Police Issue an Official Statement on Jeff Hardy's Arrest by Nick Paglino

[Johnny Fenoli]

I don't really fancy a huge "rargh drugs" debate right now, especially considering you don't seem like you're the type to ever back down, and i'm incredibly entrenched in my views similarly.

 

However, i will say that if you think people using cocaine instantly makes them 'failures', then there are an enormous amount of 'failures' these days. Coke is everywhere now, i'd be amazed if you can find many clubs et al that don't have something dodgy going on in the loo's. It's not just 'the posh drug' anymore.

 

I agree, there are an enormous amount of "failures".

[GDE71]

Jeff Hardy=turd

 

 

Turds get flushed down the toilet and forgotten about.

[PoisonedSuperman]

I don't see how anyone here can make a case for Jeff Hardy, I don't know anyone in my family who does any drugs and I only know one crack head that I worked at the same place as me but I refused to ever work with him. Including leaving the job when we were scheduled to work together but plain and simple DRUGS are ILLEGAL.

 

People have personal reasons to kill people too but they go to jail for very large amounts of time because once again it is against the law. I don't feel bad for anyone who does drugs because they make there own bed. We all have problems, we all don't break the law.

[Nedew]

I don't see how anyone here can make a case for Jeff Hardy, I don't know anyone in my family who does any drugs and I only know one crack head that I worked at the same place as me but I refused to ever work with him. Including leaving the job when we were scheduled to work together but plain and simple DRUGS are ILLEGAL.

 

People have personal reasons to kill people too but they go to jail for very large amounts of time because once again it is against the law. I don't feel bad for anyone who does drugs because they make there own bed. We all have problems, we all don't break the law.

 

Sodomy was a crime in many American states until 2003, does that make gay people as bad as murderers? You sound like a real stickler for the law. People all have their own moral codes, 'the law' can't be used as a moral code for all - it is merely the moral code of the people in charge at any given time.

[Johnny Fenoli]

Sodomy was a crime in many American states until 2003, does that make gay people as bad as murderers? You sound like a real stickler for the law. People all have their own moral codes, 'the law' can't be used as a moral code for all - it is merely the moral code of the people in charge at any given time.

 

 

 

Nedew, not trying to sound rude or anything at all, but have you/do you have some of these similar demons? Only, because you seem very defensive of drug users/abusers. Honestly asking. Not trying to start some kind of board war.

[djthefunkchris]

I agree, there are an enormous amount of "failures".

I have to say, I laughed a bit when reading this (maybe too much). I however, tend to agree.

 

I don't see how anyone here can make a case for Jeff Hardy, I don't know anyone in my family who does any drugs and I only know one crack head that I worked at the same place as me but I refused to ever work with him. Including leaving the job when we were scheduled to work together but plain and simple DRUGS are ILLEGAL.

 

People have personal reasons to kill people too but they go to jail for very large amounts of time because once again it is against the law. I don't feel bad for anyone who does drugs because they make there own bed. We all have problems, we all don't break the law.

I'm going to take up Nedew's side here for a second though. I myself couldn't stand smoking cigarettes. I didn't know the danger's like we do now, of course, but I did know there was a possibility of danger's. My thing is, I didn't like them... But because of my ignorance, my total belief that I was immune, etc... I tried them. The reason was because in the day room where we watched TV, a Football game was on. This was when I was in the Service. I asked them to put out the cigarrettes so I could enjoy the game. They said they would, as long as I smoked a cigarrette fully first. I did, so they put-em out inside the room.

 

Here I am 20+ years later, still smoking wishing I didn't smoke the first cigarrette. I'm too stubborn to try a crutch, which is my downfall I suppose, but yet here I am still smoking after trying to quit at least on four different occasions. It started out alot different then most, but the end is the same.

 

My point is that you never know why someone started, and it's never as easy to quit as one might think. Unless you have legitimately been hooked on something, it's not the same. I could have seen it coming I never had to smoke again... but long nights talking to my girl on the phone, it somehow made me feel better for some reason. Then I bought my first pack about two or three weeks later. Now I buy cartons.

 

On a better note though, I used to drink very heavily. I think I've drank maybe twice this year (including New Years eve). Both times not enough to make a difference. I never got hooked on drinking for some reason, but smoking was a different story. Drank my 20's away though, seriously. Because it was fun though, not because I was itching for it.

Sodomy was a crime in many American states until 2003, does that make gay people as bad as murderers? You sound like a real stickler for the law. People all have their own moral codes, 'the law' can't be used as a moral code for all - it is merely the moral code of the people in charge at any given time.

There are still alot of laws that exist that no one has enforced in 50 years or more. They need to be taken out, but for some reason they still exist. It's not the same thing.

Nedew, not trying to sound rude or anything at all, but have you/do you have some of these similar demons? Only, because you seem very defensive of drug users/abusers. Honestly asking. Not trying to start some kind of board war.

 

Don't answer this Nedew!!!!

[Sartagis]

I'm 100% behind Nedew's way of thought. Well maybe not 100% but you know what I mean.

[Candyman]

Wow, at a guess, you've got a massive grudge against drug users. You allude to someone in your family having a drug problem... and whether that be alcohol, crack, heroin, whatever, i'm assuming they've wronged you at some point, and since then you've gone all self-righteous.

 

People don't use drugs because they go "oh hey, i'm gonna be a f*ck up in life!". That's not how it works and if you really think it's that simple, i pity you. Everyone has their own personal reason, but it's usually something to do with having an escape, a way out. Something to block the pain out. And again, everyone has their own kind of pain.

 

Of course, you boil it down to much more simpler than that, and just think "problems? pffft, he's not as wonderful as me! He can just walk it off!". I don't know what your family member did, but try and see it from their side as well eh? And if they are/were an absolute tosser, doesn't mean all drug users/abusers are.

 

I don't personally know Jeff Hardy, so i can't knowingly comment on him, but i have no doubt that he has his reasons. Would he be better off without them? Most probably. Is it as easy at clicking your fingers to get to being clean? No. And it really bothers me that so many people don't understand that.

 

One man's "reasons" is another man's excuses. And while you may not want it to be simple, it really can be quite simple: drugs are illegal. Whatever reasons/excuses Jeff has, there are legals ways to deal with them. Of course it's not easy, doing the right thing rarely is, and that sucks for him. But that doesn't absolve him of responsibility for his actions.

 

Sodomy was a crime in many American states until 2003, does that make gay people as bad as murderers? You sound like a real stickler for the law. People all have their own moral codes, 'the law' can't be used as a moral code for all - it is merely the moral code of the people in charge at any given time.

 

Are you saying Jeff Hardy's above the law? All drug abusers are above the law? Anybody with a "reason" is above the law? That must be a nice feeling. 'The law' isn't a moral code - it's the law. The only morals involved are everybody's own personal morals dictating if they choose to live by the law. Anybody can take the easy way out and break the law, claiming they have "reasons" to do so. And that's fine, as long as they're prepared to deal with the consequences. Additionally, last I heard laws against murder have yet to be ruled unconstitional in the United states. Neither have laws against steroid and cocaine possession.

 

But this is all beyond PoisonedSuperman's point - which is simply that having reasons to do so doesn't make it acceptable to break the law. At the end of the day, Ted Bundy had the exact same reasons for what he did as drug abusers do for what they do. It was his way out, it was the thing that blocked out his pain. Do you defend Ted Bundy as vehemently as you do drug users? I doubt it. And no, I'm not saying drug abuse is as bad as rape and murder. But where do you draw the line? What laws are OK to break as long as you have a "reason" and what laws aren't?

[Self]

I'm in the Nedew camp. I'm not a drug guy (never even smoked a cigarette) but my philosophy in life has always been that you should be free to do anything you want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Jeff's only hurting himself, and while that makes me sad, it doesn't make him a villain or a failure in my eyes. Just a guy living his life.

[The Masked Orange]

I'm in the Nedew camp. I'm not a drug guy (never even smoked a cigarette) but my philosophy in life has always been that you should be free to do anything you want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Jeff's only hurting himself, and while that makes me sad, it doesn't make him a villain or a failure in my eyes. Just a guy living his life.

 

Tell that to me and my six year old cousin.

 

I told him that Hardy is in jail, he started crying, I got an earful from his mum.

 

The point is, if you are a celebrity, and you are in the spotlight, you've got to realise that all the decisions you make now will go beyond just your life.

 

Not to mention the fact that he is damaging his family aswell.

[The Masked Orange]

I just want to say, normally I'm very liberal, and that I think people should have the freedom to do what they want.

 

But after seeing my neigbourhood go to Sh*t because of drug-dealing gangs that sprang up, I now realise that drugs are far more dangerous than, "it's my life to screw up".

 

People on drugs, in all fairness, have some form of addiction to the drug they are on, ans as such they themselves are oblivous to whatever harm they are doing half the time. And it is that sort of reckless behaviour that leads to so many problems. Which is why I beleive drugs should be taken out of everyone lives completely. Everyone deserves a second chance, but how can you do that if your life has gone to pot?

[Johnny Fenoli]

I'm in the Nedew camp. I'm not a drug guy (never even smoked a cigarette) but my philosophy in life has always been that you should be free to do anything you want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Jeff's only hurting himself, and while that makes me sad, it doesn't make him a villain or a failure in my eyes. Just a guy living his life.

 

 

 

The thing is, people can say, it's ok if he smokes crack, he's only hurting himself. Until they start stealing for the crack, start robbing for it, even killing for it. Drugs make you do some stupid crap.

[Self]

The thing is, people can say, it's ok if he smokes crack, he's only hurting himself. Until they start stealing for the crack, start robbing for it, even killing for it. Drugs make you do some stupid crap.

 

Oh absolutely. There's a line. When you start hurting people, that is wrong. I doubt Jeff will be stealing to pay for crack, but if he was, absolutely. Bad guy.

 

Good point on the cousin thing, Orange. Although I personally resent the need for celebrities to be 'role models' in society, I imagine a good portion of the Hardy-Army will be crying themselves to sleep for the next few nights.

[Johnny Fenoli]

Oh absolutely. There's a line. When you start hurting people, that is wrong. I doubt Jeff will be stealing to pay for crack, but if he was, absolutely. Bad guy.

 

Good point on the cousin thing, Orange. Although I personally resent the need for celebrities to be 'role models' in society, I imagine a good portion of the Hardy-Army will be crying themselves to sleep for the next few nights.

 

It may be too late...

 

 

 

 

[Candyman]

And honestly, I can't salt Jeff for possession. I probably have as much, if not more, pills than he was busted for in my house right now (I don't believe in pain meds so I still have prescribed meds from the last millennium in my house).

 

Same here. But it's not fair to anybody involved to compare you or me to Jeff Hardy. I've never been suspended from my place of work so many times I got fired. I don't work in a public industry that has seen countless people die young from drug problems, hell I'm not a celebrity at all. I'm assuming this is all true for you as well.

 

If John Cena was caught with all those pills (not including the cocaine and steroids), it wouldn't be nearly the problem it is for Jeff Hardy. Hardy doesn't have the benefit of the doubt that people who aren't repeat offenders have. But even if you go so far as to believe he did nothing illegal - say, he had prescriptions for all the pills and steroids - it's STILL idiotic. That's like a recovering alcoholic having a fridge full of beer. It's just a bad decision, and shows he's not serious about getting over his demons.

[Moderndaywarrior]

I would tend to agree with Candyman;there is not a single person in the world that doesn't have troubles and pains of some nature or another to a degree,we choose our own selves how to handle it and for me that's what it comes down to;at the end of the day he knows that at least SOME of the substances are considered illegal;he is not mentally challeneged or otherwise unable to make his own judgements,noone(AFAIK) held a gun to Hardy's head and said "Take all these pills or else!".....he knowingly chose to break a law and that there are consequences for doing such.

 

Becuase of the physical nature of my job,I've injured myself in many interesting ways (back spasms,broken bones,sprains,strains,pulls,and more) so it's not exactly like I'm a stranger to Vicodin,had it prescribed more than once,and I have only ever taken one Vicodin pill,the other subscriptions for it I always just throw away......the one time I took it the world was a wonderful place for about 9 hours and then you feel like absolute heck,ten times worse than you did before and you feel like "maybe if I took another pill this feeling will go away..." At that point I knew how dangerous it could be,and made my own choice: I'd rather be in a little pain with a clear mind than happy sappy but living from pill to pill.....I flushed the rest and never touched another one ever again.I can see how one could develeop and addiction,but then I can also see that you sorta know what's going on and that you're running the risk....if it does happen I tend to believe it's more of a failing of the self,more than anything else.

 

As far as laws go,part of the deal when we formed a society is that there would be certains rules that we must abide by,they keep us reglulated,otherwise it's just an anarchistic mess.Are there times when a law becomes outdated?Yep. Do we have to like every law out there?Nope.We still have to follow them though,because by being a member of soecity we have agreed to......if a law doesn't work,there's a process to change it;if we follow that process and it is changed then it's no problem......we can't just go around throwing out the bits we don't like though just because we personally disagree with it.

 

From my own experience and from my experiences working with and be friends with people with a drug or alcohol problem,I have seen alot of times just how the things they do,do affect them physically(from being unable to keep their balance,to being unable to distance and perspective,passing out and more) and affect their judgement from the simple and stupidly harmless(jumping on a little kids bike and riding full throttle around a lot) to the incredibly dangerous(smashing up a car and taking out about half a dozen parked cars due to a drug induced hallucination leading the person to believe they were being chased by the entire police force)Having to go into a wrestling ring and put my personal bodily safety into the hands of someone who could at any moment "fail to properly function" in any of those ways would,quite frankly,scare the heck out of me.

 

Now on a personal level,I feel bad for Jeff as it seems he just can't "get it together"....I hate to see anyone suffer and potenially ruin their life;I'd be overjoyed if he could get things straightened out to where he didn't have to rely on such things to get by.On another level though.....this is what the 3rd time he's burned them and brought bad press in them like this?They've offered to pay the cost and give him the time to do the rehab,but he refused?IMO then it's obvious he's made his choice,he doesn't want to be helped,he wants the status quo...and if that's the way it is then I'm sorry, it's time to stop wasting effort....he needs to be left go from the WWE,he needs to be punished as determined fit by our courts system, until he's ready to act like a responsible member of society.

[lazorbeak]

For the record, I agree with Nedew about everything he's said. Johnny Fenoli: asking Nedew if he's got 'similar vices' just because he's not ready to break out a lynch mob before a guy has been convicted of anything is despicable behavior. Completely inappropriate.

 

Does everyone on this thread remember that piracy is illegal? That changing lanes without signaling is illegal? And the question of things being against the law is not the most important part of the argument!

 

The point that people seem to be missing is where it's not okay for you to get on your moral high horse and make value judgments of a guy whose circumstances you don't know. And you don't know them because there hasn't been a trial and there hasn't been a conviction. A lot of people break the law. That doesn't automatically make them "****" as people. Comparisons to murderers is both insensitive and completely clueless.

 

It's fine to be disappointed or upset or angry, but arguing Jeff Hardy is a bad person because he (allegedly) broke the law is just straight up ignorant.

[GDE71]

Jeff Hardy is one of the dumbest POS there is.

 

People like that are a waste of good air.

[The Masked Orange]

Jeff Hardy is one of the dumbest POS there is.

 

People like that are a waste of good air.

 

Now that just saddened my day.

 

 

Jeff Hardy has screwed up. Even he has admitted that.

 

But mindless insults? petty and weak and they really should be smited from the face of this thread.

 

EDIT: is it smited or smitten? or is smitten just the original meaning.

[Astil]

Oh absolutely. There's a line. When you start hurting people, that is wrong. I doubt Jeff will be stealing to pay for crack, but if he was, absolutely. Bad guy.

 

Good point on the cousin thing, Orange. Although I personally resent the need for celebrities to be 'role models' in society, I imagine a good portion of the Hardy-Army will be crying themselves to sleep for the next few nights.

 

The other thing is family and friends. No one lives alone, and when you **** yourself over with anything you're not just hurting you but everyone who cares about you.

[CQI13]

So it's not OK to judge someone without knowing all the facts...but it's OK to "support" someone (a stranger essentially) under the same circumstances? Go figure.

[lazorbeak]

So it's not OK to judge someone without knowing all the facts...but it's OK to "support" someone (a stranger essentially) under the same circumstances? Go figure.

 

Haha yes, because one is the inversion of the other?

 

I'm not even making this argument but do you seriously not see where "support" does not involve judging a person's actions either positively or negatively?

[Moderndaywarrior]

Haha yes, because one is the inversion of the other?

 

I'm not even making this argument but do you seriously not see where "support" does not involve judging a person's actions either positively or negatively?

 

Seems to me now we're doing the same thing we claim not to do? (judging a guy based him judging another guy,getting on the good old moral high horse and trying to say one is better than another because they don't judge.)

 

In reality the truth is going to lie somewhere in the middle.....though i would ask where was all this "support" when Lex Luger got nailed for having a big mess of pills?I guess when you're over the hill and not a fave of the IWC then we can dump all over them(as it pertains to the IWC in general,and not anyone here in specific).

 

Personally,I feel that everyone is entitled to a viewpoint no matter which side of the fence they happen to lie on.....and we're entitled to question that viewpoint,but let's keep it to logical and sane discussion/point making without getting into the semantics of personal morality.

[lazorbeak]

Seems to me now we're doing the same thing we claim not to do? (judging a guy based him judging another guy,getting on the good old moral high horse and trying to say one is better than another because they don't judge.)

 

No, it's actually not the same. Two pretty important differences. First, "judging a guy based on him judging another guy" isn't comparable because there aren't any glaring assumptions in the second person's "judging." The "second-hand judger" does have access to all the facts: they can see the first person saying someone they don't personally know is a bad person based on an arrest, which is not the same as a conviction.

 

But more importantly, it's an issue of questioning behavior vs. judging a person. I don't think anyone on this thread is a bad person and wouldn't for a second attempt to make a value judgment about whether they deserve to live. And I think it's in poor taste to make judgments like that, especially if I don't know the circumstances.

[Remianen]

I don't see how anyone here can make a case for Jeff Hardy, I don't know anyone in my family who does any drugs and I only know one crack head that I worked at the same place as me but I refused to ever work with him. Including leaving the job when we were scheduled to work together but plain and simple DRUGS are ILLEGAL.

 

Honestly, I think you need to go back and look at the laws for every one of the 50 states. I'll even give you a hint: check the states that were part of the Confederacy. You'll find a lot of things are 'illegal' that are completely nonsensical. Here's one: Auburn, Alabama: If a man has sex with a virgin, no matter what her age or marital status, he can be arrested and sent to jail for up to 5 years. So, 'deflowering' a woman is ILLEGAL in Auburn, Alabama.

 

Oh yeah, and isn't marijuana illegal....except when it's not?

 

Seriously, if you're going to stand on the universal 'it's illegal' line, it might be a good idea to make sure laws make universal sense (and most of the time, they don't). Ever hear of the Rockefeller Drug laws? A person can be sentenced to more time for possession of a small amount of drugs....than people who murder people or rape children. Look it up.

 

People have personal reasons to kill people too but they go to jail for very large amounts of time because once again it is against the law. I don't feel bad for anyone who does drugs because they make there own bed. We all have problems, we all don't break the law.

 

Patently false. I am personally acquainted with 6 people who have murdered other people and served less than 5 years. Is that a 'very large amount of time'? I don't think so. Again, you might want to look outside of the 'on paper' perspective. Go look at the rate at which second degree murder turns into first or second degree manslaughter, which shaves up to 15 years off a sentence. Also look at the difference between the two crimes, in legal terms. I break the law at least a dozen times a year. On paper, it is illegal in the United States to reduce your taxable income for the sole purpose of reducing your tax burden. Look it up. The problem with enforcing that law should be obvious (how do you prove intent?). Millions of people break that law every single tax year.

 

There are still alot of laws that exist that no one has enforced in 50 years or more. They need to be taken out, but for some reason they still exist. It's not the same thing.

 

Bingo! The law is not absolute and it doesn't always make sense. Many times, people are ignorant of the law (which, in legal terms, is no excuse) so they break it without even knowing. Heck, the quantity of prescription drugs that I have in my house right now is illegal. I've had federal agents who have seen them and not said a word about it (yep, they're friends but still...). Hell, from 1989 until 1998, I had four Dianabol tablets (I experimented with 'roids when I was 16) in the bottom drawer of my dresser.

 

One man's "reasons" is another man's excuses. And while you may not want it to be simple, it really can be quite simple: drugs are illegal.

 

Except when they're not.

 

Are you saying Jeff Hardy's above the law? All drug abusers are above the law? Anybody with a "reason" is above the law?

 

Um, you do realize that 'a prescription' constitutes a valid 'reason' for breaking this particular law, yes?

 

That must be a nice feeling. 'The law' isn't a moral code - it's the law. The only morals involved are everybody's own personal morals dictating if they choose to live by the law. Anybody can take the easy way out and break the law, claiming they have "reasons" to do so. And that's fine, as long as they're prepared to deal with the consequences. Additionally, last I heard laws against murder have yet to be ruled unconstitional in the United states. Neither have laws against steroid and cocaine possession.

 

Funny. Murder is murder.....except when it's not. Do the terms 'justifiable homicide' mean anything to you? In the last 10 years, there have been over a dozen cases of police officers murdering private citizens unjustifiably. How many of those police officers were charged and convicted of murder? TWO. There have been videotaped instances of police trying to kill private citizens. Did those police officers (representatives of 'the almighty law') pay for their crimes? Newp. Seriously, leave the 'on paper' perspective and look at reality. There are exceptions to EVERY rule (and law). Also, do you realize that one single bill of US currency used to snort coke can contaminate an entire cash drawer? I'm not saying Jeff wasn't treating his nose to some candy but the wording screams 'piling on' to me. Powder cocaine. Does cocaine come in other forms when typically used? This isn't sugar we're talking about, after all.

 

But even if you go so far as to believe he did nothing illegal - say, he had prescriptions for all the pills and steroids - it's STILL idiotic. That's like a recovering alcoholic having a fridge full of beer. It's just a bad decision, and shows he's not serious about getting over his demons.

 

So, lemme get this straight. You are of the belief that, as a person with past drug issues, Jeff should have quit his job and....done something else? You'd have to believe that since it's been established that being a professional wrestler is very much like any other professional athlete in that you're going to have to work through sometimes excruciating pain. So Jeff's alternatives would've been the Michael Jackson method (i.e. having a doctor on hand to administer pain medication, on demand) or stop doing whatever was causing his pain to begin with (thus quitting his job). Personally, I'm dubious about both alternatives.

 

But more importantly, it's an issue of questioning behavior vs. judging a person. I don't think anyone on this thread is a bad person and wouldn't for a second attempt to make a value judgment about whether they deserve to live. And I think it's in poor taste to make judgments like that, especially if I don't know the circumstances.

 

This.

 

I've developed a healthy distrust for both law enforcement and media reports. If this had happened to you, no one would care. Newspapers wouldn't run stories on it and nobody would blog about it. If it happened to me, the only reason anyone would care would be as a result of connecting me to a godparent and trying to form a story from that. But because Jeff Hardy is "a name", this automatically becomes a story. I'm also dubious because of the tip aspect. Who was the snitch? What did the snitch have to gain by ratting Jeff out? How much (or in what manner) was s/he paid? When is the book due?