David Stern, commissioner of the NBA, has decided to suspend both Gilbert Arenas and Javaris Crittenton for the remainder of the season for their role in the recent issue of bringing a gun into the Washington Wizards arena which later resulted in Gilbert Arenas being indicted by a grand jury.Many will ask if it is fair with some thinking the incident was merely a prank gone bad and others thinking it was absolutely uncalled for. The fact is that both Javaris Crittenton and Gilbert Arenas were at fault and both players will no longer have the chance at seeing any more game time this season.

Gilbert Arenas has plead guilty to felony gun possesion a couple weeks ago and Javaris Crittenton has plead guilty to a misdemeanor gun charge just earlier this week.

David Stern then made the decision to change the players suspension status from out indefinitely to out for the rest of the NBA season.

Gilbert Arenas has stated pubicly that he will not appeal the league's decision which is probably the first and only smart decision by Arenas since news of this issue broke.

Although Gilbert Arenas will lose out on $7.4 million (once) owed to him for the next 50 games, it's likely he will suffer losses greater than that as I doubt any media or advertising agency will be willing to touch him with a 10 foot pole for quite some time.

David Stern said "We mean what we say when we say that guns are prohibited from our buildings and team business," continuing with "And if you violate that provision... you will be dealt with harshly. Because it's very potentially dangerous, to our players, to the other players, and to anybody else that might be involved, and we simply aren't going to tolerate it."

Personally, I expected this to be something of a minimum possible sentence. I really couldn't see either player hitting the court for another game this season and am personally wondering if David Stern was hard enough to send a legitimate message to the players.

Aside from the legal issues each player must face, it seems almost like this should have been the immediate punishment with further action to be decided later. If any typical citizen got caught brandishing a weapon at work in the same manor as Gilbert Arenas, we would have been fired, plain and simple. There would have been no passing go or collecting 200 dollars, we would likely just go straight to jail with several charges laid upon us and no hope at impressing anybody on our future resume.

Would anybody else be able to get away with this as easily as they have?

Do you think you would have been able to keep your job minus a penalty of less than 50% of your paycheck for that year?

Am I the only one that thinks a little And 1 suspensions should have been in order -- meaning, the rest of this year and 1 year?

If David Stern was trying to send a strong message, am I the only one to think he failed to deliver?