Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

At VICE: JR Smith and America’s Out of Control Love Affair with Drug Tests

So remember last week when JR Smith got suspended five games for his fourth violation of the NBA’s Drug Policy? After a spririted debate in the comments section,  I wrote some things about it. Since it’s not so much about basketball as the multi-billion dollar industry that’s perpetuating Prohibition and superseding state laws, it’s here at VICE Magazine:

Take the case of Brandon Coats, a 33-year-old who used to work as a telephone operator for Dish Network in Colorado until he was fired for failing a drug test in 2010. This was a random test, just like the one that ensnared JR Smith—Dish didn’t consider him to be some kind of slack-jawed, drug-sucking fiend who needed to be monitored, he just got unlucky.What makes this particularly unjust is Coats has had a prescription for medicinal marijuana since 2009 to deal with the effects of a car crash that left him partly paralyzed. He sued to get his job back but lost, and the court of appeals in Colorado (where, as you’re probably aware, pot is legal) recently upheld the ruling, stating, “For an activity to be lawful in Colorado, it must be permitted by, and not contrary to, both state and federal law.

So when state law conflicts with rules set up by employers, business will trump government. Cool. Here’s how the Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation, an organization for manufacturing executives, explains the confusing legal conflict(s) thusly :

“The Colorado law—specifically Amendment 64 to Article 18 of the state constitution—prohibits employers from terminating employees for engaging in lawful activities (marijuana possession and use) off the employer’s premises during nonworking hours unless the employer’s decision relates to a bona fide occupational qualification, the employee’s specific duties, or the employer’s efforts to avoid a conflict of interest. However, the Colorado law expressly states that marijuana legalization does not affect the right of employers to maintain a drug-free workplace.” (Emphasis mine.)

The same rules generally apply in Washington, the other state to have fully legalized weed. In 2011, the state supreme court ruled against a woman working as a customer-service rep who was fired for failing a test even though she was taking medicinal marijuana to treat migraines, and even though she had told them she was taking marijuana.

You can read the whole thing here.

 

42 comments on “At VICE: JR Smith and America’s Out of Control Love Affair with Drug Tests

  1. johnno

    Sorry, but I am among the apparent minority who think that recreational drug use by pro athletes is a big deal. Feel free to ignore last week’s story about how Michael Ray Richardson and two other Knicks shaved points and threw games as a favor to their drug dealer. That, too, was apparently no big deal in the eyes of many.

  2. er

    johnno:
    Sorry, but I am among the apparent minority who think that recreational drug use by pro athletes is a big deal.Feel free to ignore last week’s story about how Michael Ray Richardson and two other Knicks shaved points and threw games as a favor to their drug dealer.That, too, was apparently no big deal in the eyes of many.

    dont you think that happened in the 20s when liquor was illegal.

  3. thenamestsam

    johnno,
    I’m no subject matter expert, but I would suggest that the big difference is between recreational drug use and drug addiction. It seems to me that by definition when drug use becomes addictive it ceases to be recreational. It is no longer something done for fun, but something done out of necessity.

    What happened with MRR is obviously a huge deal, but to me that has nothing to do with “recereational” use in any true sense of the word. MRR was an addict, and addiction is a huge problem with serious costs, both on a personal level and on more macro, societal levels. Finding a way to prevent addiction to whatever extent possible and to help people who are already addicts should be a pretty large social priority in my opinion. But I’m unconvinced that trying to prevent and treat addiction has much to do with random drug testing.

    Yes, on the one hand, addicts are nearly guaranteed to be ensnared by random testing. But on the other hand there are many more non-addicts than addicts in the population of marijuana users. It’s basically the classic Bayesian problem with false positive from clinical drugs. Even if the probability of getting caught is much higher for an addict, the probability of catching an addict may be much lower than the probability of catching a recreational user. Even if it requires multiple tests for a suspension this may still be the case.

    Is JR Smith a drug addict? I really have no idea and neither do any of us. He might be. He might also be a guy who prefers to relax with a joint rather than with a glass of scotch and it so happens that he lives in a society where one is illegal and one isn’t. Oh, and has crappy luck when it comes to drug tests.

    Drug use can lead to some terrible things but in my opinion random drug testing for something as low harm as marijuana is an extremely indirect way of targeting those negative outcomes and does boil down mostly to a waste of time, money, and fretting.

  4. Donnie Walsh

    Though I haven’t read the full Vice article, I think the argument is that illegality makes for the existence of “drug dealers” in the first place. So by treating the problem, one also controls the symptoms.

  5. Robert Silverman Post author

    johnno:
    Sorry, but I am among the apparent minority who think that recreational drug use by pro athletes is a big deal.Feel free to ignore last week’s story about how Michael Ray Richardson and two other Knicks shaved points and threw games as a favor to their drug dealer.That, too, was apparently no big deal in the eyes of many.

    It’s really not about JR, the article. It’s about how testing people is a 1.5 billion dollar industry — an industry that’s not actually interested in catching anyone, but rather in finding more people to test. Passing a drug test is actually a lot easier if you’re a user of hard drugs than it is marijuana.

    And as you can see above, they caught two people who were using it for legitimate medical reasons in states where it is legal. And even then they were still fired.

    To be clear, I am in no way attempting to dismiss how damaging substances can be. In the name of full disclosure, I am a recovering addict, myself. Vodka was my poison of choice. I never broke a single law, yet I developed a serious, harmful physical addiction, one that undoubtably will have long-term medical repercussions later in my life.

    My point is that if the goal is to get fewer people using harmful substances of all kinds — a goal I support — both legal and illegal, threats of jail time and/or the loss of employment/unemployment benefits (yes, there are proposals to test recipients of gov’t benefits. And again, a big factor is getting a massive influx of clients for the testing industry) don’t work.

  6. Z-man

    Robert, I agree with most of this. In fact, Marijuana is nowhere near as harmful to our society as alcohol, nor will it ever be. People who use pot exclusively are less likely to crash their car, abuse their loved ones, or get into fights than those who get drunk.

    I do believe that employers are within their rights to set reasonable standards for behavior both on the job and off the job. The definition of “reasonable” is the rub. The cases you brought up should not have passed the “reasonable” standard.

  7. johnno

    Z-man: People who use pot exclusively are less likely to crash their car,

    Only if you ignore all of the scientific evidence that someone who is high has slower reflexes and is less alert than someone who is not high. Quick reflexes and alertness are kind of important on the basketball court.

    er:
    dont you think that happened in the 20s when liquor was illegal.

    Maybe, maybe not. It’s kind of irrelevent. Argue all you want over whether marijuana and other recreational drugs SHOULD be illegal. The fact is that, in most states they are illegal so, until the laws change, you have to deal with what is, not what should be.

    Robert Silverman: My point is that if the goal is to get fewer people using harmful substances of all kinds — a goal I support —

    I assume that a lot of other people also support this goal, which is why I find it amazing that so many people are making light of the JR situation.

    thenamestsam: Even if the probability of getting caught is much higher for an addict, the probability of catching an addict may be much lower than the probability of catching a recreational user.

    Someone who fails one drug test might be the victim of bad luck. A guy who (a) knows that he is going to be tested, (b) knows that he has already failed two tests and (c) knows that, if he tests positive again, he will get suspended to the detriment of himself and his team, but continues to smoke away and gets caught yet again, most likely has a substance abuse problem.

  8. er

    johnno: Only if you ignore all of the scientific evidence that someone who is high has slower reflexes and is less alert than someone who is not high.Quick reflexes and alertness are kind of important on the basketball court.

    I assume that a lot of other people also support this goal, which is why I find it amazing that so many people are making light of the JR situation.

    thenamestsam: Even if the probability of getting caught is much higher for an addict, the probability of catching an addict may be much lower than the probability of catching a recreational user.

    Someone who fails one drug test might be the victim of bad luck.A guy who (a) knows that he is going to be tested, (b) knows that he has already failed two tests and (c) knows that, if he tests positive again, he will get suspended to the detriment of himself and his team, but continues to smoke away and gets caught yet again, most likely has a substance abuse problem.

    I agree with the substance abuse problem if you know there will be repercussions and you do it anyway. But i think the bigger issue Robert was trying to make was dealing with rec drug use and how its different than a substance problem. Also I am sure plenty of players have a drinking problem but that is treated differently then say weed. I could argue having a drinking problem is worse that being addicted to weed.

  9. lavor postell

    johnno: Only if you ignore all of the scientific evidence that someone who is high has slower reflexes and is less alert than someone who is not high.Quick reflexes and alertness are kind of important on the basketball court.

    Right, but in all fairness he wasn’t saying it doesn’t affect JR’s play if he’s high on the court. Obviously we don’t want him baked out of his mind and unwilling to put in maximum effort. The argument is that marijuana is a far less harmful drug than alcohol in virtually every respect, but it has been illegalized for bullshit reasons that have nothing to do with health or safety risks.

    So would I rather have JR hitting a joint every night and gorging on pizza over ripping shots of Goose at the club? I’d go with the former everyday and not hesitate, because I’ve never heard of somebody overdosing and dying from smoking, or getting so high they got behind the wheel and smashed into another vehicle at 3AM.

    I think JR is an idiot for getting caught, because the guy isn’t some martyr trying to expose the flaws in the American drug war. He knew that a third positive test would trigger a 5 game suspension and went ahead and did it anyways. I am pissed that he would be so cavalier with his behavior, but I also think the rule itself is nonsense and it’s not something I am okay with being policed at any level government or by employers.

  10. johnno

    lavor postell: because I’ve never heard of somebody overdosing and dying from smoking, or getting so high they got behind the wheel and smashed into another vehicle at 3AM.

    A just read an article yesterday about a recent study that found that 30% of drivers killed in auto accidents tested positive for a substance other than alcohol, with marijuana being the main culprit.
    I am not arguing that smoking pot will lead to “Reefer Madness” (one of the unintentionally funniest public service movies ever made) but we shouldn’t be pretending that it has NO adverse side effects.

  11. Z-man

    johnno: Z-man: People who use pot exclusively are less likely to crash their car,
    Only if you ignore all of the scientific evidence that someone who is high has slower reflexes and is less alert than someone who is not high. Quick reflexes and alertness are kind of important on the basketball court.

    Nice job of truncating my comment to distort what I was saying. Did you actually read the end of the sentence? If not, please do so and THEN tell us all whether you agree or disagree.

    In addition, it’s not whether players are playing high. It’s about whether they tested positive, which can happen days after the high has worn off. Players should not play drunk either, but even if they drank a fifth of Vodka two days before a game, or 5 drinks the night before, they don’t have to worry about testing positive or being suspended.

    The central issue here is whether pot use and alcohol use should be treated the same. I would argue yes, and if anything, that light/moderate/excessive pot use is less of a performance/behavioral issue than light/moderate/excessive alcohol use.

  12. Z-man

    johnno: A just read an article yesterday about a recent study that found that 30% of drivers killed in auto accidents tested positive for a substance other than alcohol, with marijuana being the main culprit.I am not arguing that smoking pot will lead to “Reefer Madness” (one of the unintentionally funniest public service movies ever made) but we shouldn’t be pretending that it has NO adverse side effects.

    And does that study also compare stats for drivers testing positive for alcohol but not pot vs. testing positive for pot and not alcohol?

  13. lavor postell

    Z-man: And does that study also compare stats for drivers testing positive for alcohol but not pot vs. testing positive for pot and not alcohol?

    This. Pot is definitely smoked often in combination with alcohol and definitely can lead to some dizzying and messy experiences, but marijuana in combination with no other drug I have a hard time believing leads to fatal car accidents.

  14. er

    lavor postell: This.Pot is definitely smoked often in combination with alcohol and definitely can lead to some dizzying and messy experiences, but marijuana in combination with no other drug I have a hard time believing leads to fatal car accidents.

    I mean dont be silly and smoke alot and drive. I know it will slow your reflexes and you are more likely to make mistakes. But alcohol can make you drive faster and more reckless. But all of this is besides the point. In sports leagues it is better to be a “hardcore” user than a pot smoker due to the length of time that it stays in your system which i have always found annoying

  15. johnno

    Z-man: Nice job of truncating my comment to distort what I was saying. Did you actually read the end of the sentence? If not, please do so and THEN tell us all whether you agree or disagree.

    I didn’t intend to distort your statement. I was only commenting on part of it. You said that people who smoke pot don’t do three things — crash their cars, abuse their loved ones or get into fights. My response only relates to the first one of those three. You are probably correct that people who spoke pot don’t abuse their loved ones or get into fights like an angry drunk does (although not all alcoholics are angry drunks).

    Z-man: And does that study also compare stats for drivers testing positive for alcohol but not pot vs. testing positive for pot and not alcohol?

    My understanding of the results of the study were that 30% tested positive for something other than alcohol only (in other words, they had marijuana in their system and not alcohol).

  16. er

    johnno: I didn’t intend to distort your statement.I was only commenting on part of it.You said that people who smoke pot don’t do three things — crash their cars, abuse their loved ones or get into fights.My response only relates to the first one of those three.You are probably correct that people who spoke pot don’t abuse their loved ones or get into fights like an angry drunk does (although not all alcoholics are angry drunks).

    My understanding of the results of the study were that 30% tested positive for something other than alcohol only (in other words, they had marijuana in their system and not alcohol).

    That sounds high ….. but hey could be. Do you have a link im just curious

  17. mokers

    johnno: I didn’t intend to distort your statement.I was only commenting on part of it.You said that people who smoke pot don’t do three things — crash their cars, abuse their loved ones or get into fights.My response only relates to the first one of those three.You are probably correct that people who spoke pot don’t abuse their loved ones or get into fights like an angry drunk does (although not all alcoholics are angry drunks).

    My understanding of the results of the study were that 30% tested positive for something other than alcohol only (in other words, they had marijuana in their system and not alcohol).

    Do you have a link for the study? I just wonder because marijuana can stay in low levels in the bloodstream for a while and other places even longer. If a person is stopped and gets a positive on a blood test for MJ, it could have been a week or longer. If you don’t split that 30% out to how proximal it was the the accident, the number is useless.

    Also, I could care less what has impaired a driver during an accident. If you cause an accident or kill somebody and were eating a cheeseburger or picking your nose or whatever I don’t think that is worse than because you were impaired because of a plant.

  18. Z-man

    johnno: I didn’t intend to distort your statement. I was only commenting on part of it. You said that people who smoke pot don’t do three things — crash their cars, abuse their loved ones or get into fights.

    People who use pot exclusively are less likely to crash their car, abuse their loved ones, or get into fights than those who get drunk.

    The key words are “less likely…than those who get drunk.” I have never seen a serious study suggesting that vechicular fatalities directly attributable to marijuana consumption are in proportional to those linked to alcohol consumption. My own experience is that pot-smokers tend to miss their exit, forget where they’re going, or stay stopped at a stop sign or red light way too long. They tend not to drive way too fast, or all over the road. Sure, being stoned is not condusive to safe driving. But the larger point is that we POLICE pot as if it is way, way more harmful than alcohol, when it is actually less destructive (once the criminal element, i.e. dealers, gangs, tainted product, is removed.)

    Again, that’s NOT what I said. I compared it t

  19. Donnie Walsh

    At the end of a thread a few weeks ago we discussed studies such as the one Johnno sites. Here is what I posted then (to conclude that thread). It seems relevant to repost it here:

    daJudge:
    please check this out from NIH:
    Thanks for keeping an open mind on this issue.

    The problem with the NIH is that it is working with a combination of biased and/or antiquated information. Here is a summary of all the known tests on the subject [driving while "stoned"].

    http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/22650-marijuana-and-driving-a-review-of-the-scientific-evidence/

    One conclusion was plainly stated: “crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes.”

    *

    Dr. Sanjay Goupta recently did a 180 from his opposition to marijuana. He says “I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency,” adding that “we have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana

    *

    Finally, an unrelated study concluded that marijuana opponents tend to site per-game basketball stats, while proponents of its legalization prefer advanced metrics.

  20. Brian Cronin

    Awaiting moderation?!

    Yeah, weird. I approved it but I dunno why it got caught in the moderation filter in the first place.

  21. Brian Cronin

    Re-reading it I can’t think of any reason why it’d be picked up. I guess if it ever happens again I’ll take a look to see if there was anything in common with the comments.

  22. Brian Cronin

    Did y’all see Bleacher Report signed away both Jared Zwerling and Howard Beck? Damn, they are not fucking around. Good for Bleacher Report. Bleacher Report gets pushed down our throats so much by search engines and the like that it’d be nice to actually be able to take the articles on there seriously. Or perhaps this will just a blip like the last time they hired a big name writer to write about basketball (he left in less than a year)? We shall see! I am rooting for this to be a turnaround!

  23. Z-man

    I agree, I’ve noticed that the quality of articles at the BR has improved lately. Was just reading the one re: our 3 PGs. Hey, at this time of year, any article is welcome!

  24. Brian Cronin

    ESPN had an article on the 10 players most likely to be dealt this season and I found this take on Zach Randolph to be odd:

    Still, don’t be stunned if Memphis ends up dealing for another starting forward because of the combination of Randolph’s age (32), his ability to opt out of his contract next summer and the presence of Ed Davis (a restricted free agent next summer barring an extension) on the roster as a ready-made replacement.

    I am more of an Ed Davis fan than most, but I don’t really see how Ed Davis can be viewed as a ready-made replacement for Z-Bo.

  25. Brian Cronin

    Good call. I can’t believe that guy isn’t currently working anywhere. And yet he keeps breaking stories!!

  26. SeeWhyDee77

    Good morning everyone. I got married on Saturday so I haven’t been following anything sports related the past few days due to all the last minute runnin around and finishing touches. But I been holding on to some thoughts and questions that maybe the savvy environment here can talk/debate on.
    So I’ve been thinkin..with a star like Melo in his prime and big pieces still in their prime like Tyson, Felton, and even Bargnani in tow- maybe now is the perfect time to start churning the rest of the roster and rebuild while still competing. We have young talents with potential in Shump, TH2, Tyler, Leslie, and Murry. My fortst thought is moving JR for maybe a backup big and either a serviceable young point to stash and develop or a draft pick(probably a 2nd rounder). I really don’t think u lose too much by moving JR as I think a SG rotation of Shump-TH2-Murry carries a lot of intrigue and potential. Plus Udrih can slide over and play the 2. I think he and Murry make JR expendable. But who’s out there we can get? Better yet, who would trade for JR? I would love to move JR for Fredette and Patterson..and then flippin Patterson for Byombo or Jordan Hill or even Anthony Randolph (get him on a regimen to get him up to 240-245 so he can move to C full time). Talent wise we lose a little but gain youth and potential and players who fill their roles more reliably. I would even look into finding a partner to help facilitate Omer Asik comin to NY. Of course the thought of losin Tyson stings but Asik should numb the sting. I don’t know if these types of moves are even feasible buy I think the FO should consider these types of moves. Thoughts?

  27. flossy

    Congrats on getting married!

    I wouldn’t do any of the moves you suggest–we are stacked with competent, veteran role players. Why trade them away for retreads who aren’t any good (Jordan Hill or Randolph)? Why let go of JR at this point? He’s on a good value contract, and trading him away would leave us with a SG rotation of Shumpert (has been a below-average NBA player so far, but has promise) and THJ (rookie, no track record, might suck) and Murry (even less of a track record, might not even make the team). No thanks. We’re trying to contend, right? We need players who will help the team win now.

    FWIW, looks like Ike Diogu got an invite to camp. Why hasn’t he caught on somewhere? His numbers make him out to be a poor man’s Paul Millsap, which is still a quality player, especially at the end of the bench.

  28. thenamestsam

    Congratulations on the marriage! Hope the new wife is a Knicks fan.

    My issue with your plan would be (like Flossy) that I think you’re overstating the quality of our young players and backups a bit. Udrih is a journeyman. Solid bench guard, but nothing more. TH2 is a late first round pick. Tyler, Leslie, Murry these guys are freely available. They may look intriguing in summer league games but there are guys like that littering the ends of every team’s bench. We may hit the jack pot with one of them, but to suggest that a guy who averaged 9 points and 3 assists in the D-league last year has anything to do with making JR expendable is getting way, way ahead of ourselves in my opinion.

    If Shump proves himself capable of carrying a 30-35 minute a night load and one of the youngsters steps up and looks like a capable backup then we might start to have a glut at guard and considering moving JR in some kind of long-term move might be reasonable. But we’re a long, long ways from that point right now. JR is set (for better or worse) to have a huge role on this team again. I don’t think “trade JR” and “compete” are congruous goals right now.

    Also on a practical note, since they just resigned him they can’t trade him for some length of time, right?

  29. ephus

    thenamestsam: Also on a practical note, since they just resigned him they can’t trade him for some length of time, right?

    Because JR Smith was resigned using Early Bird Rights and received more than a 20% increase, the Knicks could not trade him before January 15, 2014.

    http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q94

    In addition, I would say that JR Smith’s trade value is severely depressed right now.

    1. His post-season fade wiped away a lot of the good will that he built during his 6th Man of the Year campaign.

    2. He is coming off of a knee surgery.

    3. Once he is healthy, he must serve a 5 game drug suspension. More importantly, if (or when) he slips up again, he is subject to a 10 game drug suspension.

    4. JR Smith has a well-earned reputation for being difficult to coach. If the Knicks give up on him, after everything that Woodson did to accommodate JR, that will be a HUGE red flag.

    5. If other teams were interested in JR, they could have offered him the full MLE. It seems that he did not get that offer. So the only way that a team would be interested today in JR is if they can foist bad contracts on the Knicks.

    My bet is that JR Smith will have more value at the Trade Deadline, if he has come back healthy.

  30. Frank

    ONE WEEK UNTIL TRAINING CAMP!!!!!!!

    Although I’m enjoying the Jets so much right now I hardly even miss it.

    btw I love that Revis is stuck on a train wreck of a team in TB. Hope that extra $2MM/year was worth it Darrelle!!! And I’m guessing TB knows now that shutdown corner for $16MM/year is a luxury, not a necessity.

  31. lavor postell

    Frank:
    ONE WEEK UNTIL TRAINING CAMP!!!!!!!

    Although I’m enjoying the Jets so much right now I hardly even miss it.

    btw I love that Revis is stuck on a train wreck of a team in TB. Hope that extra $2MM/year was worth it Darrelle!!!And I’m guessing TB knows now that shutdown corner for $16MM/year is a luxury, not a necessity.

    Haha me and my friend wasted about 3 hours in the middle of the NFL games yesterday trying to figure out what our starting lineup and rotations would look like. Hopefully Woody can figure out the right lineups, because there are a lot of very interesting and versatile pieces at his disposal.

    Anybody else take some satisfaction in watching the 49ers have a mini collapse early on in the season and watching Harbaugh’s smug self serving attitude get thrown right back in his face. Seattle is the real deal. That defensive line is just downright frightening.

  32. SeeWhyDee77

    thenamestsam: Congratulations on the marriage! Hope the new wife is a Knicks fan.

    Lol thanx! And she better be! And thanx Flossy as well!

    Those moves I suggested probably aren’t the most favorable, I admit. But with the talent we have that’s pretty much set in stone in their places on the food chain, I’m just lookin for an opportunity to add some young talent to develop for the future since we really don’t have draft picks. I know JR is an important piece, but I also believe in Shump-TH2-Murry’s potential..especially when u have someone like Melo doing the heavy lifting. Not to mention the talents (when healthy) of Stat-Bargnani-MWP-Chandler. Of course health is always a concern, but they are more than capable of carrying the team as the core along with Melo. Maybe my desire to see the team develop young guys is leading me to have a little too much faith in the youngins and overall health of the team. But I also don’t wanna see Woodson lead a group of young guys and no names once the big deals are off the books. I don’t have that kind of faith in him. D’Antoni could pull it off becuz he taught an entertaining style of ball. Unless of course we hire a young exciting coach like Indy and Boston did.

  33. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Dee, you really should look into the efficiency numbers for marriage. You think that an increased volume of events like tax write-offs will make up for the decrease in other “productive” events? God, you are such a mouth-breather. Why don’t you agree with my basic premise? I hate you.

    ; )

    Congrats.

  34. SeeWhyDee77

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Dee, you really should look into the efficiency numbers for marriage. You think that an increased volume of events like tax write-offs will make up for the decrease in other “productive” events? God, you are such a mouth-breather. Why don’t you agree with my basic premise? I hate you.

    ; )

    Congrats.

    +1

Comments are closed.