Performance Enhancing Drugs Speech (Issues)

Lets be honest here, taking drugs to change performance isnt a spur-of-the-moment mis condense, its a well aforethought(ip) and thought out way of cheating. Its not like they atomic number 18 sold over the counter at your local chemists (or are they? ) hatful ofttimes say they dont want to see druggies representing their sphere (wherever they are from) and so they should be banned for life, but can jocks that take performance enhancing drugs be labeled as druggies. Their physically fit in shape and generally healthy, everything a typical idea of a druggie isnt.Lifetime bans could acquire fewer convictions, because harsher punishment means greater burden of proof First, the cosmos is that a lifetime ban represents the harshest possible punishment for an athlete, for it takes away their livelihood, often without a fall-back plan ( conduct a 26-year-old cyclist what their endorse career selection is, for example). It is, literally, a case of off with their heads, because you may as well do this. Now, in order to do this fairly, you have to be absolutely, 100% original that you are punishing a person who deserves it.And sadly, the science is, as of this moment, not able to provide those guarantees, and in that location is always some doubt if an athlete wants to grapple the origin of a doping positive. So ask the following If on that point is a 2% fortune of a false positive test, wherefore how comfortable are we issuing lifetime bans? Then ask If there is a 10% chance of the positive dope test organism the result of contamination of supplements, then are we comfortable with a lifetime ban? Now, imagine being the decision maker who has to evaluate a legal case where the athlete says I do not contest the positive dope test, but my defence is that it came from a supplement (or meat). I was therefore not cheating. Can you confidently judge and condemn this person as a cheat? Given the science of anti-doping today, and the complexity of these cases , Id entreat that you simply cannot make this decision, and if your punishment option is to hand out a lifetime ban, Id argue that youre far less likely to find dopers shamefaced when presented with this defenceWe do not want our young people face up to people who use drugs, but we also do not want to give those who are in admired positions of proposed authority to be forgiven of their sins. However, we are more than unforced to allow those who use illicit road drugs a second and third, sometimes even a fourth chance at resolving themselves from what, these days, is being regarded as a disease alternatively of what it started out as- a very poor in the flesh(predicate) choice on the person who is now using.Steroids are not safe. We all know this. employ of these chassiss of drugs, when not prescribed for an actual ailment, cause more damage than good. We do not like when our heroes are found out to simultaneously be human as well as talented. It is far easier to see this sor t of behavior when it is displayed by a rock star or a spoiled rich kid, but when it is our heroes, we want to punish them severely, and more so than we would if the person in question were some street hooligan with no hope for a future.We will gladly help the hooligan, because that makes us a hero. We have helped a person lift themselves out of a personal and spiritual poverty and in the process have been given the chance to tell the world that because of something that we did, whether it is directly or indirectly, that person is now, in the look of better society, whole again, and it was all due to something we did for them.We are more willing to uplift an entire population of people who cannot even remember their bear on rather than allow those who could be the example of having done the bad thing, and now, after(prenominal) a lot of work and LOTS of apologizing, be the example that they were rationalize out to be. I say let them have a second and third chance at it all. And why not? We let adjourn heads, meth heads, alcoholics and wife beaters do it. Why not someone who has approach path to the media who can truly be the role model that they did not ask to be when they signed those multi-million dollar contracts?