One Old Fart's View...

[All4SU]

1) Marijuana is a "recreational" drug. Consumed in private, and in moderation, it is harmless.
2) The drug trade is out of control. Legalizing marijuana isn't going to help that.
3) The NCAA has no policy on drugs, and encourages the schools to come up with whatever suits them best.
4) SU has a drug policy. (I don't know the specifics. But they have one.)
5) SU is morally and ethically obligated to monitor the activities of their student athletes for the use of illegal drugs.
6) (This part is speculation) SU may feel that the casual use of marijuana does not constitute a significant problem. They can't come right out and say this, however, as it would imply an endorsement of the use of the drug. So SU has a comprehensive policy for drugs, but and "soft" policy on marijuana. They test, they counsel, they imply that suspensions are a real consequence. But when it comes right down to it, they look the other way unless it looks like a real problem.

As I said, #6 is pure speculation on my part. But I can see this possibly being the case. As such, is this the right way to handle it? I have no idea. I'm not that smart. But I'm not so old that I don't remember that kids will drink beer, do shots, engage in promiscuous sex, drive fast, and yes, smoke pot on occasion. I'm not explaining this away as "boys will be boys." But I'm just not sure that a drug testing policy for marijuana will work on a practical level.

 

[ImperialOrange]

1) Marijuana is a "recreational" drug. Consumed in private, and in moderation, it is harmless.
2) The drug trade is out of control. Legalizing marijuana isn't going to help that.
3) The NCAA has no policy on drugs, and encourages the schools to come up with whatever suits them best.
4) SU has a drug policy. (I don't know the specifics. But they have one.)
5) SU is morally and ethically obligated to monitor the activities of their student athletes for the use of illegal drugs.
6) (This part is speculation) SU may feel that the casual use of marijuana does not constitute a significant problem. They can't come right out and say this, however, as it would imply an endorsement of the use of the drug. So SU has a comprehensive policy for drugs, but and "soft" policy on marijuana. They test, they counsel, they imply that suspensions are a real consequence. But when it comes right down to it, they look the other way unless it looks like a real problem.

As I said, #6 is pure speculation on my part. But I can see this possibly being the case. As such, is this the right way to handle it? I have no idea. I'm not that smart. But I'm not so old that I don't remember that kids will drink beer, do shots, engage in promiscuous sex, drive fast, and yes, smoke pot on occasion. I'm not explaining this away as "boys will be boys." But I'm just not sure that a drug testing policy for marijuana will work on a practical level.

7) Get off my lawn!!!!

seriously though, very good post

 

[Antiprodigy]

The NCAA doesn't require schools to have a policy. SU chose to have a policy. Obviously, at some relatively high level within the University, someone felt that having a policy was necessary. If you are going to have a policy, you have to follow it. If you don't want to follow the policy, abandon it, don't ignore it.