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!
I don't have a link handy, but from my experience living in North Carolina, the southern "underclass" is strikingly desegregated. My perception is that dogfighting occured in poor rural communities, white and black.
Disagree. Just like dogfighting, hunting is a cultural phenomenon, made up mainly by rural folk. I personally find it discusting, but I can understand how others don't. Hunting tortures and kills animals for sport, just like dogfighting. Why would it not be ok for Owens to say, "dogfighting is engraned in some southern communities."
Here are some interesting websites relating to the multi-cultural draw of dog fighting.Hutchinson EO
oh, my bad, in that case I am very offended as a southerner. I try not to read or listen to anything TO says, and I was also referring to Jamie Foxx's comment.
Look, I hate hunting as much as the next guy, but calling it torture is just ignorant. Hunters pride themselves on the ability to make a clean kill. In fact, the ability to kill your prey while putting it through the least amount of pain is what distinguishes a good-hunter for a bad hunter. I know this cause I have gotten a crash course in hunting from my brother-in-law. Even the craziest animal rights groups have never been able to pass anti-hunting legislation because even they know it's necessary to maintain the herds and prevent over-population. Cumberland Island off of Georgia, which is a nature preserve, had to invite hunters onto the island to prevent the entire herd of deer from wiping itself out. He and his brother were chosen to go because it had to be bow-hunting, and their accuracy proved that they would put the animals through the least amount of pain.
Yeah I guess it is hard for "the man" to understand how race is an excuse for torturing animals. Go figure.
yknow "it's just the way it is" was the same kind of line they used to justify/excuse slavery for centuries. lol @ the apologists using the "it's a black thing" bit - which of cousre is not racist. 
Nice try, but you're spitting into the wind. Also granted it a small sample, but I've talked to people who are/were social workers in various areas of the South and they have some familiarity/experience with it, and say it is mostly a "black southern thing" FWIW.(PS isn't it amazing how you hear all this apologist BS from blacks but little if any about anyone being anything near furious....or is it...)Paging Mr Cobsy
Oh there you go spewing facts n stuff around. Don't you realize apologists aren't into that - get w/the times and go w/the flow on their pretzel logic. Besides you're outnumbered anyway.
First of all, thanks for the response and the links. I can't listen to the NPR link here at work (no sound card), but I'd be interested in knowing where they're talking about. That aside I'm not finding the stuff you've posted here all at compelling as a response to my question. I'll go item by item. First of all, we're talking about the South. Ireland and the San Francisco case don't count for much there. Beyond that that, though, I'm asking for more than anecdotal evidence if it's out there. I have no doubt that there are a few of the proverbial southern rednecks out there who fight dogs, but I've never seen anything to indicate that it's anything predominant. That's what I'm looking for.RedZone said:
Again, I'm no authority on this and my only agenda is knowing the truth here, but when I hear people denying that this is a predominantly black activity in the U.S. I note that I have yet to hear evidence supporting this assertion. Maybe that NPR link addresses that, but unfortunately that's the one link I can't access due to my work computer.
corpcow said:
Redman, there's three primary categories of dogfighters in this country. There's the "streetfighters" who are found in both urban areas and country backroads. They're relatively new to the scene and they are primarily African Americans. They arrived with gangsta glorification and the hip hop movement. Another classification is called the hobbyists. These are folks who use the "professional rules and protocols", usually keep less than ten dogs, sometimes just one or two, and they are primarily White with strong ethnic influences among Latinos, Asians, and Blacks. You will find hobbyists broken into cliques and those clicks are generally segregated by race. There's large groups of both Asians and Mexicans fighting dogs in Southern California.
Hunting - LegalDog Fighting - IllegalThis should be the end of the discussion.Edited to add - I'm not a hunter so I could give a rat's ### about the guys (and ladies) who do all that. I just realize there's a very easy distinction to be made between elements in our society which are legal and those which are not.sholditch said:
True, but same can be said that....comparingSweet J said:
Tremendous Upside said:
J"Being present at a dog fight when he was a kid" = the part bolded aboveBeachBums said:
Mike Vick is not poor.
Tend to agree.zoonation said:
Good post. That's info I wasn't privy to before. I'll take a closer look when I get home.
Thank you for posting that. Most or all of your information will be ignored, of course, by those who want to use this as another thread to criticize black people. But it won't be ignored by redman, myself, and most of the other people reading here.
This is what I have been saying for a while. Also, some people don't understand that Vick has/had probably been fighting dogs since he was 11-12 years old. It become "normal" to him. I saw dogfighting while growing up right in the middle of my street, in the alley, in the backyard etc. It was and still is a "cultural thing" and some will NEVER understand. If any of you could find your way to a urban neighborhood, ie Cass Corridor, Dexter and Fenkell or Linwood and Puritan in Detroit you will find that dogfighting is pretty common. Ummmm, strike that you don't wanna visit THOSE areas in Detroit.
Theres a big difference though....My guess is that even children of drug dealers have a pretty good idea that their parent's "culture" is wrong and against the law. While they may grow up in that "culture" theres no misconception of the morality of it.Converesely, many kids probably grow up thinking that dog fighting is no different than any other sport and theres nothing wrong at all with it.
While I don't doubt that they try to cause the least amount of pain, obviously none of us know the horrible feeling you get as your life is slipping away from you. I have no problem with someone calling that "torture."sholditch said:
this is pretty poor logic. So because hes not a criminal people can't condemn him for his personality and public actions?
**** Cheney and Tom Brady?
You forgot Travis Henry.
Hunting for sport = executing animals for pleasure / entertainmentDog fighting = being part and parcel to the killing of dogs, also for pleasure / entertainmentMorally, there is no difference here. People in here will say otherwise because of their cultural upbringing. But then again, it is difficult for most to be objective, especially when deep down that objectivity would uncover a dark patch of their own humanity that they would prefer to ignore.Any of the logic ie 'clean kill' or whatever is just whitewashing the fact that these people are murdering animals for fun - how is that morally different from dog fighting? It isnt. But the winners dictate history. They also dictate what is morally "acceptable" - and the winners in our nation are from a culture that accepts hunting but does not accept dogfighting. So they will pretend there is a moral difference. There is not. And someone who says there is, is likely lying to themselves.
And I am on a week's vacation?
nice one
maybe not, but a I'm sure one can agree that criminal behavior is worthy of a greater degree of condemnation than non-criminal behavior.
in here 
