Sure, One More for the Road
Published March 27th, 2007There are some pretty good reasons I’m not a journalist. Which worked out OK this time, since Keith Law at ESPN.com said what I’ve been thinking, probably better than I could.
Let’s say I went out onto the street with a loaded gun and just started firing randomly. Would it be OK? What if I emptied the clip and didn’t hit anyone - is it OK then? Should my employer perhaps at least have a discussion with me over this act? Would a suspension be unwarranted?
In baseball, the above scenario is basically OK if you replace the gun with a car and the bullets with shot glasses. Multiple World Series winning manager Tony LaRussa (considered by some to be a “genius” of the game) was arrested asleep and drunk behind the wheel of his car. What has happened? Well, his team….did nothing. MLB….did nothing. The fans….gave him a standing ovation the next day.
Have we all lost our minds? A radio sports talking head went all apologist, saying basically “What’s the big deal? No one got hurt!” - seriously? This guy was still blowing over the limit 2 hours after he was arrested! So it’s not like he was a little tipsy and blew a .09, something he could have sobered up if he just sat around for half an hour drinking a soda. He was blitzed. He was a loaded gun on the streets.
I’ve never liked LaRussa. I’ve always thought he was overrated. But this really put me over the top, the guy’s a jerk. And it really brought to light the ridiculous attitude of MLB. They just look the other way. Law’s article details just how pervasive drinking is in baseball, and how commonly these guys get into and out of trouble without a peep. Most of them get more of a pat on the head than even a slap on the wrist!
Look we’re all aware of the double standards in sports about drinking and driving, especially in LA. Public transportation to many of our stadiums is weak at best. Taxis are absurdly expensive because of the sheer geographical size of the city. All the stadiums have beer. Some have mixed drinks. There are alcohol advertisements all over. And let’s not forget that NASCAR has advertisements for alcoholic products on the cars. It’s just the way things are. But we need to draw the line - when sports stars and public figures get in trouble for DUIs, there should be consequences. It’s pretty simple.
If you were to get a DUI, would it be appropriate for your employer to punish you? I tend to think not, unless your work involves driving. I’m not saying he shouldn’t be punished, just that the punishment should come from those whose rules he broke: the government. And the punishment should be severe. It is definitely in bad taste to be cheering the guy for what he did.
Another interesting question is whether there should be any legal difference between a person who kills someone while driving drunk and a person who gets lucky and doesn’t. It seems weird to me to punish a person based on chance. The real mistake is deciding to drive drunk in the first place. After that there is no decision of whether or not to kill someone, its just a matter of chance.
There is some room for interpretation on the part of the employer when an employee breaks the law. This is a bit of a special case - when you are a public figure, you accept that you are basically representing your company at all times. In this case, Tony LaRussa is always a representative of the St Louis Cardinals and Major League Baseball - it’s the nature of the position. With fame comes responsibility.
Players and coaches are typically suspended when they break the law. Steroids are illegal - not just in baseball, but period. And steroids fall under the greater substance abuse policy of MLB - so you get caught with coke, speed, heroin, marijuana or steroids, you face legal issues AND are suspended from your job. Alcohol is apparently not covered by that - odd.
The likelihood of an employer to suspend should be proportionate to the crime. Should your employer suspend you for shoplifting, that might be excessive. It’s not a violent crime, basically any misdemeanor. But DUI - especially when you’re so far over limit like LaRussa - should be treated for what it is. It’s reckless endangerment of who knows how many people.
And I suppose you just have to accept that making a stupid choice carries one penalty, and random chance controls whether that penalty is made worse. You could spin it the other way - should criminals be treated more lightly because they were incompetent criminals? As in, Murder vs. Attempted Murder? If the criminal was better at it, he’d get a stiffer sentence. But he wasn’t. The intent was the same, only his incompetence changed the ultimate outcome. Definitely a difficult question.
I think the difference between making a stupid choice and random chance is made more distinct by examining intent — in many cases, it’s the degree of the mens rea component of a crime so, instead of “murder versus attempted murder,” I think the question is more like murder versus manslaughter.
[…] while ago I talked about the problems in baseball with alcohol, the most recent offender being Tony LaRussa. I called for harsher penalties. I pointed out the idiocy of forgiving LaRussa just because […]