happens all the time in any job, but I hate seeing it unfold on TV. He should be losing his Mania payday period. Even him getting squashed, which I really hope happens, doesn't cut it. This isn't even necessarily political. In most jobs misdemeanor charges don't cost you anything at your job. If this would have happened to someone at the awful data entry factory I worked in, nothing would have happened, provided the person didn't miss time at work. Like it or not the state of Mississippi classifies everything he did as a misdemeanor (and in case of the speeding and possession charge, even less than that), and did not feel the need to lock up him as some sort of menace to society. If the state feels fines are good enough for him to repay his debt to society, I have no idea why his employer must be obligated to add on to it, or even to make it worse than what the state does. Exactly! I wish everyone who's "outraged" would read and understand this.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 28,016
|
Post by chazraps on Feb 26, 2013 21:01:59 GMT -5
Maybe his punishment is bumping the WrestleMania payday down to a regular payday? Or no payday at all.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Feb 26, 2013 22:03:29 GMT -5
I know, I guess it still doesn't make it right. In my opinion, everyone who got a DUI in WWE should have had some disciplinary actions thrown against them. But, I'm dreaming when it comes to that. The thing is nobody seems to know the facts in this case yet. I've asked this before in this thread but haven't seem to have got an answer. He was charged with a DUI. What was the rationale behind that charge? With booze, the rational tends to be the driver didn't pass a breathalyzer test, or refused to take one, or didn't pass a roadside sobriety check. With pot I don't know how it's determined other than maybe a blood test (and to get deeper into that argument, it just determines if there is THC in the bloodstream and not necessarily impairment, but at least in that case there is something established). With all the articles I've read so far (and maybe some new ones have presented themselves) the best I could find was "an officer determined he was driving under the influence." Well how was that determined? Was there a lit joint in the car? Did the officer smell smoked pot (or to be more accurate, the odor of previously smoked pot) in the car? Did he give Swagger a roadside that he failed? Did Swagger submit to a blood test and fail it? Or did he just charge it because they found a bag of weed in his car and, for a lack of a better way to explain it, put two and two together and gave him that charge. Is the last way even permissible in Mississippi? I have no clue, but some more answers/evidence would be nice. At least here in Texas, this is how it would have happened: - They saw him speeding and driving erratically and made the traffic stop. This was the original report from TMZ. He was going 10 miles over, swerving and making U-turns.
- The officer would have already suspected DUI and when he got close and smelled the weed, he'd search the car. (Possibly observed physical signs of him being stoned as well (pupils, ways he was acting and so on).
- Once the weed was found, he'd be arrested for DUI based on his driving, the smell of the smoked weed and any other physical signs observed and taken for most likely a blood test (piss test possible but unlikely) then booked.
From there, everything depends on how the test comes out. If he has anything in his system he'll be DUI otherwise he's golden.
|
|
|
Post by kamero00 on Feb 26, 2013 23:59:36 GMT -5
The thing is nobody seems to know the facts in this case yet. I've asked this before in this thread but haven't seem to have got an answer. He was charged with a DUI. What was the rationale behind that charge? With booze, the rational tends to be the driver didn't pass a breathalyzer test, or refused to take one, or didn't pass a roadside sobriety check. With pot I don't know how it's determined other than maybe a blood test (and to get deeper into that argument, it just determines if there is THC in the bloodstream and not necessarily impairment, but at least in that case there is something established). With all the articles I've read so far (and maybe some new ones have presented themselves) the best I could find was "an officer determined he was driving under the influence." Well how was that determined? Was there a lit joint in the car? Did the officer smell smoked pot (or to be more accurate, the odor of previously smoked pot) in the car? Did he give Swagger a roadside that he failed? Did Swagger submit to a blood test and fail it? Or did he just charge it because they found a bag of weed in his car and, for a lack of a better way to explain it, put two and two together and gave him that charge. Is the last way even permissible in Mississippi? I have no clue, but some more answers/evidence would be nice. At least here in Texas, this is how it would have happened: - They saw him speeding and driving erratically and made the traffic stop. This was the original report from TMZ. He was going 10 miles over, swerving and making U-turns.
- The officer would have already suspected DUI and when he got close and smelled the weed, he'd search the car. (Possibly observed physical signs of him being stoned as well (pupils, ways he was acting and so on).
- Once the weed was found, he'd be arrested for DUI based on his driving, the smell of the smoked weed and any other physical signs observed and taken for most likely a blood test (piss test possible but unlikely) then booked.
From there, everything depends on how the test comes out. If he has anything in his system he'll be DUI otherwise he's golden. This comment is borderline political. Much less political themed comments have been deleted by you, yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Feb 27, 2013 0:07:38 GMT -5
At least here in Texas, this is how it would have happened: - They saw him speeding and driving erratically and made the traffic stop. This was the original report from TMZ. He was going 10 miles over, swerving and making U-turns.
- The officer would have already suspected DUI and when he got close and smelled the weed, he'd search the car. (Possibly observed physical signs of him being stoned as well (pupils, ways he was acting and so on).
- Once the weed was found, he'd be arrested for DUI based on his driving, the smell of the smoked weed and any other physical signs observed and taken for most likely a blood test (piss test possible but unlikely) then booked.
From there, everything depends on how the test comes out. If he has anything in his system he'll be DUI otherwise he's golden. This comment is borderline political. Much less political themed comments have been deleted by you, yourself. What? I'm explaining how a traffic stop works in Texas. That is not political.
|
|