Originally Posted By: HelmsmaNThere would be no point in "throwing the book at him", in that the fighting isn't going to go away, it would only (further) ruin one man's life, if it hasn't already. That's ludicrous!By your logic, the basketball coach here in Mayberry that raped my cousin's little girl should be let off the hook. Child abuse and rape are not going to go away, and it would only ruin one man's life, if it hasn't already.Really...think about what you're saying.
-
Vick and dog fighting
-
Come on, Damien. You really can't compare rape and dog fighting. Granted, they are two horrendous things, but I don't think you can compare the two.You guys do realize that Vick probably won't get more than 2 years in prison? He probably won't even serve 18 months. Helms is right--it's worthless throwing the book at him because it won't stop dog fighting. If people are really upset about the plight of dogs and other animals, they would look at ways to curb the overpopulation of dogs. That's a far serious issue than dog fighting, in my opinion.
-
Please Krystal.
I wasn't comparing dog fighting and rape. If you read my comments with a half cup of intelligence, you know that's not what I was doing.
I was commenting on his logic. The idea that someone who breaks a law - any law - should only receive any kind of sentence or punishment if doing so would alleviate the crime. That's asinine. And to say he shouldn't be convicted because it might ruin his life?!? Tough titties. He should have thought of that before.I don't like the idea of making it worse on him because he is who he is. I think sometimes folks like him or Paris get harsher sentences cause they're famous. But he did something illegal. And it won't be Eddie who sentences him. It will be a judge who will base his sentence on previously determined guidelines.
And if his career is ruined cause he did this incredibly stupid thing. Oh well. To whom much is given, much is expected.
-
It's actually Kristal.Anyway, I'm going to say something that isn't going to be popular, but what the hell. I'm rarely on here anyway, so fuck it.It seems like the "dog loving" crowd are letting their emotions get the best of them. Yes, it's fucked up what Vick and his co-defendents did. However, I do think everyone is missing the main point, which is he isn't the only person doing this. Granted, he is a celebrity and that magnifies dog fighting. But all this attention has not made people actually THINKabout the world of dog fighting. What a surprise--Americans not thinking.This is a prime example of people jumping on the emotional bandwagon and not thoroughly examining the issue. All those "animal activist" remind me of the Terri Schiavo case--all camping out in front of her hospice, villifying her husband. What happened to those people? They went back into their cozy homes and turned their backs on the central issue of that case.That is exactly what will happen with this case. These so called "animal rights protesters" don't give a shit about the plight of animals. They are just feeding off the press frenzy that's surrounding the case. Like I said, if those people really gave a shit about the plight of animals, they why not focus on the overpopulation? Why not contact your city officials and create ordinances to prevent animal hoarding in houses? Instead, these people want to take the easy (and less productive) route of jumping on the bandwagon and participating in process of media sensationalism. And once the case is over, they'll go back to sipping their expensive lattes, driving their gas guzzling SUVs and yapping on their cell phones, leaving the animals they claim to love high and dry.
-
Well, Kristal with an "i"...
I don't see where your views are so controversial or why they should be unpopular. I think you're absolutely right. While I think all the animal activists do care about the "issue", the only real interest in this case most of them have is the opportunity to go on CNN or wherever and draw attention to themselves and their cause. I think what this man has apparently done is terrible and there is a penalty for it. But it shouldn't be more than that.
I also don't think that those who are calling to an end to his career are being fair. I think it's appropriate for the NFL to suspend him for whatever amount of time. But if he were a plumber, or an actor for Pete's sake, no one would even think of denying him his livelihood for the rest of his life.
That being said, whatever natural - logical and in proportion - consequences he suffers outside of the legal penalties are fair game.
-
Quote:I also don't think that those who are calling to an end to his career are being fair. I think it's appropriate for the NFL to suspend him for whatever amount of time. But if he were a plumber, or an actor for Pete's sake, no one would even think of denying him his livelihood for the rest of his life That's an excellent comparison. Why is it when it comes to sports, we call for a person's banishment, but when it comes to acting, we are so quick to forgive a person and let them continue their career? Why is it that Michael Richards, who showed his racist side in public, has been allowed to continue his career, but Barry Bonds, who has not been convicted or charged with anything, is constantly booed every where he goes (no, I'm not making this a racial thing--it's just a coincidence that Bonds is black and Richards is white)?To answer my own question, actors aren't under the same contract like athletes. They used to be back during Hollywood's Golden Era, but not anymore. Sports has become such a big business that any particular league would be committing commercial suicide if they don't "punish" an athlete for doing something wrong.I don't think Vick should be banned from football. The NFL should just suspend him for however long his sentence or for a full season and just let him continue to play.
-
Quote:
There would be no point in "throwing the book at him", in that the fighting isn't going to go away, it would only (further) ruin one man's life, if it hasn't already.
It would be like convicting a person to a year in jail for having a bag of pot. Sure it "punishes" the person involved, but doesn't "solve the problem".
Very excellent point.
-
And, once again, sentencing a murderer or rapist for murder or rape doesn't solve the overall problem of murder or rape.Should they not be sentenced?
-
Quote:I also don't think that those who are calling to an end to his career are being fair. I think it's appropriate for the NFL to suspend him for whatever amount of time. But if he were a plumber, or an actor for Pete's sake, no one would even think of denying him his livelihood for the rest of his life. I'm gunna take a step back and post a bunch of thoughts which will probably end up contradicting themselves.But, A. yes there is alot of emotional bandwagon but, what do you expect when something is quite literally ripping out the jugular of another creature? I mean I think its safe in saying the man is a fucken sadist =/. (assuming this is all true). yes alot of people are using it to get 5 minutes of fame but, that doesn't make the situation any less horrific. I won't lie I am not a major animal lover. I can't say I go contribute countless hours and try to solve this problem. However, I will say I've been raised around animals since I was little so I can't say I take kindly to this situation. Chickens, dogs, cats, lizards, and a number of other random animals. Had some of them all. I find it sick someone wouldn't have any problem senselessly torturing my pets.B. Your training dogs to kill. PERIOD. One gets away and loose someone is going to get hurt. Then how do you feel about it? The difference? then not only is it cruelty to animals its negligence because he screwed up and one got away. However, if you think a dog trained to kill would think twice about killing an infant, old lady, a new mother, a middle aged mother with 3 grown sons. Or anyone who is unarmed and unable to fight back your dead wrong.C. plumbers don't make 130 million dollars. Were he an actor I would hope he would never get another high paying job in his life. Also seeing as your "picked" to be a football player he realistically should have a degree in something else besides "footballology"e because, he could at any point lose his livelyhood with a single injury.Any time you place your entire career around a highly unstable feild. (sports, dancing, acting, music, and things of that nature) you ultimately run the risk of ending up out of a job.No market is garuenteed but, lets be honest 1 in how many thousand people get to play sports, act or something of that nature and make millions? If he was counting on football being his livelyhood that was his first mistake before any of this started.
-
And, once again, sentencing a murderer or rapist for murder or rape doesn't solve the overall problem of murder or rape.Should they not be sentenced? Even though you said you weren't comparing rape to dog fighting, you are. You're trying to prove a point but the comparison is ridiculous.Of course he should be sentenced/punished, but he(helms) was saying could ruin his career and when you compare it to other crimes does not seem fair.
-
He wasn't saying the two crimes are the same - he was showing that the logic was faulty because the same logic applied to other circumstances produced an obviously erroneous conclusion.The problem would appear to be that it is unfair to prevent a criminal, once he has paid his debt to society, from working at his trade. Unfair, and also unwise, since it will tend to push him back into crime. The problem is wider than in professional sports. People released from prison are finding it increasingly hard to live honestly.
-
I understand his point about the logic, but the level of the crime is not the same. In both cases a life/career is ruined.
-
Quote:
The problem would appear to be that it is unfair to prevent a criminal, once he has paid his debt to society, from working at his trade. Unfair, and also unwise, since it will tend to push him back into crime. The problem is wider than in professional sports. People released from prison are finding it increasingly hard to live honestly.
I have a problem with this. If it were any other profession fine let him go back. The problem is with football, acting and music style careers are something of a high risk life style to begin with. If vick doesn't have a degree in college from shit. If he has no skills besides playing football and no knowledge of anything besides football (and dog fighting) then who's fault is that?
In football you could at any time get injured and be unable to play.
In any career where your a major public figure you are liable for an "oh shit" factor. If your a football player its breaking your legs. if your Imus its a bunch of whiney girls being over sensative.
My point is simple. ANYONE who goes to be a public figure has to have a fall back plan. I mean very very few people ever make it to the "big leagues" so if they aren't going to make it to the big leagues then what? And well I hate to say it but, you have to be insane to just assume your going pro.
So I really don't think of this as taking away his livelyhood. He should have some form of work outside of football to begin with. If he doesn't then thats his own fault =/.
-
Like I said, if those people really gave a shit about the plight of animals, then why not focus on the overpopulation? Why not contact your city officials and create ordinances to prevent animal hoarding in houses?I totally agree with this. At any given time we always have at least two dogs in (at the vet place where I work) that were bought from a store that gets its puppies from puppy mills. And not too long ago, there was 40 dogs found in someone's house, and all were living in hideous conditions. However, in my opinon, dog fighting is still just as bad as all that.And most people never stop being animal lovers.
-
well a possible reason id see is if some actor, pro sportser or music person basically a major public figure is doing something as heinous as dog fighting or something like that they should be prohibited from continuing that work considering, how many kids and such emulate football players, actors, musicians?
-
By LARRY O'DELL, Associated Press WriterAugust 24, 2007
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) -- Michael Vick filed his plea agreement in federal court Friday admitting to conspiracy in a dogfighting ring and helping kill pit bulls. He denied ever betting on the fights, only bankrolling them. The Atlanta Falcons quarterback is scheduled to formally enter his plea Monday in U.S. District Court.
'Most of the Bad Newz Kennels operation and gambling monies were provided by Vick," a summary of facts in the case said.
The statement said that when the kennel's dogs won, the gambling proceeds were generally shared by Vick's three co-defendants -- Tony Taylor, Purnell Peace and Quanis Phillips."Vick did not gamble by placing side bets on any of the fights. Vick did not receive any of the proceeds of the purses that were won by Bad Newz Kennels," the summary said.
"Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts of Peace, Phillips and Vick."
According to court documents, Vick was aware that his co-defendants killed a number of dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions.Last April, Vick and two co-defendants tested the fighting skills of dogs and the three agreed to kill six to eight dogs that didn't measure up. All were killed by methods including hanging and drowning.
-
apperently he found Jesus ans axed him for forgivness... moron
-
I read today there is a chance the league will go after the $22 million they already paid to Vick. I personally hope they do and win every penny back.What I don't get is how the NAACP can actually defend Vick after what he did: Quote: An NAACP leader said Michael Vick should be allowed to return to the NFL, preferably the Atlanta Falcons, after serving his sentence for his role in a dogfighting operation."As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football," said R.L. White, president of the NAACP's Atlanta chapter. "We further ask the NFL, Falcons, and the sponsors not to permanently ban Mr. Vick from his ability to bring hours of enjoyment to fans all over this country." Quote: "At this point, you're not looking at guilt or innocence," White said, referring to the possible harsher sentence Vick could have received had he taken his case to trial and been found guilty. "You're thinking, 'What I better do is cut my losses and take a plea.' But if he saw this as the best thing to do at this point for his future, then I think he made the correct choice." White said he regretted that the plea deal will mean all the facts of the case might never be known. "Some have said things to save their own necks," White said. "Michael Vick has received more negative press than if he had killed a human being." White said he does not support dogfighting and that he considers it as bad as hunting. "His crime is, it was a dog," White said.Article found Here And lets not forget about Mr. Al Sharpton. I cannot find a link right now but supposedly he stated dog fighting is just a sport like hunting. I find that absurd! The point behind hunting is not to cause pain to the animal, actually during training they teach you to kill the animal quickly, if not instantly. Plus the animal is used to feed the family, at least that’s how it was in my house growing up. I am not sure how anyone can try and put dog fighting and hunting into the same category.
-
Al Sharpton and the NAACP have what to do with the law and/or pro sports exactly?Or is there some other issue in play with this guy who committed a crime? I don't remember them comming to Pete Rose's defence
-
I laughed like a mother fucker over that bastard in florida who found god and asked for forgivness and knew all would be alright when he was sentenced then he got the death penalty, made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.