SG Broadband Community

Sava700 wrote:He already said my answer..but didn't give me permission to say it.

Example:

You hit a bong and get busted..you get a weekend in jail and a 1000$ fine.

Phelps hits a bong and gets busted..he gets a weekend in jail and a 1000$ fine.

I'm not saying thats what you or he should get but as long as its in line with each other in a fair manner.

Other people have been caught hitting a bong and let go, so then by your answer its fair that we let Phelps go?

YARDofSTUF wrote:Other people have been caught hitting a bong and let go, so then by your answer its fair that we let Phelps go?

Well depends if you think it was fair for those that were let go against those that weren't.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Other people have been caught hitting a bong and let go, so then by your answer its fair that we let Phelps go?

This doesn't even get to this level of attention from the police if its a frat party down the street.

Sava700 wrote:Are you still kidding me? LOL

I read the article..and we know the sheriff is building a case against him. Regardless of how they are doing it or how they busted the others this is a good move to have fair treatment of Phelps. I really think you need to relax a little..you sound as if your going to explode if you can't have your way with me talking about a subject or your just all high and mighty to make sure pot stays legal in some way.

Me relax?


I noticed you removed that article which only proves that the investigation is a huge waste of tax payer money.

Sava700 wrote:Well depends if you think it was fair for those that were let go against those that weren't.

People have been let go for even pocession in some situations. I do think its fair, even more so in Phelps' case. Not only because I think hes gotten enough crap for it, but also because it can be used as a good lesson for kids.

YARDofSTUF wrote:People have been let go for even pocession in some situations. I do think its fair, even more so in Phelps' case. Not only because I think hes gotten enough crap for it, but also because it can be used as a good lesson for kids.

I don't think its fair for some to get punished and others not.. and this is not a good lesson for kids if he goes unpunished by law. That would be a lesson to say they can do this criminal act and get away with it..perhaps even worse. If they are California they won't get nearly the amount of jail time they should either.

Sava700 wrote:I said "all of you if not most of you"

But what your saying is its ok for him to take a "Bong hit" that he's admitted to?

I'm trying to get on the same page here with you or anyone else.

show me where ANY OF US said he was innocent.

Gixxer wrote:show me where ANY OF US said he was innocent.

maybe it appears that way..if not then sorry...its just the impression thats being givin

Sava700 wrote:I don't think its fair for some to get punished and others not.. and this is not a good lesson for kids if he goes unpunished by law. That would be a lesson to say they can do this criminal act and get away with it..perhaps even worse. If they are California they won't get nearly the amount of jail time they should either.

Come up with a fitting punishment then, Judges are the only ones that come up with them, jurors are asked to find them too.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Come up with a fitting punishment then, Judges are the only ones that come up with them, jurors are asked to find them too.

I don't know all the evidence...that hasn't been found yet..YET! I think in the coming days/weeks they will gather up enough to charge him with something then I guess we will see.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:

Sava700 wrote:I don't know all the evidence...that hasn't been found yet..YET! I think in the coming days/weeks they will gather up enough to charge him with something then I guess we will see.

With that in mind I think it's a little premature to say anyone is benefitting from favoritism.

Roody wrote:With that in mind I think it's a little premature to say anyone is benefitting from favoritism.

Lets hope not

Sava700 wrote:while the other 8 ( most not in the photo) get jail time or large fines and he gets off scott free.. nice.

guess what? they also have the opportunity to get a good enough lawyer to get them off. it should not take a Harvard law grad for this case.

Gixxer wrote:guess what? they also have the opportunity to get a good enough lawyer to get them off. it should not take a Harvard law grad for this case.

Maybe..maybe not..guess we will find out.

Sava700 wrote:I agree drugs are stupid... I don't want a prosecutor to nail him but I think he's getting off with NOTHING so far which isn't fair. If they do find more to warranty a arrest which they are doing then at least its done by the book and giving out in a fair manner. I think we can agree on that.

getting off with NOTHING?!!!! i thought he lost a sponsor and got suspended from his bread and butter.

let me ask you this. do you think, based on the photo, they can prove he smoked/possessed weed?

YARDofSTUF wrote:People have been let go for even pocession in some situations. I do think its fair, even more so in Phelps' case. Not only because I think hes gotten enough crap for it, but also because it can be used as a good lesson for kids.

Sava700 wrote:Maybe..maybe not..guess we will find out.

hell, a PD should be able to handle this case with ease.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:

Seriously 9 pages of this? Damn I need a binger to relax.

Gixxer wrote:getting off with NOTHING?!!!! i thought he lost a sponsor and got suspended from his bread and butter.

let me ask you this. do you think, based on the photo, they can prove he smoked/possessed weed?

losing a sponsor is hardly punishment when someone else may be locked up or pay a fine. Regardless of what that sponsor paid out thats irrelevant.

I can't answer the other question cause I'm not in a position to dictate the views of a photo to say he's innocent or not. We need to leave that up to the team investigating everything.

tarpoon75 wrote:Seriously 9 pages of this? Damn I need a binger to relax.

If you don't want to add to the conversation then stay out of the thread.. I mean that goes for anyone really.... not to be mean or anything but is it really hurting you in some way that this one is 9 pages long?

tarpoon75 wrote:Seriously 9 pages of this? Damn I need a binger to relax.

downhill wrote:

it really hurting you too? I mean your not adding anything constructive to the discussion? are you trolling?

Sava700 wrote:If you don't want to add to the conversation then stay out of the thread.. I mean that goes for anyone really.... not to be mean or anything but is it really hurting you in some way that this one is 9 pages long?

Cheese with that whine?

No, it doesn't hurt me but to see you go on for 9 pages, resolve nothing and refuse to see both sides of the issue and hold on to your beliefs as "the way it should be" is silly. Or wait is that the purpose of a forum?

How about to agree to disagree?


There I contributed to this thread, happy?

Sava700 wrote:it really hurting you too? I mean your not adding anything constructive to the discussion? are you trolling?

May I suggest the gouda? It's quite tasty.

tarpoon75 wrote:No, it doesn't hurt me but to see you go on for 9 pages, resolve nothing and refuse to see both sides of the issue and hold on to your beliefs as "the way it should be" is silly. Or wait is that the purpose of a forum?

How about to agree to disagree?


There I contributed to this thread, happy?

see that's where your slightly wrong.. I see both sides of the issue.. I even agree that he could be innocent I also believe that he couldn't be and that the waste of resources to prove otherwise is justified to allow him to be treated no differently than anyone else. The only thing I'm guilty of refusing here is see that illegal drug use (if he did so) is acceptable.

But yes.. happy that you contributed to the thread in a positive manner. Thanks!

Dammit, I think I'm his ignore list. Woe is me!

Sava700 wrote:see that's where your slightly wrong.. I see both sides of the issue.. I even agree that he could be innocent I also believe that he couldn't be and that the waste of resources to prove otherwise is justified to allow him to be treated no differently than anyone else. The only thing I'm guilty of refusing here is see that illegal drug use (if he did so) is acceptable.

But yes.. happy that you contributed to the thread in a positive manner. Thanks!

he is not innocent (by admission), but it cannot be proven in a court of law.

Gixxer wrote:he is not innocent (by admission), but it cannot be proven in a court of law.

If the evidence is found in the case ( which is being built against him) then yes it will likely hold up in a court of law with his own admission to tack on to it.

Sava700 wrote:If the evidence is found in the case ( which is being built against him) then yes it will likely hold up in a court of law with his own admission to tack on to it.

his admission was to a newspaper (i think) and can be "recanted". there is no evidence to find. it is a pic that shows nothing and the other people (if they testify against him) will be dismissed as hearsay. then the attorney for Phelps will pick apart there character to the tune of, "they said Phelps was smoking weed? are you going to believe druggies and drug dealers over a Olympic gold yadda yadda. they are just trying to point the blame to cya.

Gixxer wrote:his admission was to a newspaper (i think) and can be "recanted". there is no evidence to find. it is a pic that shows nothing and the other people (if they testify against him) will be dismissed as hearsay. then the attorney for Phelps will pick apart there character to the tune of, "they said Phelps was smoking weed? are you going to believe druggies and drug dealers over a Olympic gold yadda yadda. they are just trying to point the blame to cya.

LOL omg you don't even follow whats going on do you?

He appologized on his facebook page likely within minutes after it leaked out. He's said sorry for it on news video, newspapers and facebook so again his admission is on several sources.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id= ... arch_video

Gixxer wrote:his admission was to a newspaper (i think) and can be "recanted". there is no evidence to find. it is a pic that shows nothing and the other people (if they testify against him) will be dismissed as hearsay. then the attorney for Phelps will pick apart there character to the tune of, "they said Phelps was smoking weed? are you going to believe druggies and drug dealers over a Olympic gold yadda yadda. they are just trying to point the blame to cya.

Sava700 wrote:I don't know all the evidence...that hasn't been found yet..YET! I think in the coming days/weeks they will gather up enough to charge him with something then I guess we will see.

Uhg. Based on what we know. The photo of him taking a hit, and him admitting to taking the hit off the bong.

Based on that, average Americans that do jury duty come up with an answer, So you come up with one. There may be more info/evidence later, but I'm saying for the purpose of this question, take it as this is it, and give me an idea of a fair punishment.

Roody wrote:

Sava700 wrote:LOL omg you don't even follow whats going on do you?

He appologized on his facebook page likely within minutes after it leaked out. He's said sorry for it on news video, newspapers and facebook so again his admission is on several sources.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id= ... arch_video

YARDofSTUF wrote:Uhg. Based on what we know. The photo of him taking a hit, and him admitting to taking the hit off the bong.

Based on that, average Americans that do jury duty come up with an answer, So you come up with one. There may be more info/evidence later, but I'm saying for the purpose of this question, take it as this is it, and give me an idea of a fair punishment.

fair punishment = same/equal to any other individual acting out the same crime.

That's all you need and all your going to get till we know more evidence/info at a later point while the case is being built up.

Sava700 wrote:LOL omg you don't even follow whats going on do you?

He appologized on his facebook page likely within minutes after it leaked out. He's said sorry for it on news video, newspapers and facebook so again his admission is on several sources.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id= ... arch_video

like i said, to the media, not to a court of law. so apparently i am following just fine.

Roody wrote:

don't agree with me, apparently i am not following the story.

Gixxer wrote:like i said, to the media, not to a court of law. so apparently i am following just fine.

Exactly and like it has already been said that can be recanted.