illegal to be muscular in Sweden/Belgium - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15047805
Godstud wrote:You cannot ban anyone from a gym unless they are convicted of something, as that's a punishment of which I found no evidence of, in the articles you presented.

Well, let me quote it again for you in case you didn't see it:

Puffer Fish wrote:A recent report comes out of Belgium. Boris, a young dietician in his late 20’s working in the medical insurance field ...

Shortly after receiving the letter regarding his urine results, Boris received a call from his father. Three policemen had shown up at the door of their home with a warrant and had begun searching his room. The warrant alleged there was cause to search for steroids, other drugs and “narcotics” – all based only on the urine test results. They even seized his computer and external hard drive.

“Yet that day, when I had to pee in that cup, all of that changed, and I was all of a sudden a criminal, a very, very bad man in need of some serious punishing….”

Boris was commanded to appear at an investigational hearing before the anti-doping disciplinary commission. For two and a half hours, he was questioned on every aspect of his life, his training, his diet, and all aspects of his use of sports-related drugs. He was also fingerprinted and his mug shots were taken.

The following month, he received a letter in the mail. While the criminal investigation was not resolved, the decision of the anti-doping disciplinary commission was a heavy fine of 3,350 euros and … a four-year ban on setting foot in a gym. Yes, not just a ban on bodybuilding competition, but a prohibition against working out at all in any gym! Sounds crazy? Of course it does, given that exercise is universally regarded as a healthful human activity with tremendous physical and psychological benefits. The punishment is idiotic. But there’s one more part of the equation that’s even crazier: the doping authorities claim jurisdiction over each and every gym member in the country, not just the ones that compete!
#15047806
Godstud wrote:I find no problem with this, either, as it's quite normal for steroid abusers to be sellers. Also, if you test positive, then it's a valid reason to suspect that you may have steroids in your possession.

If that's the case, then they should not be required to undergo such a test unless there's a valid reason that's better than "he looked too muscular".

Are you capable of seeing the problem here, or are you not?
#15047807
Godstud wrote:I body build, and am in a gym for at least an hour every day. I don't use steroids. Most countries make them illegal, as they are harmful. You'd be hard-pressed to validate a search or even suspect me of steroid abuse, however, since talking to my fellow gym-goers wouldn't yield results to arouse suspicion. You are forgetting that they investigate in other ways, aside from simple drug testing.

Would you be okay personally being subjected to these random mandatory urine tests?

Knowing that, on occasion this test could yield a false positive, and knowing that, if it does, you approve of everything that happened to those men in those stories because the test indicated a positive.
#15047810
Puffer Fish wrote:A recent report comes out of Belgium. Boris, a young dietician in his late 20’s working in the medical insurance field ...

Shortly after receiving the letter regarding his urine results, Boris received a call from his father. Three policemen had shown up at the door of their home with a warrant and had begun searching his room.


What did they find in his urine ?

Puffer Fish wrote:“Yet that day, when I had to pee in that cup, all of that changed, and I was all of a sudden a criminal, a very, very bad man in need of some serious punishing….”

Yes, that is what happens when you break the law.

Puffer Fish wrote:Would you be okay personally being subjected to these random mandatory urine tests?

All athletes in all sports are subjected to random doping tests.

Puffer Fish wrote:Knowing that, on occasion this test could yield a false positive, and knowing that, if it does, you approve of everything that happened to those men in those stories because the test indicated a positive.


Again I am asking you : what percentage of these tests results in a false positive ?
And how many are still false positive after a repeat test ?
#15047811
So, it was the anti-doping commission for bodybuilding competition, that made the decision to get him banned, and NOT the law, as you claimed. That's not what you said when you implied it was illegal to be muscular. You made an inherently dishonest argument on this basis of it being ILLEGAL, when it's not. He wasn't banned by the law, but by a commission which he CHOSE to recognize.

Puffer Fish wrote:Would you be okay personally being subjected to these random mandatory urine tests?
If I was going to compete in bodybuilding, I would expect as much, as steroids are a considerable problem

Puffer Fish wrote:Knowing that, on occasion this test could yield a false positive, and knowing that, if it does, you approve of everything that happened to those men in those stories because the test indicated a positive.
A false positive is easy to dispute. Simply take another sample, and retest. I said nothing about approving of a gym ban so stop making stupid assumptions based on what I have not said.

Puffer Fish wrote:Are you capable of seeing the problem here, or are you not?
Are you incapable of understanding that "he is too muscular" was not the only criteria? The article itself stated that there was an investigation. The search warrant, though yielding nothing to charge for, legally, was enough for the commission(non legal) to be convinced of his guilt, and to act on it. Being a non-legal commission, they often have rules that aren't necessarily fair. Bad luck for him... or was it?

Anyhow, this is hardly a common occurrence, and claiming that this means it is illegal to be muscular, is really fear-mongering and melodrama of the highest order. This is, at best, an isolated incident, and it was not the actual state authorities who placed the ban, but the bodybuilding commission that he belonged to, and recognized the authority of.

The law did not levy the fine against him. The law did not punish him.
#15047812
Godstud wrote:So, it was the anti-doping commission for bodybuilding competition, that made the decision to get him banned, and NOT the law, as you claimed.

The law in that country is automatically connected to the decision of the anti-doping commission, so their decisions can effectively be the law.


Godstud wrote:That's not what you said when you implied it was illegal to be muscular. You made an inherently dishonest argument on this basis of it being ILLEGAL, when it's not.

The more accurate description wouldn't fit in the title.

It might not be outright illegal, but it does constitute a legal attack.



Godstud wrote:He wasn't banned by the law, but by a commission which he CHOSE to recognize.

You didn't read the article again. He didn't have a choice whether to recognize them or not.

Godstud wrote: If I was going to compete in bodybuilding, I would expect as much, as steroids are a considerable problem

So imagine you want to compete in bodybuilding, and then due to that you late get banned from being allowed to use a gym for 4 years, due to no fault of your own, even though you've left competitive bodybuilding.

Godstud wrote: A false positive is easy to dispute. Simply take another sample, and retest.

No, you're being disingenuous and you didn't read the story again. He didn't get back the results of the test until weeks later.

Godstud wrote:Are you incapable of understanding that "he is too muscular" was not the only criteria? The article itself stated that there was an investigation.

The articles made it sound as if there wasn't much other evidence.

Godstud wrote:he search warrant, though yielding nothing to charge for, legally, was enough for the commission(non legal) to be convinced of his guilt, and to act on it. Being a non-legal commission, they often have rules that aren't necessarily fair.

That may be where our disagreement is then. Because it sounded from the story that this commission was able to impose a legal ban on him being allowed to go to the gym.

Did you somehow read the story and not pick up on that part?

Yes, I agree, as long as a commission or organization has nothing to do with the government, and it is not compulsory for the individual to belong to that organization, that organization, as a private entity, should be allowed to impose whatever decisions they want. My entire issue is when the government gets involved.

From the way I read the story, the man was prevented by government law from being allowed to enter into a gym in his country. THAT is my issue.

Maybe you should reread the story.


Godstud wrote:The law did not levy the fine against him. The law did not punish him.

It could be inferred from the story that if he did not pay the fine, he would not be permitted to go back to any gym in the country ever again, since that country has made it mandatory for all persons who use these gyms to be members in this non-government body they have set up.

So again, just to clarify, if this was all the actions of private companies and private organizations, and there was no coercion by government, I would not be having any complaints here.
#15047815
Puffer Fish wrote:The law in that country is automatically connected to the decision of the anti-doping commission, so their decisions can effectively be the law.
The law did not find him guilty, so you're incorrect. A charge is not the same as a conviction. IBFF decisions are not LAW, either

Puffer Fish wrote:He didn't have a choice whether to recognize them or not.
I cannot read a fucking article in Swedish. You understand that, right? :roll: I went by the other article you posted, and it does not support what you said. He was part of the IFBB, as a bodybuilder, so he was "connected".

Puffer Fish wrote:So imagine you want to compete in bodybuilding, and then due to that you late get banned from being allowed to use a gym for 4 years, due to no fault of your own, even though you've left competitive bodybuilding.
Doing steroids IS your fault. AGAIN, this is one incident, and not the norm. How can you not see this?

Puffer Fish wrote:No, you're being disingenuous and you didn't read the story again. He didn't get back the results of the test until weeks later.
No, you're being a troll. I am not disingenuous, and your insult only demonstrates that your argument is pathetic. AGAIN. I do not read SWEDISH. The other article makes no mention of this.

Puffer Fish wrote:The articles made it sound as if there wasn't much other evidence.
You are making assumptions on things not present. in short, you are "guessing". Deal with facts, not supposition.

Puffer Fish wrote:Because it sounded from the story that this commission was able to impose a legal ban on him being allowed to go to the gym.
Sounded like? :roll: It cannot be a LEGAL ban, but only a ban by the commission. He could choose to go to the gym, but then he would likely be permanently banned from competition, instead of just having a 4 year ban, by the IFBB.

Puffer Fish wrote:My entire issue is when the government gets involved.
Steroids are illegal. They only got involved as far as that. The "punishment" was not linked to the government, as there was no conviction. IFBB, however, can impose restrictions on its members/competitors.

Puffer Fish wrote:From the way I read the story, the man was prevented by government law from being allowed to enter into a gym in his country. THAT is my issue.
From the way I read the story? :eh: You are implying a lot, with no facts to support your conclusions. I don't agree with your unsubstantiated OPINION. Get over it, already.

Puffer Fish wrote:So again, just to clarify, if this was all the actions of private companies and private organizations, and there was no coercion by government, I would not be having any complaints here
. Your complaint is unwarranted, as such is not the case. This was ONE instance. Can you find any others, or is this just you being overly melodramatic?
#15048040
The IFBB came up with it as a penalty for using steroids. You'd have to, quite literally, care about their "order", for it isn't something enforceable by law, since the law did not impose the penalty. The topic is very unclear about this, and the most important document appears to be in Swedish. :knife:

The thread is disingenuously named.
#15050407
Godstud wrote:The IFBB came up with it as a penalty for using steroids. You'd have to, quite literally, care about their "order", for it isn't something enforceable by law, since the law did not impose the penalty. The topic is very unclear about this, and the most important document appears to be in Swedish. :knife:

This is what happens when socialism begins to apply control over individual lives.
#15050533
Godstud wrote::lol: @Hindsite no, this is what regulatory commissions do when people cheat at sports.

Having big muscles because one lifts heavy weights at a gym is not evidence of cheating at sports.
#15050564
Hindsite wrote:cheating

If steroid use was merely some sex thing, gay men making themselves more attractive to other gay men in the hope of being buggered, it could be dismissed. After all, despite the known health issues, society allows heterosexual women to disfigure their bodies with plastic tits and arses.

sports

But think back to the 80's and the Soviet women winning everything. It was beyond a joke. Sponsors demand that sports associations police their members to ensure a level playing field.
#15050572
ingliz wrote:If steroid use was merely some sex thing, gay men making themselves more attractive to other gay men in the hope of being buggered, it could be dismissed. After all, despite the known health issues, society allows heterosexual women to disfigure their bodies with plastic tits and arses.


But think back to the 80's and the Soviet women winning everything. It was beyond a joke. Sponsors demand that sports associations police their members to ensure a level playing field.

I did not say I was in favor of taking steroids to cheat at sports. But people should not be forced to submit to drug tests just because they are in a gym lifting heavy weights and not actually competing in a sports contest. They should do it the same way they do for Olympic competitors.
#15050583
If the steroids are illegal @Hindsite, then suspicion is enough for police to issue drug tests. It's like if you stagger around, they can do a sobriety test. Don't do illegal drugs is the lesson to be learned, here.
#15050586
Police were called, an undercover officer dispatched and laid in wait at the restroom until he could make his move. When Tornros went to use the bathroom, the undercover cop somehow managed to get a urine sample, return to the station to test its content which showed a slightly above average testosterone content. Based on that the police arrested Tornros!


Uhhh. Alrighty then. How, in the name of all that is Holy, did he do this?

"excuse me old man, do you mind rising out my coffee cup?"

"pardon me Mr. Really Big and Scary person, I need to line your urinal with plastic wrap".

"Hi sailor. Can I hold your dick while you pee?"

"Ok. So here is the deal.....I'll bet you a zillion kroner that you can't stand here and fill that cup with pee".

Just saying......
#15050708
Godstud wrote:If the steroids are illegal @Hindsite, then suspicion is enough for police to issue drug tests. It's like if you stagger around, they can do a sobriety test. Don't do illegal drugs is the lesson to be learned, here.

Admin Edit: Rule 2 A person staggering around on the street or in a gym is not illegal nor is it illegal to be drunk on the street or in a gym. It would only be illegal if he was caught driving a motor vehicle in that condition. Only then is there enough suspicion or probable cause to do a sobriety test. There is nothing illegal about working out in a gym regardless of muscle size.
#15050726
Hindsite wrote:A person staggering around on the street or in a gym is not illegal nor is it illegal to be drunk on the street or in a gym. It would only be illegal if he was caught driving a motor vehicle in that condition.


Sorry you are wrong. Being intoxicated with alcohol in a public place is not allowed. The police can take you in and keep you in a cell till you sober up.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 9

Israel won't comply because one of their explicit[…]

Commercial foreclosures increase 97% from last ye[…]

People tend to forget that the French now have a […]

It is easy to tell the tunnel was made of pre fab[…]