This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
yes, I've pulled legs off spiders... used magnifying glasses to fry ants... etc...anything bigger than that?well I gutted a bird... and I've shot at deer... I was with my uncle when he shot one in the stomach and then helped him chase it through the woods for a mile or 2 as it oozed its guts out the whole time....
I don't think anyone has justified what he is doing... they're just saying to compare him to a rapist is stupid and to ban him for life is even more stupid...
why would you pull legs off spiders?wtfyes, I've pulled legs off spiders... used magnifying glasses to fry ants... etc...anything bigger than that?well I gutted a bird... and I've shot at deer... I was with my uncle when he shot one in the stomach and then helped him chase it through the woods for a mile or 2 as it oozed its guts out the whole time....
Solid human behavior here. This board would be so much better if larryboy were put on ignore. Here, I'll start...:ignore:yes, I've pulled legs off spiders... used magnifying glasses to fry ants... etc...anything bigger than that?well I gutted a bird... and I've shot at deer... I was with my uncle when he shot one in the stomach and then helped him chase it through the woods for a mile or 2 as it oozed its guts out the whole time....
Everyone has preconceived notions and cultural blindspots. Thats part of living in a society and learning a language. As for the insect not being evolved enough for you, then what about hunting quails? deer? fishing for marlin? Sometimes those animals die very quickly and in a 'humane' way, but sometimes they bleed out or have their throats ripped out. And then consider that in fishing you yank on a fish until its utterly exhausted and then you suffocate it.
Im not defending the killing of animals for entertainment. Im defending the ideals of innocent until proven guilty and redemption, both bedrock principles of this society.As for no valid argument even being possible, well thats quite a statement when the most popular sport in the land has mounting evidence that the strains of training and playing cause many long term players to slowly (sometimes quickly) destroy their bodies.
I love how all contorted and convoluted these arguments get when they're really dumb.
I hear what you are saying here, and I am on the fence.But I'd just like to point out that the NFL IS a little different than the average company in one very important way. The NFL is an ENTERTAINMENT "company". It's primary purpose is to get viewers to watch which leads to advertisers which leads to money. YOU may not care, and I may not care, but if enough people DO care (and it is entirely up to them whether they care or not), it leads to lower viewership, lower advertising and less money in the end.
Sure it does. But I'd like to see this kind of thing decided on a team-by-team basis rather than by the league. It's possible that fan bases around the nation vary greatly. Dallas and Charlotte may need the players to be "good guys" to have strong support. New York and Oakland may well value winning over character, however, and let a lot more misconduct slide without endangering their fan bases. When the Raiders were perceived as a bunch of filthy criminals some decades ago, everybody else hated them (and because they won a lot, too). It was wonderful. Living in Ravens' territory, I have some experience with this as well.So encourage your home franchise to field the kind of team you'd be proud to support. Let the other fans do the same. Mr. Goodell can go worry about something else.
I have to disagree. Im simply a huge fan of the NFL. And stuff like this ruins it for me.
Ah, but perhaps you're forgetting how all those bitter rivalries in the AFC West were built -- they were built on hatred. Even though you're a fan of the NFL in general (as am I), I'm not sure why you insist that each team be subjected to the same rules of off field behavior as the next. Shouldn't that be a matter between a team, its players and its supporters?
Check out the shelters in Mexico or other countries.
Like what? What power do you even support a commissioner having, in the first place? In other words, what good is a commissioner and the NFL to you? Should there even be one, in your eyes? Or, are you just bent out of shape that it's a bad day for thug behavior in the NFL?
And...? Your point?
The league, along with the 32 owners and the players union, have all agreed that it's in THEIR BEST INTERESTS to bestow power to the league office (i.e., Goodell, whom you hate) in adjudicating these matters. Are you suggesting that they should change their minds to grant you your wish of bringing in more thugs into the league?
NO possible way will an NFL team sign Vick if he is foudn guilty of these offenses.
If he had the talent of Peyton Manning, perhaps someone would take the P.R. hit. But, given that he's a crap QB, anyway, I agree...no way anyone hires this S.O.B. if he's convicted.I think if he plea bargains, there might be a team out there...just depends on the language of the plea agreement, I guess.
your a disgrace to man kind.
My point is that people beat, shoot, strangle, and ELECTROCUTE dogs everyday at the "local" shelters right across the border. In other words, we Americans view dogs in a very different light than others. Funny how Americans can be so outraged by the treatment and killing of dogs (3 million a year someone said) and yet we feel none of the same horror about the deaths of over 1 million babies every year.And...? Your point?
Wow.Can't really do much to warm up the room temperature IQ here.My point is that people beat, shoot, strangle, and ELECTROCUTE dogs everyday at the "local" shelters right across the border. In other words, we Americans view dogs in a very different light than others. Funny how Americans can be so outraged by the treatment and killing of dogs (3 million a year someone said) and yet we feel none of the same horror about the deaths of over 1 million babies every year.And...? Your point?
I'm not a big fan of comparing what other countries do with ours. Other countries allow their men to beat their women. That doesn't mean we should. Our country is different from other countries and that was the intent when it was founded. I take pride in knowing that we will not tolerate certain things that are morally wrong that other countries accept and that includes cruelty to animals. Killing dogs like the indictment suggests is just wrong. Plain and simple. "If" found guilty, I personally believe he should not be allowed back into the NFL. The NFL needs to set an example for everyone thats its not always about money and marketability. To put someone like Vick in a position to be idolized by kids all over the world is unbelieably wrong.My point is that people beat, shoot, strangle, and ELECTROCUTE dogs everyday at the "local" shelters right across the border. In other words, we Americans view dogs in a very different light than others. Funny how Americans can be so outraged by the treatment and killing of dogs (3 million a year someone said) and yet we feel none of the same horror about the deaths of over 1 million babies every year.And...? Your point?
Its simple. Vick probably did something bad, and if he did he should get punished. But to claim that this is the worst offense ever committed by any active player of the NFL is ludicruous. As is the suggestion that this is a bannable offense. What Im confused about is how so many people seem to value the lives of dogs over the lives of humans, while having little to no care about the treatment of other species (save cats).
I'm suggesting that they've made a mistake in this area and encouraging them to change, for the reasons I've stated in this and the other threads. I won't repeat them but it appears that you have bestowed quite a different motivation to me than that which I intended.
Especially from the roadkills, Keith Lewises, and ILUVBEERs of the FBG contingent who have each taken turns wearing Vick's jock defending this thug.
I have no problem with the plea agreement and have never had an issue with a pro athlete being subject to the same penalties for his transgressions as the average thug.You're having a little problem with the details, aren't you?
"thug"'s have rights too. YOu know how quick Gene Upshaw and the boys would appeal (and likely win any suspesnion longer than 1-2 years?NFLPA>PETA
So I am sure that you protest Peyton Manning for his hunting?Vick is just a moron from the sticks. In rural north/south carolina this kind of #### is part of the culture.
excuse making
well it is?excuse making
Don't shoot the messenger.Should politicians pass laws and crack down on tickling in the south-midsouth? cockfighting on the bayou? Bullfighting? How about Rodeo? How about corn fed game hunbting? How about hunting with assault weapons. How about bare knuckle boxing? How about horse racing? How about dog racing?all very similar. Where you draw the line and how tyou view the above activities really depend on where you are from (race and economic class status included).Actually if Pit Bulls are raised in a compassionate and intelligent home (like all dogs) they are at least as good with kids as most other breeds. Don't forget the Little Rascals...Petey was a Pit Bull. Go to a dog show and you will see that they are as friendly and trustworthy as any dog breed. Stereotypes are dangerous.
Vick might be a moron, but he's not from the sticks.
What is Tickling?Cockfighting....AbsolutelyBullfighting...already illegal is the USA (atleast in the same form it is done in Spain and Mexico)To compare the rest to Dog Fighting shows how you and many others are completely ignorant to just how bad the world of dogfighting is.
Correct.........this is what will give him the most problems. We all hate and agree that what he did to the dogs is bad. There are varying degrees of how bad, some feel what he did is the worst thing you can possibly do and others feel it's bad, but it's a dog.Regardless of that and taking the emotion out, if you look into the future 2 to 3 years down the road, what will cause him problems are these illegal gambling charges. If he's kept out for life, or a prolonged time, I believe it's this that will do it.
And it's not just dog fighting. Dog fighting IMO is cruel and it doesn't belong, but he even went further than that. The things he did to those dogs goes beyond just dog fighting.In horse racing or dog racing...if there was an owner or trainer and they were found out that they drowned the horse, or electricuted them or smashed them around, they'd be in trouble as well and certainly not allowed in their professions.
I'll add a little more to address the comparisons with Peyton Manning's hunting.It goes back to the caretaker-dependant relationship between pets and people that I mention above. The deer that Manning hunts are not dependant upon him for their care and feeding. Same with fishing. To me, hunting and fishing constitute use of natural resources (which can be humane/responsible or inhumane/irresponsible, of course). Dog fighting and killing of losing dogs is not in the same league IMHO.What would be comparable to Vick is if Manning shot at deer with tranquilizer darts, and then kept the deer alive for some car-battery action later on. Or maybe if they captured deer, made them have races, and then killed the slower deer.
I see your point but aren't the dog owners wrong for doing that as well who do that? I'm sure not everything in dog or horse racing is something you'd want to hear about at the dinner table but regardless of that, how does that make what Michael Vick did right or wrong?This is a specfic case and will be judged as so. Throwing in dog racing or horse racing also shows to many of the people in this thread that they KNOW very little about owners and trainers in those worlds.
Yes in the end the are still creatures who feel pain, fear, isolation and a whole host of other emotions. They are innocent and in a civilized society innocents should be protected from the cruel.When deciding on his sentence why don't you just say....in the end he is just a cruel scum bag that shows remorse only because he got caught and has very little compassion for others (humans or animals)To suggested that someone who has tortured many innocent creatures should be given a second chance is to me ridiculous and an attack on our civilization and its development.
Iwannabeacowboybaby! said:I see your point but aren't the dog owners wrong for doing that as well who do that? I'm sure not everything in dog or horse racing is something you'd want to hear about at the dinner table but regardless of that, how does that make what Michael Vick did right or wrong?This is a specfic case and will be judged as so. Throwing in dog racing or horse racing also shows to many of the people in this thread that they KNOW very little about owners and trainers in those worlds.Big Score said:Doug B said:
For any negative story you may have heard about horses, there's 9 great ones about how well these horses are taken care of and how much a part of some people's family these horses are.
What Mike Vick and his gang did to these dogs is so far off from what normally happens to horses and dogs in racing.
Hmmmm...so mass killings, shipping dogs off to be experimented on & my personal favorite...
...doesn't seem much different to what Mike Vick and his gang did....well...except that dog racing is legal, while dog fighting is not.
Being unwilling to forgive and allow second chances is the more frightening attack on our civilization and way of life. It effects far more people and undermines our concepts of justice, rehabilitation, and humanity.Tillmanisahero said:
He will be given a second chance...when he gets out of prison. Don't equate second chance with getting of scott free like other have. Where is the justice for the victims if he get off with out real punishment? Will they be able to enjoy "rehabilitation"? How do we protect our humanity if we don't punish those who don't practice it or encourage others to toss it aside? When the criminal is a celebrity we enjoy we always forget about the victims....what does that say about our society?
I don't understand intelligent, informed people like you advocating a brutal death sentence for Vick (three years of underground fighting with other human beings).
You said giving him a second chance is ridiculous. I'm all for locking him up. You don't seem to want to let him out. You have advocated brutally torturing him. I'll go along with a five year max sentence and no torture. I'd love to see him get hit with the max financially too. But I can forgive him. I can get over it. I can give him a second chance. I can hope and pray that he turns this into a positive and sheds a bright light on the culture of dogfighting. I have no interest in hate, sensationalized peta points, and losing my own humanity because he was inhumane.
