ROR Impaired Driving Charges Dismissed

[Eleven]

Assuming that ROR really was driving, are his hands really clean here? Is there nothing to be said for fessing up and taking his medicine, given his "celebrity" status? Or his status as a "human being"?

 

Also, no security cameras on the premises?

 

I'm definitely not saying his hands are clean.  But let's look at his options:

 

1.  Plead to some really minor charge, because he knows they can't convict him.  That leaves him in the exact same position he's in, where people think he gets off scot free because he's famous and/or wealthy.

 

2.  Confess.  This is just unrealistic.  No one does that, and he shouldn't be held to some higher standard because he's an athlete, just like he shouldn't be held to a lower one.

 

3.  Go to trial knowing it's an easy win.

 

No-brainer for me there.

 

I don't know if there are security cameras or not, but if there are, they apparently weren't pointed in the right spot or were not functioning properly.

[Stoner]

So you think he should "confess" because he owes you and society a debt because he's mildly famous? 

I wouldn't phrase it that way, but sure. He should take responsibility knowing that it would send the right message to all the kids out there who (stupidly) admire him. I mean, it's not like his life is at stake. Having said that, I have no idea the likelihood of his doing time/being suspended by the NHL if he had been convicted.

[That Aud Smell]

He should take responsibility knowing that it would send the right message to all the kids out there who (stupidly) admire him.

 

Well, that's quite something innit?

 

ROR should have taken actions against his personal self-interest in order to honour a dynamic that is stupid (and, to the extent it does exist, should not).

[Stoner]

Well, that's quite something innit?

 

ROR should have taken actions against his personal self-interest in order to honour a dynamic that is stupid (and, to the extent it does exist, should not).

I think you, not I, have committed some kind of logical fallacy. The kids still admire him, whether they are right or wrong to do so. What's their takeaway here?

 

Something something Pangloss out.

[That Aud Smell]

I think you, not I, have committed some kind of logical fallacy. The kids still admire him, whether they are right or wrong to do so. What's their takeaway here?

 

Something something Pangloss out.

 

I didn't say you were being illogical. I said you were demanding that ROR act so as to uphold and perpetuate a paradigm that you think is stupid.

[Eleven]

Why do we think athletes are supposed to be role models for kids?  Do we think the same of the musicians they listen to?

[Weave]

Why do we think athletes are supposed to be role models for kids?  Do we think the same of the musicians they listen to?

 

I don't think they are supposed to be role models.  But I think the reality is that they often are.

[pi2000]

Why do we think athletes are supposed to be role models for kids?  Do we think the same of the musicians they listen to?

 

Because it's a game, a game that kids play, so they naturally look up to them. 

[kas23]

Why do we think athletes are supposed to be role models for kids? Do we think the same of the musicians they listen to?

Truly thought provoking questions. But I think it's generally acknowledged that both musicians and athlete serve as role models to teenagers. More often than not these are usually negative influences, but nevertheless it happens.

[Stoner]

I don't think they are supposed to be role models.  But I think the reality is that they often are.

Thank you. Got it, Smell?

[That Aud Smell]

You disappoint me, PA.

 

Shouldn't ROR defy that "stupid" convention? That could serve a greater good -- getting those kids oriented to admiring true heroes.

 

Fight the Power, ROR.

[Hank]

If your child's role model is a professional athlete you failed as a parent.

[WildCard]

If your child's role model is a professional athlete you failed as a parent.

Why?

[darksabre]

Yeah, that's realistic. Never let your kids look up to anyone who might make a bad choice in their life. "Here son, this ball of lint is your hero now. It's safe and will prevent me from having to explain difficult concepts like the fallibility of idols".

[Hank]

Why?

Because athletes aren't role models, they're entertainers. Your child doesn't know them, they are complete strangers, and if a professional athletes actions can influence your child's behavior/actions than yeah, you've failed as a parent. Take responsibility and parent your own kids.

[WildCard]

Because athletes aren't role models, they're entertainers. Your child doesn't know them, they are complete strangers, and if a professional athletes actions can influence your child's behavior/actions than yeah, you've failed as a parent. Take responsibility and parent your own kids.

So, MLK, bad role model then?

[Hank]

What team did he play for?

So, MLK, bad role model then?

[That Aud Smell]

Hank's point is stated a bit strongly, but the essence of it seems right to me.

 

Moreover, I'll venture to say that well raised kids may be disappointed to learn that their favourite sports figures have made bad choices, but such kids won't have their behaviour influenced thereby.

[WildCard]

Because athletes aren't role models, they're entertainers. Your child doesn't know them, they are complete strangers, and if a professional athletes actions can influence your child's behavior/actions than yeah, you've failed as a parent. Take responsibility and parent your own kids.

What team did he play for?

What's the difference other than that they don't know them?

[Hank]

What's the difference other than that they don't know them?

If you disagree with my statement and would like to discuss it I'd be happy to, but MLK is not relevant to the discussion.

[WildCard]

If you disagree with my statement and would like to discuss it I'd be happy to, but MLK is not relevant to the discussion.

I do disagree with your statement, and I've outlined why. What is the distinguishing characteristic between role models in history and role models in sports other than that your kid does not personally know them?

[Hank]

I do disagree with your statement, and I've outlined why. What is the distinguishing characteristic between role models in history and role models in sports other than that your kid does not personally know them?

I do disagree with your statement, and I've outlined why. What is the distinguishing characteristic between role models in history and role models in sports other than that your kid does not personally know them?

Now you're just being obtuse, good day sir.

[WildCard]

Now you're just being obtuse, good day sir.

Honestly I'm not. If that's the crux of your argument it's flawed IMO

 

Anyone else care to answer that one?

Edited July 12, 2016 by WildCard

[inkman]

Because athletes aren't role models, they're entertainers. Your child doesn't know them, they are complete strangers, and if a professional athletes actions can influence your child's behavior/actions than yeah, you've failed as a parent. Take responsibility and parent your own kids.

So who do your kids idolize?

[Doohicksie]

So who do your kids idolize?

 

My kids were weird.  The idolized Bach, Beethoven and that ilk.