In Defense of Michael Vick

[Mastertank1]

Okay, let's clarify one thing.

Dog fights are gambling operations; they have no other purpose.

Vick did not lose his NFL career for cruelty to dogs. You're giving the NFL WAY more credit than it deserves any more.
He lost his NFL career for being involved with gambling, just like Pete Rose did in Baseball.

The NFL and the team owners may forgive a valuable player for any kind of moral turpitude or criminal act, and they regularly do, but it is written into their charter that they are NOT ALLOWED to forgive any player for gambling. This is a contract that all the owners have signed with each other, and a no gambling clause is included in EVERY player's contract in EVERY professional sport played in the USA. Vick signed a contract which stated that he would lose his job permanently if he was caught gambling. Dog fighting is always a gambling operation. He was caught fighting dogs. He was caught gambling, he lost his job. The NFL does NOT have the moral uprightness to ban a good player for cruelty to animals, no matter how much agitation and propaganda is generated about it. They just don't CARE!

Unless they thought that animal lovers would refuse to watch NFL games on TV in numbers large enough to drop the ratings to where TV pays the league less for games, they DO NOT CARE what Vick did to dogs.

This is one of the many areas in which the morality of the society has deteriorated due to the influence of money.

I can remember back in the 1970s, a Dallas Cowboys player named Lance something or other (not Rentzel, but on the team at the same time), who was married to bombshell actress Joey Heatherton, was caught in a hotel room with a 9 year old girl and abusing her sexually during the off season.

The NFL and management made no comment, but when he showed up at the stadium for the start of training, coach Tom Landry met him at the players entrance and told him to wait there while someone else cleared out his locker and brought him his stuff. Landry told the man that if he entered that locker room, he would probably not come out alive.

The NFL will not let the human feelings of the players interfere with business that way ever again.

May their souls be reincarnated as dung beetles with human awareness, forever.

 

[RobAce]

There's really nothing else to say on this topic; I think it's wrong to take a man's career away over this and others think it's okay. Well they got their pound of flesh and took a man's career away; I hope they'll be satisfied but I feel they're not finished with him and nothing will make them happy. Either way, none of us are going to change our position on it, at least I am not.

kis,
I respect your position, I agree to the point that someone should not lose their livelyhood, but my only problem is the NFL is a privledge not a right.
And what about the case I had earlier....should he was shunned by the league and never allowed to play again. This is not the first time.

And Tank, that was pretty spot on...except Id add the fact he lied to the NFL about his actions. At the draft he told the commissioner that he had nothing to do with anything, while knowing only a few days earlier he had done something.

Rob

 

[RobAce]

brian,
I understand you viewpoint....I dont agree but I do understand.
However something you said at least to me proves my point even more....

I talk to kids up to 25 26 who say foolish things to me all the time and that is based on the fact that lots simply dont know any better are ignorant or dont bother to watch the news or even pick up a book.

Its not societies fault that these people dont know, are ignorant, dont watch the news or pick up a book. Its their personal fault.

If someone is smart enough to memorize an NFL playbook, they are smart enough to know what is right and wrong.

Everyone wants to blame someone else for their ills. If people would shape up, take responsibility and act accordingly, there would be a lot less problems in my opinion.

Rob

 

[SlaverTickler]

Dogs are not for human consumption so there goes yer whole food analogy. These dogs were not used for food as well, they were kept in cages and bred to be extremely violent and dangerous and when they lost they got beaten or killed

Where I agree with you on how Vic treated the dogs was wrong, I disagree with the consumption part. In some parts of the world eating dog is what they do. I'm not going to nock a culture for not putting the same value on one animal the way mine does. However I've heard that in some places they will beat the dog with a heavy stick while it is still alive (to tenderise it) I'm not sure where this is done, but if the Yanks and Ruskies are looking to dump off some nucular waist, thats a good place to start. An if any farmers in the Americas (note the s) are doing that, well toss them in to. Animals are "lower life forms" and we should protect them. Even if we are going to eat them that doesn't mean that shouldn't be killed in as humane a way as possible.

 

[SlaverTickler]

I talk to kids up to 25 26 who say foolish things to me all the time and that is based on the fact that lots simply dont know any better are ignorant or dont bother to watch the news or even pick up a book.

Sorry to tell you this spencer, but by the time a person is that age, they aren't a "kid" anymore. By that age you are suposed to be a man, and that mean you face the consaquenses of your words and deads. Chances are by the time you are 9 or 10 you know whats right and whats wrong. It's pretty much the golden rule right, treat people the way you'd want to be treated. If, by the time a person is almost 30, you haven't grasped that consept yet, then someone should put through them to the wolves so the rest of the heard known as humanity can prosper.

People like Vic, no matter what walk of life they come from, make me sick. Killing animals for anyreason, other then for food or clothing, is cruel. Hunting for sport is wrong, killing a beautiful dear or moose just so you can set a pair of antlers over you fire place is no better then killing a person so you can stick there head on a pike. It's wrong. If your hunting or fishing while your camping, I get that, at least it makes sence to a dagree, but for sport sorry, you in Vic League. Mind you I don't agree with through red paint on someone for wearing a fur coat either.

I'm really pretty much against hurting stuff period. I would wrather open a window and let a fly out then kill it if I had an option to do so. This may sound funny coming from a guy with a collection of John Wayn films, but remember the Duke always fought for the right reasons, and his fights weren't real they were scripted. And my wrestling fandom is pretty much founded in knowing that while they look like they are trying to kill each other they do there best to try and protect each other. Most inportantly, Lynda Carter would not aprove... ha I worked in a Lynda reff, so there.

Power to the pink bunny.

 

[brianspencer66]

brian,
I understand you viewpoint....I dont agree but I do understand.
However something you said at least to me proves my point even more....


Its not societies fault that these people dont know, are ignorant, dont watch the news or pick up a book. Its their personal fault.

If someone is smart enough to memorize an NFL playbook, they are smart enough to know what is right and wrong.

Everyone wants to blame someone else for their ills. If people would shape up, take responsibility and act accordingly, there would be a lot less problems in my opinion.

Rob

But see its not a simple matter of everyone just simply shaping up Robace. We are not all brought up with the same moral compass. There are lots of poor people who simply dont understand middle class values. the jails are full of them and there is an imbalance of poor people jailed and rich who get off a little to easy. Again im not letting go what this young man did but its apparant he did come from a poor backround with less than steller values. The problem simply wont go away simply by jailing him as there are lots more who think as he does and that is what needs to be addressed. We need to find a way to get to these kids who do these horrid things and understand the WHY and work on meaningful solution or else it will go on and on.

 

[brianspencer66]

Sorry to tell you this spencer, but by the time a person is that age, they aren't a "kid" anymore. By that age you are suposed to be a man, and that mean you face the consaquenses of your words and deads. Chances are by the time you are 9 or 10 you know whats right and whats wrong. It's pretty much the golden rule right, treat people the way you'd want to be treated. If, by the time a person is almost 30, you haven't grasped that consept yet, then someone should put through them to the wolves so the rest of the heard known as humanity can prosper.

People like Vic, no matter what walk of life they come from, make me sick. Killing animals for anyreason, other then for food or clothing, is cruel. Hunting for sport is wrong, killing a beautiful dear or moose just so you can set a pair of antlers over you fire place is no better then killing a person so you can stick there head on a pike. It's wrong. If your hunting or fishing while your camping, I get that, at least it makes sence to a dagree, but for sport sorry, you in Vic League. Mind you I don't agree with through red paint on someone for wearing a fur coat either.

I'm really pretty much against hurting stuff period. I would wrather open a window and let a fly out then kill it if I had an option to do so. This may sound funny coming from a guy with a collection of John Wayn films, but remember the Duke always fought for the right reasons, and his fights weren't real they were scripted. And my wrestling fandom is pretty much founded in knowing that while they look like they are trying to kill each other they do there best to try and protect each other. Most inportantly, Lynda Carter would not aprove... ha I worked in a Lynda reff, so there.

Power to the pink bunny.

I agree with lots that you say, and again I really hate what this young man did. But people dont seem to want to deal with the bigger picture here. I live in a ghetto where it is common knowlege this sort of thing goes on daily ok? Its awful and horrible but we need to understand the how and why. If we dont deal with the root cause of the problem then what is the point? Its like having roaches in your home and stomping on them with your foot one by one when you well know you need a professional exterminator to get rid of all of them. We need a long term solution so animals are no longer harmed in these horrible ways.

 

[SlaverTickler]

But see its not a simple matter of everyone just simply shaping up Robace. We are not all brought up with the same moral compass. There are lots of poor people who simply dont understand middle class values. the jails are full of them and there is an imbalance of poor people jailed and rich who get off a little to easy. Again im not letting go what this young man did but its apparant he did come from a poor backround with less than steller values. The problem simply wont go away simply by jailing him as there are lots more who think as he does and that is what needs to be addressed. We need to find a way to get to these kids who do these horrid things and understand the WHY and work on meaningful solution or else it will go on and on.

Again I state the basics of "I don't want it done to me, so why would I do it to somebody elts.", or even, "I didn't like it when it was done to me so why would I do it to somebody els." No matter where your from, this is a basic law of humanity, and if you can't grasp this, well, you belong in a cage with the rest of the animals, no matter where your from.

 

[Redmage]

And newsflash, people, this situation is causing great divide in racial relations, because of this. I guarantee you, if this wasn't a person of color, I guarantee you there wouldn't be this much hubbub over it.

I can't speak for anyone else, but since I don't follow football closely I actually had never heard of Michael Vick until this. I had no idea what color his skin was until I saw him on television, but I thought what he had done was detestable the moment I heard about it.

As for caring about an animal's life more than a human's, no. I don't object to humane slaughter or even ethical hunting. But domestic animals are dependent on humans, and far less able to defend themselves from human violence than another human would be. I find abusing animals to be akin to abusing children, for the same reasons: A man who beats and murders a defenseless creature (and pit bull or not, a dog in a pen is effectively defenseless against a prepared human) for no reason other than sport has a long crawl back to become a civilized member of the human species again.

 

[Redmage]

Killing animals is killing animals. Vick is no worse than a person who hunts animals. Most people choose to shoot the animals, but Vick and his friends had their own methods. What Vick did was wrong but don't make it seem like he is worse than any other person who kills animals as a hobby.

No, hunting is not the same as what Vick did.

First, most hunters kill for food, not to punish a dog for losing them money.

Second, hunters generally go for as clean and quick a kill as possible. In contrast Vick took wounded dogs (wounded in fights he arranged for gambling) and didn't even put them down cleanly. He drowned them, strangled them slowly, and electrocuted them. And it wasn't because they were too badly hurt to live. It was because they weren't making him enough money.

If you compared Vick to a "hunter" who puts rabbits in cages and tortures them to death, then I'd agree that what Vick did was no worse than that. But comparing it to ordinary ethical hunting? No, you can't make that stick.

 

[Redmage]

I personally think that Vick should get more jail time than he actually will serve, but here's the issue that I wonder about.
If Vick were ordinary Joe Blow, he would serve his sentenced prison time, say 5 years, and go back, perhaps to another job as a pipefitter, or whatever....if not at the same company, then for another one.....

But Vick was the second highest paid player in the NFL, with a 130 million dollar contract and a 22 million "in the bank" signing bonus. All of that has now gone away, (we are talking his siblings and grand kids possible college educations, among other endowments and endowments to future charities....he did donate to area charities) and perhaps he and his family and any beneficiaries deserve to lose all of that for his actions.....

The pipefitter's family might well lose their home and their life savings as a result of Joe Blow's actions in a case like this. It's a sad fact that in cases of serious crimes the perpetrator's family usually suffers as well.

Arguably Vick's family will suffer much less than most. Vick has already banked more money than 99 out of 100 Americans see in their entire lives. If he has used two grains of brains in managing that money then his family is well provided-for. He may never be richer than he is right now, but what he has now is much more than most people will ever have.

In raw numbers, does what he did justify everything he's going to lose for it? That depends on how you look at it. In one sense it's true that no ordinary person would be (effectively) fined millions of dollars for a crime like this. Of course no ordinary person could pay such a fine anyway.

On the other hand Vick must have known what he was risking with this dogfighting operation. He knew it was illegal, and he knew what he stood to lose if it ever came to the official attention of the NFL. But he did it anyway. Effectively he gambled that he wouldn't get caught. He lost that bet and now he forfeits the pot. It's sad, but I can't find any sympathy for him.

 

[johnttickle]

Well I have to put in my two cents.

1)Vick is trouble with the NFL for the gambling part of the dog fights.

2)Animals are not people in fur coats, and we need to understand that. I grew up on a small farm, which we raised animals to eat. We always killed them quickly, so they didn’t have to suffer. Also we tried to use as much as possible with no waste.

3)Vick did mistreat the dogs, but so do a lot of people. Dogs are pack animals, and need to be part of a pack. When people abandon their dogs by tying them up in the back yard all alone, that is mistreating them too. They see the owners as their pack, and by tying them up all alone, you kick them out of your pack. That is wrong too!

4)What about Bull Fighting, which is a popular sport in some countries. People seem to enjoy watching the bull get stabbed with colored spears, and then put to death at the end.

5)I do think Vick needs to do some time too. But I also see a lot of people get off on charges of rape, assault, and mistreating humans.

There, I feel better now.
Good luck to all of you.

Aloha, John.

 

[Redmage]

2)Animals are not people in fur coats, and we need to understand that. I grew up on a small farm, which we raised animals to eat. We always killed them quickly, so they didn’t have to suffer. Also we tried to use as much as possible with no waste.

So you've already shown how you differ from Michael Vick.

3)Vick did mistreat the dogs, but so do a lot of people. Dogs are pack animals, and need to be part of a pack. When people abandon their dogs by tying them up in the back yard all alone, that is mistreating them too. They see the owners as their pack, and by tying them up all alone, you kick them out of your pack. That is wrong too!

Is shouting at a child just because you had a bad day on the same level as beating the child to death? After all, aren't they both mistreatment?

You can't just shrug your shoulders and say "sometimes people aren't nice to animals" as an excuse for what Vick did.

4)What about Bull Fighting, which is a popular sport in some countries. People seem to enjoy watching the bull get stabbed with colored spears, and then put to death at the end.

I think bullfighting is a barbaric sport, but the bull at least has a chance. Matadors die in the ring. Those dogs didn't have a prayer, and that's what makes Vick's crimes so heinous. Not only were they cruel and unnecessary (like bullfighting). Tormenting and killing an animal that can't even defend itself is simply cowardly. It's beneath the dignity of a civilized human.

 

[johnttickle]

I don’t like what Vick did.

I don’t approve of dog fights.

I don’t like mistreating animals in anyway.

I am glad Vick is going to jail.

I just think there are a lot of different types of abusive behavior that goes unpunished.

Why do we need to be so abusive to children, animals, and our fellow man or women?

I am just an Old U.S. Marine that has been to places I don’t want to remember. I have hurt my fellow man in ways I would like to forget. I just want violence to stop. I believe violence is obsolete. We should have evolved by now into a more peaceful society.

But I know this is just a pipe dream.

Maybe this will clear up some of what I posted earlier.

Good luck to all.
Aloha, John.

 

[jaba]

On the other hand Vick must have known what he was risking with this dogfighting operation. He knew it was illegal, and he knew what he stood to lose if it ever came to the official attention of the NFL. But he did it anyway. Effectively he gambled that he wouldn't get caught. He lost that bet and now he forfeits the pot. It's sad, but I can't find any sympathy for him.

And ultimately, I the gambling is the crime that will prove to be Vick's carreer ender. As I Mastertank stated, gambling is the "moral" issue that the league really frowns on, and not for moral reasons. A lengthy suspension may not have been meted out in the past for Vicks dogfighting offenses, but as Robace stated, the NFL has a new sheriff in town in the form of the current NFL commissioner.

 

[Knox The Hatter]

Which brings up another point. He and his partners in crime "murdered" these dogs for performing poorly in the dogfights. The dogs they murdered were probably bleeding profusely, suffering with huge gashes and cuts and writhing in agony as they died. Truth be known, Vick and his partners actually did these dogs a favor, much like putting down a horse with a broken leg to stop the suffering.

Yes, yes. Adolf Eichmann was a great humanist, too.

 

[mrmiguu]

People....people!!!

(opening statement....peace and love to you, johntickle....truly....thank you for bearing your heart on these humble pages)

I agree with those who see it fit to acknowledge his responsibility for his actions in a place that DOES have statutes against animal AND human cruelty. Thank you for the principled discussion of serious issue here.

First and last, Michael Vick is an ADULT with a brain. And unluckily for him, his influx of cash says that he had even more OPPORTUNITY to provide knowledge for himself through accessing resources and time that would not be available to the average Josephine.....or Joe. Yes, he said he was guilty...AFTER he got ratted on (DOH!!!!) and he'll do his time or whatever the celebrity-crazy judicial system will offer him. Leave him be. I would rather tickle the lot of you with my right hand (my good tickling hand) tied behind my back than spend another miniscule moment discussing the poor "judgment" of some rich athlete who shoulda known better (uh-DUUUHHHHLT!....GROOOOOOOOOWN-UP!).

So into the stocks with all of ya...and somebody get to tyin' my right hand behind me.....ah, there's the rope....

 

[brianspencer66]

Again I state the basics of "I don't want it done to me, so why would I do it to somebody elts.", or even, "I didn't like it when it was done to me so why would I do it to somebody els." No matter where your from, this is a basic law of humanity, and if you can't grasp this, well, you belong in a cage with the rest of the animals, no matter where your from.

So thats your solution to a problem? We all adhere to the same value system you have right? Lets forget about the how and why and lets not discuss anything and if we dont agree with you throw them in a cage for life. I love an intelligent conversition thanks for sharing with me man.

 

[isabeau]

where is the originator of this thread? rather curious is it not that he/she hasn't shown their face again...and shame for bringing the race card into this..like Redmage i never heard of him before this happened..and i hate animal abuse..animals are innocent creatures..to be used in this way is thoroughly disgusting..i live not too far from a greyhound racing track..about hmm half an hour away...i so long to go and picket the place as those poor sweet dogs are half starved so they race faster..then set adrift after they have gone past their prime...

 

[Capnmad]

After sifting through all this, my thoughts:


1. Where is the OP? Probably laughing his/her ass off. Until they return for debate, I award them no points for being gutsy at all, but see them as the "provoke-and-run" sort who cheapen debate.


2. Dogs are sentient beings as much as are humans. Their nervous systems work the same, they learn the same ways, they remember, they fear, and their pain and torture should not be disregarded as less important.

Differences between species prove more and more every day to be quantitative ones and not qualitative. To not defend animal rights is to embark on an increasingly slippery slope.

I'm not an activist, but simply because our genes are different and dogs lack our level of intellect does not mean they should be expected to be treated with any less respect or understanding for their suffering than us. I would defend the rights and appropriate treatment of any human sufferer of a mental disability due to genetic disorder on the same premise.


3. Killing the dogs wasn't done for "humane" reasons any more than a vicious assault that ends in murder is "humane". He was responsible for both their torture and their subsequent deaths.


4. Hunting is done for sport and food much more than survival requires, but deliberate torture of animals is not an innate part of the sport. In fact, the goal is to have a clean, quick kill to prevent suffering and prevent the hunter from having to chase a wounded prey animal for miles. Torture is an innate part of dogfighting.


5. I eat meat. I like meat. At lunch today alone, I've consumed portions of cow, pig and turkey. I'm not ignorant of some hypocrisy in that. However, it behooves the meat industry to have quick, efficient ways to kill, and they receive no benefit from torture. Torture is integral to dogfighting.


6. Pointing to other, inadequately prosecuted or inadequately consequenced cases has never been a valid defense for the accused. It is only an indictment of a system that sometimes permits such injustice. The case before us still stands waiting for appropriate consequence.

 

[isabeau]

some countries eat dog...and cats...

 

[hootus]

The sad truth is, the government doesn't give a damn about the dogs that were killed, they just want their tax money off his gambling on the dog fights!
Doesn't matter whether they are Democrats or Republicans, thats just the cold hard fact of it. It's all about $$$$$$$ !
Now just what does that really say about where our country is headed.

I like dogs and cats. I won't have any now because I live next to a major highway and I don't want to come home and find my pet squashed on the highway by a semi truck because it got out of the fence. And you can't keep cats from prowling. It's their nature to hunt.

Hootus

 

[gluestick]

I wouldn’t support what Vick did for the same reason I wouldn’t hurt a baby or a retard; its not necessary, I’d feel horrible and look like an asshole. That said, I’ll play devil’s advocate. Dogs do not respect or love people...they are brainwashed and only obey to suit their needs. Also, when push comes to shove they'll kill and eat weaker animals to survive like any other carnivore would. However, it doesn’t stop there. I’ve seen countless squirrels and rabbits mauled to death just to satisfy the canine instinct of play. The same applies to cats that toy with mice before killing them and then casting them aside. Here’s my point- if blood sport is demonstrated by animals in nature then killing and torturing for entertainment's sake is part of natural law. Since humans are subject to natural law it follows that we should be able to kill lower/weaker life forms (not of our own species) for entertainment’s sake. So there it is- I’m a sicko. But if you think its wrong to gamble on animal life remember it was our own government that tried to implement a little something called the “Policy Analysis Market” a few years back that would promote profit from the loss of human life.

 

[CitY of MicA]

kibbles 'n vick

I've seen interesting arguments in this thread with regard to how much consideration or rights animals should be given. Frankly, if a person chooses to give more weight to the rights of animals than humans, that's their prerogative. I'm not sure how that really concerns me, unless they somehow neglect to do their job (a firefighter choosing to save a cat before rescuing family members in a burning building). But I've never heard of such a thing happening before, so I don't see how it's relevant.

I wouldn’t support what Vick did for the same reason I wouldn’t hurt a baby or a retard; its not necessary, I’d feel horrible and look like an asshole. That said, I’ll play devil’s advocate. Dogs do not respect or love people...they are brainwashed and only obey to suit their needs. Also, when push comes to shove they'll kill and eat weaker animals to survive like any other carnivore would.

I suppose whether or not dogs can love is just opinion; I certainly believe they can. But then you could stretch your argument to say that humans simply do things to fulfill their needs, as well, and don't really love. And, when push comes to shove, what will humans due in order to survive? Apparently, some will kill animals indiscriminately when survival is not even a consideration.

However, it doesn’t stop there. I’ve seen countless squirrels and rabbits mauled to death just to satisfy the canine instinct of play. The same applies to cats that toy with mice before killing them and then casting them aside. Here’s my point- if blood sport is demonstrated by animals in nature then killing and torturing for entertainment's sake is part of natural law. Since humans are subject to natural law it follows that we should be able to kill lower/weaker life forms (not of our own species) for entertainment’s sake.

In the examples you gave, blood sport is not being demonstrated by animals in nature: they're domesticated animals. In the wild, dogs, except perhaps when they are young, probably won't have any instinct to play. And that cat will be eating that mouse if it kills it. I have never seen an animal in nature 'killing and torturing for entertainment's sake;' actually, I've never seen a domesticated animal torture another animal. I think that's pretty much the antithesis of natural law. While there is a certain amount of play-time in the animal kingdom, generally, animals which one witnesses at play are either pets or in a zoo. They don't have to worry about finding their next meal, so their time has been freed up. It's the type of lifestyle that can inspire jeolousy.

I believe that even those people who don't care one way or another about animal rights should consider the fact that in order for this soceity to be a humane soceity (if you'll excuse the expression), people should not be torturing or indiscriminately killing innocent creatures. We lose part of our humanity if we do.

 

[Redmage]

I wouldn’t support what Vick did for the same reason I wouldn’t hurt a baby or a retard; its not necessary, I’d feel horrible and look like an asshole. That said, I’ll play devil’s advocate. Dogs do not respect or love people...they are brainwashed and only obey to suit their needs. Also, when push comes to shove they'll kill and eat weaker animals to survive like any other carnivore would. However, it doesn’t stop there. I’ve seen countless squirrels and rabbits mauled to death just to satisfy the canine instinct of play. The same applies to cats that toy with mice before killing them and then casting them aside. Here’s my point- if blood sport is demonstrated by animals in nature then killing and torturing for entertainment's sake is part of natural law. Since humans are subject to natural law it follows that we should be able to kill lower/weaker life forms (not of our own species) for entertainment’s sake.

Do you think a dog that kills a squirrel "feels horrible and looks like an asshole" to other dogs? I very much doubt it. But you know that a human who does that sort of thing is tainted by it.

That's because "natural law" notwithstanding, humans are not dogs, and a man who acts like a dog needs to be put in a cage.