How many bouncers are on steroids?

[injuryupdate]

One item that should be a priority for the police investigating the David Hookes manslaughter case is drug testing for the bouncers involved. It is common knowledge that anabolic steroid use amongst bouncers is very high, which they take to bulk up and make themselves more intimidating. However a side effect is uncontrolled aggression, which may have been the catalyst of David Hookes' death. In the war on drugs in sport, one of the neglected methods to fight against this has been drying up the supply side. The authorities are obsessed with drug testing the athlete users but not in putting away the suppliers.

I would suggest an immediate drug test for the suspect in the Hookes' case, and if he is positive to anabolic steroids, then offer him a plea bargain. If he is facing, say, 12 years for aggravated manslaughter, then offer him a reduced term of 7 years in return for giving the name of his suppliers, and lock them up for an equivalent term for illegal drug dealing and being an accesory to the death.

If it is only the elite athletes who get punished for drug use, then the enormous supply chain between dealers and non-elite athlete users who never get drug tested will continue, increasing the level of violence in our society.

The death of a loved character should spark the authorities into action. Bouncers need to be well credentialed, but they also need to be off drugs themselves.

[injuryupdate]

This suggestion has been previously made in a letter to the Medical Journal of Australia, although to my knowledge no action has ever been taken:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8035740&dopt=Abstract

[lee]

I just read the posts about possible steroid abuse in the David Hooks case.

I grew up in South Australia and my memories of him are probably more
personal than those of people in Victoria and NSW. We are the same age and I gained a lot of pleasure in following his career and I am very saddened by his senseless death. However the "common knowledge" of drug abuse in the security industry approach you base your call for drug testing on is dangerous.

In the David Hooks case, I don't believe the facts of the case or the proofs of the elements of an offence the are available to anyone beyond the police at this time. They certainly have not been reported in any of the newspapers, websites, radio or television I have seen.

A logical extension of the articles on your site is that blood and/or urine
samples of all accused people should be taken.

However the social consequences of this are frightening. I already live in
an Australia that would be unrecognisable to someone from only ten years ago. I am innocent of all crimes, until I have opportunity to face the justice system. Until that time I am only accused.

An alternative to the proposal is that those people who are engaged in any occupation that requires a licence should be subjected to random drug testing.

This would cover such people as busdrivers, forklift drivers, doctors,
security guards, cab drivers, nurses and lots of others.

The difference is that a licence subject to random drug testing in no way
compromises an assumption of innocence, rather it simply extends industry governance to cover issues of OH&S, public safety, character and suitability.

I heard a representative of the hospitality industry on ABC radio yesterday talking about proposed drug testing of security personnel. This piecemeal approach will never work. The success of drugs in sport testing should be replicable into the wider community, without polluting the veray basis of our legal system.

[injuryupdate]

I agree with your comments that with respect to the accused individual involved in the David Hookes case that we should not jump to conclusions based on speculation, and we should not be attempting to charge him or blame him for the deficiencies in an industry. He is entitled to a presumption of innonence, although it is going to be difficult for him to have a completely fair trial because of the widespread discussion in the media.

The one positive of the tragedy is that it has brought this issue into the realm of public discussion. From many accounts, the Hookes alleged assault was NOT an isolated incident. Nightclub and pub fights are becoming increasingly common, and bouncers are regularly involved. Presumably they are often involved in a positive fashion, helping to protect patrons from other patrons. However, there is a possibility (and the anecdotal evidence points to an increasingly reality) of bouncers stepping beyond the line of the minimum force necessary to break up fights to actually contributing to or causing a fight. I agree we don't know in the Hookes case at this stage whether the accused bouncer was the instigator or retaliator, and presumably his entire guilt or innocence may rest on this point.

Just as analbolic steroids help athletes become stronger and more aggressive, but for the overall good of sport and the health of athletes, bans and drug testing were instigated, the security industry is an obvious area where anabolic steroids may seem like a beneficial substance for an individual, yet the overall effect of their use may be to increase the amount of pub and nightclub violence. I feel it is an industry where drug tests could be conducted, either after an altercation or randomly, and where suspension or charges could be laid after positive tests. There is a known relationship between anabolic steroids and uncontrolled aggression, and the hands of a well trained bouncer can, as we have just seen, become a lethal weapon if they are not controlled.