Arenas suspended indefinitely

[VF21]

And how does an unloaded gun go off? What does it fire?

Okay, excuse my anger, but that is one of the most irresponsible, ignorant comments I've seen about this whole situation. When I was little, my best friend's brother ended up DEAD because he was shot by someone who was sure the gun they were holding was "unloaded."

There are a lot of serious issues at work here and I honestly believe they deserve better than some rim shot one liner.



And Supes, please do not take this personally. My hurt and anger are directed solely at your comment...and not at you.

 

[Superman]

Okay, excuse my anger, but that is one of the most irresponsible, ignorant comments I've seen about this whole situation. When I was little, my best friend's brother ended up DEAD because he was shot by someone who was sure the gun they were holding was "unloaded."

There are a lot of serious issues at work here and I honestly believe they deserve better than some rim shot one liner.



And Supes, please do not take this personally. My hurt and anger are directed solely at your comment...and not at you.

...

I realize there's a level of disconnection here which is likely influencing people's opinions. We're writing about this online on a message board. The soapbox is somewhat assumed in this situation. It's not exactly the argument that Gilbert Arenas acted poorly and should be punished that I disagree with. It's more the tone which seems completely over the top on almost all accounts. I understand some people have a closer relationship to gun violence than I do. But trying to be as objective as possible here, the severity of the punishment should be proportional to the severity of the crime.

hrdboild said it better than I could.

I'm not trying to be insensitive, but I think it's important to note that the gun was not loaded. And my comment was in response (perhaps you missed this) to a poster saying that unloaded guns can go off accidentally. Of course a gun could possibly have ammunition in it, even though the person holding it thinks it doesn't. But there's a way to be 100% sure that your gun isn't loaded, just as sure as there's a way to be 100% sure that your car doors are locked. It's very important, and can mean the difference between life and death, as you know so well, but the fact is that an unloaded gun doesn't fire. It wasn't a rim shot one liner. I've put in a ton of words in this thread. I would think you would take them into consideration before jumping all over one question.

I'm sorry you feel that me stating that as fact is irresponsible and ignorant, but if a gun doesn't have ammo in it, it has nothing to fire. According to Arenas' statement, the guns had no ammo in them.

 

[VF21]

...



hrdboild said it better than I could.

I'm not trying to be insensitive, but I think it's important to note that the gun was not loaded. And my comment was in response (perhaps you missed this) to a poster saying that unloaded guns can go off accidentally. Of course a gun could possibly have ammunition in it, even though the person holding it thinks it doesn't. But there's a way to be 100% sure that your gun isn't loaded, just as sure as there's a way to be 100% sure that your car doors are locked. It's very important, and can mean the difference between life and death, as you know so well, but the fact is that an unloaded gun doesn't fire. It wasn't a rim shot one liner. I've put in a ton of words in this thread. I would think you would take them into consideration before jumping all over one question.

I'm sorry you feel that me stating that as fact is irresponsible and ignorant, but if a gun doesn't have ammo in it, it has nothing to fire. According to Arenas' statement, the guns had no ammo in them.

The guy who owned the gun that killed my friend's brother swore up and down his gun wasn't loaded, either. I watched that kid bleed out and die on the floor of his own living room, dude. And it was because an unloaded gun wasn't unloaded.

It's fairly easy to tell if a revolver has bullets in it. It's not always as easy to tell if you're using an automatic or semi-automatic, since removing the clip doesn't necessarily remove all the ammunition. If a bullet has already been chambered, that gun is loaded.

I'm bowing out of this but I think people are underestimating the potential for disaster from "unloaded weapons." I still see a 10-year-old boy lying on a rug in a pool of blood...

EDIT: Loaded or unloaded, the problem was that Arenas brought guns into his workplace, which is in clear violation of the CBA he and all other players are held to. In addition, this isn't his first problem with handguns. We can dance around things like, "Yes, but it wasn't loaded" but that's not the issue that concerns me. It's Arenas' blatant and continuing disregard and disdain for the rules he is supposed to follow. How many chances should he get?

 

[Superman]

The guy who owned the gun that killed my friend's brother swore up and down his gun wasn't loaded, either. I watched that kid bleed out and die on the floor of his own living room, dude. And it was because an unloaded gun wasn't unloaded.

It probably wasn't because someone took the gun out and set it on a bench, though. Whatever happened there, tragic and sad as it was, sounds like it was the result of wrecklessness.

A few posts ago, I mentioned that I think Gibert Arenas' actions were thoughtless, senseless, etc. I'm not excusing what he did. But in my mind, there are three separate issues here. There are unloaded guns, which the law usually considers differently from a loaded gun, stored in a locker at the Wizards arena (which is what most of my unloaded gun talk was about, by the way); there are those same guns set on a chair as a misguided joke; and there's a loaded and cocked gun being waved around. I recognize the what-ifs associated with guns, but we're talking about what was, not what could have been.

It's fairly easy to tell if a revolver has bullets in it. It's not always as easy to tell if you're using an automatic or semi-automatic, since removing the clip doesn't necessarily remove all the ammunition. If a bullet has already been chambered, that gun is loaded.

I'm bowing out of this but I think people are underestimating the potential for disaster from "unloaded weapons." I still see a 10-year-old boy lying on a rug in a pool of blood...

All good points, but it's also possible to completely empty a gun and be 100% certain that it has no bullets in it, isn't that true? It sucks that the person who owned the gun that shot the ten year old kid wasn't more careful. And I know that this kind of thing happens all the time. I'm not trying to underestimate an unloaded gun.

EDIT: Loaded or unloaded, the problem was that Arenas brought guns into his workplace, which is in clear violation of the CBA he and all other players are held to. In addition, this isn't his first problem with handguns. We can dance around things like, "Yes, but it wasn't loaded" but that's not the issue that concerns me. It's Arenas' blatant and continuing disregard and disdain for the rules he is supposed to follow. How many chances should he get?

You're right, he did violate the CBA. I doubt he was aware of that. And to me, that's not the primary issue, assuming he was storing the guns in his locker like he said he was. That might be what costs him the most, but it's of secondary concern to me.

Secondly, his first gun problem was a misdemeanor, and quite frankly, a technicality. The officers who cited him determined that the gun was not loaded, and was separate from the ammunition. Again, not trying to make light of it, but it was a gun that was registered in one state, but not another. It wasn't a dirty gun. Dumb mistake for someone who claims to be a responsible gun owner, but not a devilish act. He got a one game suspension.

Which brings me to the fact that I don't think this is about second chances and such. He blatantly disregarded the rules and does need to be punished for his irresponsible behavior. I don't believe the appropriate response from the NBA would be to ban him for life. I also don't think he should get a slap on the wrist. I stated before that I think Stern should handle this situation similar to how Roger Goodell handled Michael Vick. In light of the severity of his crimes and, as you mentioned, his disdain for the rules, he should get a pretty heavy-handed punishment. But I think a lifetime ban is inordinate.

And I do think it matters whether the gun was loaded or not. The law makes a clear distinction between a loaded gun and an unloaded gun. I don't think either should be taken lightly, but there's a difference.

 

[Elise10]

Supes: you might think that his first charge was a technicality, but at the same didn't he just do the same thing again by not having them registered in DC. Prosecutors are bringing up the misdemeanor charge in CA as something to consider for the grand jury.


There's times where you think you're the life of the party, until you realize that no one is laughing. I know for a fact that there is another thing going on with Gilbert. Not on such a scale as this but it's not good either.

Even if he had the best intention of keeping the guns away from his kids, as well as turning them in to security for them to be given to the police, he had to play one last joke, couldn't let a sarcastic remark go(Javaris saying he'll shoot him in his surgically repaired knees after Gilbert allegedly saying he'll blow up his car).

Would agents have to at least know the CBA even if the players themselves wouldn't?

 

[pshn80]

Okay, excuse my anger, but that is one of the most irresponsible, ignorant comments I've seen about this whole situation. When I was little, my best friend's brother ended up DEAD because he was shot by someone who was sure the gun they were holding was "unloaded."

There are a lot of serious issues at work here and I honestly believe they deserve better than some rim shot one liner.



And Supes, please do not take this personally. My hurt and anger are directed solely at your comment...and not at you.

VF21 I'm sure your gone by now as you said but I see your comments here as a breathe of fresh air. I agree completely. I have been brought up to understand that there is no such thing as an unloaded gun meaning that you always handle and look upon it as loaded gun.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Not only should players know the CBA and absolutely their agents reminding them constantly - especially to a pathetic problem-child like Arenas - but they also get tons of lectures about possible dangers from coaches. Maybe no tutoring by some self-appointed posse too often in the picture, but they do have constant reminders on all of it. Especially the big pitfalls - illegal drugs, excessive drinking, gambling, weapons, girls (strip bar stuff, etc.), and so forth. They are given videos produced by the league to view league policy in private and at regular team meetings as reminders of what can befall them if they screw up representing the NBA.

 

[Superman]

Not only should players know the CBA and absolutely their agents reminding them constantly - especially to a pathetic problem-child like Arenas - but they also get tons of lectures about possible dangers from coaches. Maybe no tutoring by some self-appointed posse too often in the picture, but they do have constant reminders on all of it. Especially the big pitfalls - illegal drugs, excessive drinking, gambling, weapons, girls (strip bar stuff, etc.), and so forth. They are given videos produced by the league to view league policy in private and at regular team meetings as reminders of what can befall them if they screw up representing the NBA.

Even if that happens, NBA players constantly do the exact dumb stuff you just mentioned in that post.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Even if that happens, NBA players constantly do the exact dumb stuff you just mentioned in that post.

Exactly. No one knew when Gilbert Arenas became Agent Zero it was referring to his IQ. No one knew he was quite this much of a freak show embarrassing fool.

Now he pays for his dangerous stupidity and only question is how much will he ultimately suffer as it all plays out over months and what will happen to just as dumb, maybe dumber (if possible for IQ less than zero) Crittenton.

 

[Widowmaker2k]

I don't think that it's Gilbert Arenas' job to teach my children that guns are dangerous. That's my job, and I take it very seriously. I don't want anyone but me and those who are close to me teaching my kids about gun safety, etc. If "some dumb kid" takes his cues from Gilbert Arenas, he's just as likely to take his cues from pretty much any TV show that kids are subjected to. Some estimates say that a kid has witnessed close to a thousand gun related crimes on TV by the time they go to high school. Gilbert Arenas isn't the only problem. I don't think he should be singled out because of that. If you're going to ban him, ban him because of what he did, not because "he's supposed to be an example."

Look, I know that we don't do politics here, but I'm a registered, damn near card carrying Libertarian, and personal responsibility is tops for me. What this represents though is a slight on the brand of the NBA. If some kid idolizes Arenas (God help them) and hurts somebody else because they're playing with guns, that reflects poorly on the NBA, and could seriously impact the league's revenue. Kids should learn from their parents, always, but some kids aren't lucky enough to have good parents. It's sad, but I don't think it's a reach to say that some kids learn as much television as they do from their family. This doesn't alleviate them from responsibility, of course, but it can turn public opinion against organizations that have influenced them poorly. Thus, as an ambassador of the league, Arenas is subject to any judgement that Stern decides to hand out. I don't think he should be banned for life, but if the NBA decides that they're going to make more money without Gilbert than they are with him, they have every right to fire him and move on.

I understand what you're saying, but in the same vein, you can say that someone who is convicted of DUI or buying illegal drugs should be banned for life because they're sending the message that those things are a joking matter. I think part of Arenas' punishment, like has been mentioned, is he should have to do some high profile community service where he can display his contrition -- if there really is any -- regarding his actions. I don't think he should be banned for life because he set a bad example.

Except that this excludes the NBA from the entire process. Joe Citizen on the street getting a DUI or buying illegal drugs is very different from a high profile member of a major industry doing it. As an NBA star, Arenas represents a lot of money for the league, which has no obligation to keep him if he hurts their profit margin. It's all dollars and cents, and that's a good thing. Morality be damned, the market will decide if Gilbert's actions were acceptable or not.

By the way, we all knew that Widowmaker2k is a gun owner...

Heh, I get a lot of crap for this avatar from different communities. It's from an old gamer tag I had when I was a teenager, and because so many online folks knew me by it, I just kept it. To be fair, I grew up with a bunch of cowboys, and got the name from broncs that are particularly dangerous to break or ride.

 

[VF21]

...It's from an old gamer tag I had when I was a teenager, and because so many online folks knew me by it, I just kept it. To be fair, I grew up with a bunch of cowboys, and got the name from broncs that are particularly dangerous to break or ride.

All this time, I thought it referred to a term used by lumberjacks for a tree that is felled but hangs up in another tree, creating an extremely dangerous situation.

 

[Widowmaker2k]

All this time, I thought it referred to a term used by lumberjacks for a tree that is felled but hangs up in another tree, creating an extremely dangerous situation.

You know what? The first time I posted here, you asked me about that. I had no idea what you were talking about at the time, but asked some lumberjack friends of mine, and they knew EXACTLY what you meant. Funny stuff actually (well, sort of, given the macabre nature), they had some stories to tell about that. It also can refer to, from a lumberjack perspective, a big dead(ish) branch that hangs up high in a tree about to be felled. If that branch happens to fall on a man...well the name makes sense.

 

[Gargamel]

Exactly. No one knew when Gilbert Arenas became Agent Zero it was referring to his IQ. No one knew he was quite this much of a freak show embarrassing fool.

IQ Zero

 

[Elise10]

Not only should players know the CBA and absolutely their agents reminding them constantly - especially to a pathetic problem-child like Arenas - but they also get tons of lectures about possible dangers from coaches. Maybe no tutoring by some self-appointed posse too often in the picture, but they do have constant reminders on all of it. Especially the big pitfalls - illegal drugs, excessive drinking, gambling, weapons, girls (strip bar stuff, etc.), and so forth. They are given videos produced by the league to view league policy in private and at regular team meetings as reminders of what can befall them if they screw up representing the NBA.

I asked that question because apparently Gilbert has no agent.

 

[Superman]

Look, I know that we don't do politics here, but I'm a registered, damn near card carrying Libertarian, and personal responsibility is tops for me. What this represents though is a slight on the brand of the NBA. If some kid idolizes Arenas (God help them) and hurts somebody else because they're playing with guns, that reflects poorly on the NBA, and could seriously impact the league's revenue. Kids should learn from their parents, always, but some kids aren't lucky enough to have good parents. It's sad, but I don't think it's a reach to say that some kids learn as much television as they do from their family. This doesn't alleviate them from responsibility, of course, but it can turn public opinion against organizations that have influenced them poorly. Thus, as an ambassador of the league, Arenas is subject to any judgement that Stern decides to hand out. I don't think he should be banned for life, but if the NBA decides that they're going to make more money without Gilbert than they are with him, they have every right to fire him and move on.

I'm just saying that for me, personally, I think it's hypocritical of me as a parent to hold anyone else responsible for what my kids learn. TV is one thing, because kids watch TV. I try to monitor what my daughter watches, but I only have one kid. I'm sure it's infinitely harder for parents with more than one child, especially as they get older. I don't think any public figure, no matter what association they are a part of, should be looked up to and idolized (see: Tiger Woods), and if Gilbert Arenas is setting a bad example, I think it's up to me to correct that influence.

Now, if the NBA decides that Arenas has damaged their brand, they still have to have cause to suspend him indefinitely. Plenty of NBA players have damaged their brand. I mentioned before that I think The Brawl was far more damaging to the NBA than Arenas' actions have been. Ron Artest is still playing, though. I think the Wizards might move to void the contract, and it sounds like they have every right to. But if there's no NBA sanctions hanging over him, I wouldn't be surprised if another team picked him up.

Except that this excludes the NBA from the entire process. Joe Citizen on the street getting a DUI or buying illegal drugs is very different from a high profile member of a major industry doing it. As an NBA star, Arenas represents a lot of money for the league, which has no obligation to keep him if he hurts their profit margin. It's all dollars and cents, and that's a good thing. Morality be damned, the market will decide if Gilbert's actions were acceptable or not.

No it doesn't. I'm talking specifically about NBA players who have been caught doing those things. Arenas' isn't even the first NBA player with a serious weapons charge against him this season.

 

[kennadog]

I'm sorry, but part of the problem is that parents are expected to be responsible for everything or everyone their children are influenced by? Children should only learn from their parents? That's just a very recent concept and not helpful to parents or children. I am concious every day that I have a certain degree of responsibility to every child I come into contact with directly or indirectly. This means that I always try to model responsible, mature, adult behavior.

Children are amazingly observant and learn far more about how to act as an adult from what they see adults doing. Yes, parents are their number one role model. Not all kids are lucky enough to have good parents and even fewer have steallar parents. That's why its important for them to have other adult role models.

Best commentary I read about what's happened here in this country was a column by Ellen Goodman. I can't find the whiole thing, but the main point was:

• Americans once expected parents to raise their children in accordance with the dominant cultural messages. Today they are expected to raise their children in opposition to them. Once the chorus of cultural values was full of ministers, teachers, neighbors, leaders. They demanded more conformity, but offered more support. Now the messengers are violent cartoon characters, rappers and celebrities selling sneakers. Parents are considered "responsible" only if they are successful in their resistance. That's what makes child-raising harder. It's not just that American families have less time with their kids; it's that we have to spend more of this time doing battle with our own culture.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I'm sorry, but part of the problem is that parents are expected to be responsible for everything or everyone their children are influenced by? Children should only learn from their parents? That's just a very recent concept and not helpful to parents or children. I am concious every day that I have a certain degree of responsibility to every child I come into contact with directly or indirectly. This means that I always try to model responsible, mature, adult behavior.

I think that parental responsibility took a major down swing after two-career families became the norm. I don't think that parental responsibility is as much a new concept as that it took a vacation. I don't think Supes is saying kids don't learn from everybody, but at some point a lot of parents in this country ceded just about everything to schools and televisions sets, and I think Supes is trying to buck that trend.

 

[kennadog]

I was basically a single mom from the time my son turned 2. I had no choice, but to work. I agree it would be better if either mom or dad could stay home or work only part-time. That's not always possible. I think it's not so much parents who have ceded resposibility by choice. I think they have been fighting a a battle against those forces (TV, video games, celebrities, etc.) and losing or forced to cede ground. They aren't getting much support from society. Believe me I know from personal experience.

For most of human history, children were raised by a group of adults, whether that was a tribe, clan, extended family or "village." It was most definitely not considered that biological parents were solely or even mainly responsible for raising children into responsible adults. Everyone took responsibility. That's what we have lost. Excusing the behavior of any adult, because they shouldn't be role models is a cop out and a complete abandonment of parents by the larger culture.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I think it's not so much parents who have ceded resposibility by choice. I think they have been fighting a a battle against those forces (TV, video games, celebrities, etc.) and losing or forced to cede ground. They aren't getting much support from society. Believe me I know from personal experience.

I agree that the modern reality leaves most with no choice but there was a generational choice somewhere along the line and all subsequent generations have had to deal with the consequences. I think that some of the children affected by this are starting to swing around the other way, I know I am. I don't fault anyone for playing the cards they are dealt though.

 

[Superman]

I was basically a single mom from the time my son turned 2. I had no choice, but to work. I agree it would be better if either mom or dad could stay home or work only part-time. That's not always possible. I think it's not so much parents who have ceded resposibility by choice. I think they have been fighting a a battle against those forces (TV, video games, celebrities, etc.) and losing or forced to cede ground. They aren't getting much support from society. Believe me I know from personal experience.

For most of human history, children were raised by a group of adults, whether that was a tribe, clan, extended family or "village." It was most definitely not considered that biological parents were solely or even mainly responsible for raising children into responsible adults. Everyone took responsibility. That's what we have lost. Excusing the behavior of any adult, because they shouldn't be role models is a cop out and a complete abandonment of parents by the larger culture.

Absolutely true, especially the bolded part. We have a two-income household by necessity, so I know how that can be. And it's hard on both of us to come home and night and spend time with a four year old, working on her homework when she's cranky and tired, and just wants to watch TV. I'm not saying it's easy. And I can imagine how much harder it must be for a single parent. My hat's off to you and everyone who does what you do.

But the "village" concept is still very much alive. It's not as far reaching for some as it is for others, but between teachers, day care providers, babysitters, grandparents, aunts and uncles, friends, etc., kids are raised by a host of adults and even their peers at times. The big difference between now and then is really the media access to celebrities and such, and how kids emulate what they see on TV and in movies and what they hear on the radio. I wish, just like all parents do, I'm sure, that celebrities and public figures would take more responsibility for the fact that they do influence kids. I'm just not holding my breath. I'd rather do as my parents did with me, and help the kids whose lives I personally have an influence on to understand that the things they see and hear aren't for them to imitate. I've listened to a lot of gangster rap and seen a lot of violent movies in my day, but I've always stayed away from the lifestyle that was glorified there, by choice. I didn't associate with the kids in school who were doing drugs and carrying weapons. And I know that I had it good because my parents did a great job teaching me, but their example is what I'm determined to follow (Edit: now that I'm a parent).

That is why, when everyone's jaw hits the floor because Tiger Woods gets caught having an affair, I'm nonplussed. No one ever knew that man; the image we thought was there was a cleverly created facade designed to make him money, and it worked. In reality, he's a spoiled, rich professional athlete who thinks he can get away with whatever he wants. We just didn't know it yet. It sucks that you can't point to people in the public arena and say "that's a good person", but I can point to people that I know and trust and prop them up as good role models. I don't need Tiger Woods or Gilbert Arenas or Michael Jordan or Peyton Manning or anyone else to set a good example. Ideally, they would, but realistically, I don't expect it.

I'm not excusing anyone's behavior. The behavior is deplorable. I just don't hold them responsible for teaching my kids about life. As a parent, teacher, uncle, friend, and authority figure, that's my responsibility. Unfortunately, all too often that includes explaining why certain behavior that they are exposed to is unacceptable. I'd just as soon prefer not to have to do that, but I don't expect Gilbert Arenas to not carry guns because I don't want my kids to follow his example. It's my job to set that straight.

 

[Oprostaj]

Kids are like sponges - the pick up everything and anything. When you take the parents out of the equation - all this is multiplied. I hate to admit it, but I looked up to Iverson probably more than anybody else I've ever met. And I'm a white kid from Europe. But, my parents are divorced, I lived with my mom who worked 3 jobs. I lived in a bad area and played hoops night and day to stay off the street corners or to avoid walking home and getting beat up. When I saw Iverson constantly getting hit and get up, it's almost like it gave me strenght. I know it sounds stupid, but it's true.

Bottom line - kids will pick up on everything. Supes, parents are supposed to be role models, but unless you chain your kids in a shed and not allow them outside contact, how do you know who your kids are emulating? I had, and still have, a great relationship with my mom, and she is the reason I'm a well adjusted adult. But I'll tell you what, watching Iverson play and myself playing basketball was a huge part of my life. I looked up to him, maybe because I didn't have a father figure, but I did nontheless. These players, when they accept these contracts, and take the benefits along with them, must understand that they are, indirectly, affecting people. You have to accept responsibility for your actions, and you have to understand that you are affecting people you NEVER thought you would.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Nobody is saying shackle the kids indoors, but sometimes its just talking to the kids about what they're seeing, what they're doing, etc. that needs to get done and all too often doesn't. Sometimes parents just say "don't do that" and expect their kids to follow. Even if you're working 3 jobs you have to make some time to be involved. Most importantly parents need to be role models themselves and introduce others where they fall short. I had two parents, some coaches, a few teachers, a boss here and there and even some clergy despite being raised outside religion.

 

[Superman]

Kids are like sponges - the pick up everything and anything. When you take the parents out of the equation - all this is multiplied. I hate to admit it, but I looked up to Iverson probably more than anybody else I've ever met. And I'm a white kid from Europe. But, my parents are divorced, I lived with my mom who worked 3 jobs. I lived in a bad area and played hoops night and day to stay off the street corners or to avoid walking home and getting beat up. When I saw Iverson constantly getting hit and get up, it's almost like it gave me strenght. I know it sounds stupid, but it's true.

Bottom line - kids will pick up on everything. Supes, parents are supposed to be role models, but unless you chain your kids in a shed and not allow them outside contact, how do you know who your kids are emulating? I had, and still have, a great relationship with my mom, and she is the reason I'm a well adjusted adult. But I'll tell you what, watching Iverson play and myself playing basketball was a huge part of my life. I looked up to him, maybe because I didn't have a father figure, but I did nontheless. These players, when they accept these contracts, and take the benefits along with them, must understand that they are, indirectly, affecting people. You have to accept responsibility for your actions, and you have to understand that you are affecting people you NEVER thought you would.

I guess my feelings about the subject can be encapsulated into this: If you're expecting public figures to set a good example, you're setting yourself up for failure. I don't hold Gilbert Arenas responsible for setting a good example for my kid the same way my parents didn't hold Michael Jordan responsible for setting a good example for me. He gets paid to play basketball, not raise anyone else's children.

And I'll say again, it would be absolutely great if these people would take responsibility for the impact they have in other people's lives, especially kids. I just don't expect them to. It's not realistic. I'd love to be able to say "Peyton Manning is a great human being, be like him", but I don't know that man. What I know about him is what he wants me to know about him. I do, however, know my neighbors, my friends, my daughter's teachers and care providers, my family and my wife's family, etc.

 

[VF21]

And I'll say again, it would be absolutely great if these people would take responsibility for the impact they have in other people's lives, especially kids. I just don't expect them to. It's not realistic. I'd love to be able to say "Peyton Manning is a great human being, be like him", but I don't know that man. What I know about him is what he wants me to know about him. I do, however, know my neighbors, my friends, my daughter's teachers and care providers, my family and my wife's family, etc.

You might not know Peyton Manning off the field, but you do know Peyton Manning the QB of the Indianapolis Colts. He has an incredible work ethic, he's devoted to his craft, he's one of the best at what he does, he's a team leader, etc.

THOSE are qualities you can hold up to your children to emulate. And they have nothing to do with Manning's private life, nor should they.

The problem with Gilbert Arenas is that he chose to bring his private life into the public spotlight. He blurred the line; his judgment is now horribly suspect, although he's extremely good at what he does on the court, he's a widely known sports figure, etc. Because of that, these same kids we're all just trying to see grow up in the best way possible, may get the mixed message that if you're rich enough and popular enough, you don't have to follow the rules. And, especially with kids, actions speak much louder than words. We can try and explain that what Arenas did was, in fact, wrong but unless his employer comes out with a substantial punishment, the kid is easily liable to figure it's really no big deal, despite what his/her parents might say.

 

[Superman]

You might not know Peyton Manning off the field, but you do know Peyton Manning the QB of the Indianapolis Colts. He has an incredible work ethic, he's devoted to his craft, he's one of the best at what he does, he's a team leader, etc.

THOSE are qualities you can hold up to your children to emulate. And they have nothing to do with Manning's private life, nor should they.

The problem with Gilbert Arenas is that he chose to bring his private life into the public spotlight. He blurred the line; his judgment is now horribly suspect, although he's extremely good at what he does on the court, he's a widely known sports figure, etc. Because of that, these same kids we're all just trying to see grow up in the best way possible, may get the mixed message that if you're rich enough and popular enough, you don't have to follow the rules. And, especially with kids, actions speak much louder than words. We can try and explain that what Arenas did was, in fact, wrong but unless his employer comes out with a substantial punishment, the kid is easily liable to figure it's really no big deal, despite what his/her parents might say.

I agree with all that. No beef with it. I just don't necessarily think that banning him for life is a proportionate response, based on how the NBA has handled other negative behavior and PR issues.

And regarding Peyton Manning, anyone who knows me knows I'm a huge Colts fan. He's my favorite player in any sport. But it's hard to tell a kid: "Appreciate and even imitate this guy on the court/field, but that's where it stops." That requires incredible balance, and most kids don't have that. Some adults don't. That plan is great in theory, but parents who did that with Tiger Woods are probably dealing with some pretty confused kids right now. Like I said, my parents KNEW the people I spent time with, and I KNOW the people my kid spends time with. Won't always be able to watch over everything she does, and it breaks my heart, but I hope that she'll know the difference between a celebrity and a role model.

 

[kennadog]

I don't "expect" every adult to set a good example. But I will hold them responsible when they don't. Everyone is responsible for the image they project out into society and when they project an irresponsible or negative one its society's responsibility to set them straight. Always has been.

I guess I'm sensitive, because I went through hell raising my son. I could not keep him away from the wrong people, the wrong influences, not even if I'd been home 24/7.

And there was virtually no help from anywhere. The schools were zero help and so were almost all other adults, they just washed their hands of him and he was the kid other parents didn't want their kids hanging around with.

He has turned out to be a fine man, but it cost me and my very small family more than you can even begin to imagine. Against the "glamorized" lifestyles out there, it felt like David against Goliath to me.

I won't say more, because I'm definitely getting too far off topic. Bottom line is, I do hold Arenas responsible for adding to the glamorization of guns and a joking disdain for rules. He can have his damn guns, just obey the law and your employer's rules and quit "displaying" them in public places for idiot reasons, loaded or unloaded. And I agree Javaris is more guilty, because he was stupid enough to actually load a gun.

 

[Oprostaj]

Perfect post Kennadog. Parents should spend time with their kids, and bring them with correct morals. But the second these athletes accept the money and fame, they accept responsibility. And they do influence kids. You see it on every tshirt, backpack, pair or shoes, jersey, road/school named after them, whatever.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

A lot of these athletes making big bucks are kids themselves and are surrounded by leaches who take advantage of how clueless they are when it comes to handling fame and fortune. Many come from broken homes, ghettos, etc. You honestly can't expect them to know how to be role models when they didn't have any themselves.

 

[Oprostaj]

You honestly can't expect them to know how to be role models when they didn't have any themselves.

I agreed with everything except this. They don't have to be role models, but they can be normal citizens.

 

[Superman]

I agreed with everything except this. They don't have to be role models, but they can be normal citizens.

They are normal citizens, that's what the point is. They're not saviors. They just make a lot of money to play sports. They do stupid stuff just like the rest of us do.