>of course it doesnt make it Ok. if there was no way to punish
>murderers, it wouldnt be ok to kill people.

Then your principle of "a law without enforcement is pointless" is moot.

>what im saying is
>that you cannot selectively and retroactively correct/enforce
>the flawed system that baseball had in place.

selectively? is there grand jury testimony and mountains of federal documents and other evidence at hand implicating some other player they're not investigating that I'm not aware of?

and retroactively would mean they're going back and holding Bonds accountable for something before there was a rule against it, which is not the case. there's no statute of limitations in baseball for past offenses.

>if the UN
>somehow grew some balls and independence do you think they
>would go back and punish the US?

they should, but by your logic they shouldn't.

>the owners chose not to force the issue during the labor talks
>of the strike shortened 94 season. they could have got
>stricter testing back then if they had wanted to.

Right, because the owners got everything they wanted out of the ensuing labor agreement. You obviously have no idea how powerful the players union is, especially back then.

>again, i dont think the issue is whether or not Barry cheated,
>but rather what can be done about it now.

but that is the issue people are making it into, which is why I posted it.

>i see peoples point
>though when they say it wasnt necessarily cheating because
>everyone in the league had the opportunity to do the same
>thing and not be punished.

so now it's Ken Griffey Jr's fault for NOT using steroids, because he had the opportunity to do it and not be punished?

GTFOOHWTBS. Bonds cheated. Period. End of discussion. Y'all need to accept that fact, get over it, and move on.

>too bad in the press conference yesterday Selig said they were
>limiting the investigation from 2002 to the present.

Too bad Selig actually only *suggested* that the probe would be limited to 2003 onward, but he ACTUALLY gave Mitchell authority to expand the investigation if he found it necessary.

>since
>testing started 2002 Bonds has not failed a drug test; so
>again Baseball cannot and should not go back and punish him
>(and only him) for using substances that their weak tests did
>not measure for.

so if I get stopped by the cops running through the streets high as fuck with some ashy crackhead Tyrone Biggums lips, they go on to get statements from dealers convicted in a crack house raid that I bought rock there, phone tap recordings where my dealer is heard saying that he just sold me 10 vials of crack, financial records obtained with a warrant from my dealer's house documenting my crack purchases over a period of several years, court testimony from my girlfriend stating that I'm a crackhead, and my OWN court testimony where I gave some crackheaded excuse that I "unknowingly" smoked crack thinking it was just baking soda (and that I paid $40,000 CASH for said "baking soda"), the cops got nothing on me because I didn't fail a drug test? yeah ok.

also, Bonds is not the only one being investigated; Selig said the investigation will start with the players linked to the BALCO scandal, which includes Giambi and Sheffield, and as previously mentioned, the lead investigator has the authority to expand the investigation as he sees fit.


>and since all of their evidence came from
>"sealed" court documents, nothing that they do will ever stand
>up in a court of law. MLB will not be able to independently
>verify any of the evidence on Boonds.

Cool, so Bonds might be able to avoid tax fraud and perjury charges or whatever other federal law he broke. Unfortunately MLB has no such restrictions and don't require that their findings stand up in a court of law, and furthermore many of the "sealed" documents in the BALCO case have since become public records, so even if that were the case they'd still have plenty of evidence against him.

Bonds is fucked. Only question is how far are they really willing to push this investigation.