The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Wrong? Did you comprehend what I said? I did NOT say it was legal, I said it was not frowned upon. Two different things.

I'm simply getting at people mentality towards dog fighting. They grow up in places where it's "normal" so they don't value the lives of the animal as others would. The same goes for other sports around the world.

It is not "normal" anywhere. That you can say this, and not wonder why they hide to do it? Dude. It is a disgusting activity, and is viewed as so by the vast majority of people in this country. It is illegal because society demanded it be so. Not frowned upon??? What???

They hide to do this because they know this.

I grew up in the south, and spent much of my youth in Mississippi and southwestern VA, and eastern TN. Dog fighting was, until recently, an urban crime, rarely found in the country. Where you find dog fighting, you find drug dealers. The correlation is consistent and proven. If you are involved in one... well...

I have no sympathy for Vick... No more than he had for the animals that he tortured to death.

hope vick plays for the vikings..

Just to add a few thoughts:

-Bullfighting is EXTREMELY popular in Spain and Mexico. Fighters are treated as national heroes, and get all the attention of a US celebrity or sports star. Bullfighting is not a "hidden" activity in any way.

-There may be an ethnocentric view on the punishment Vick received. If his culture deemed it popular (but illegal) to make two dogs fight, then judgement should be viewed from his perspective also.

El Mexican wrote:Just to add a few thoughts:

-Bullfighting is EXTREMELY popular in Spain and Mexico. Fighters are treated as national heroes, and get all the attention of a US celebrity or sports star. Bullfighting is not a "hidden" activity in any way.

-There may be an ethnocentric view on the punishment Vick received. If his culture deemed it popular (but illegal) to make two dogs fight, then judgement should be viewed from his perspective also.

1: Bull Fighting is both illegal and viewed as butal and cruel in the US... to first enrage a bull, and then torment it until you decide to kill it is the very definition of animal cruelty in this country. Bullfighters may be viewed as national heroes where it is considered "sport"... but I hold my opinion that they are just sadists with big cajones. It does not change that this is about cultural norms in the United States, not Mexico or Spain.

Note that I do not make judgements about whether it should or should not be illegal or frowned upon in Mexico, or Spain... It's not our business. We have made our decision as a collection of states. Just because it's deemed as "cool" in Mexico does not mean that judgement applies here.

2: Ethnocentric?? That's a load. Dog fighting is an analog of the drug culture. Where you find dog fighting, you find drug dealers, and often vice versa. It is not black/white. There proportionately as many black Americans fighting against this kind of animal cruelty as white Americans. There is no shortage of white thugs slaughtering dogs. I'll have no trouble making the same judgements if Eli Manning or Brett Favre are convicted of the same.

In much of the middle east, honor killing is accepted. Does that mean that when it happens here, we should accept it as part of their system of cultural norms?

BTW... Why do those making excuses for Vick fail to address his personal involvement in torturing dogs to death?

vick is a POS

sadly someone will give him a shot, but in the wake of the pac man stuff, they might not want to put thier head on the block.....

but a guy that fast and that talented will be on the field again.....sadly, and i know one guy in NJ that will be hoping he fails on the field...

Those are son excellent points, Counter.

My point is this: what may be cool in some contries can be illegal in other. In fact, what may be normal in some states can be condemned in others, even from one county to the next.

All I'm saying is that all judged actions must also be viewed from the accused's reality to understand why he did such actions. This does not neccesarily make the criminal's actions less brutal or wrong.

And of course you are correct, Vick broke the law and he was punished accordingly.

The NFL should--is, really--an organization that prides itself of a clean image, unlike other sports. It can do without all the Vicks out there.

I really understand the points some are making here - the thing that sometimes is brought up is that Vick has been "punished" for his misdeeds. Yes, by the legal system - not by the NFL!

The NFL has no legal limits or justice thing - the NFL is about the image of the NFL and I think that they will not think that it is good for the NFL's image if he can play again - this is not about justice! This is not a comaparison deal with another NFL player - name an NFL player that has been involved with killing dogs, then you can compare how to treat Vick - the fact that Lewis MIGHT have been involved with a person's death does not have anything to do with this - he was not found guilty of anything - Vick killed dogs and aggressivelty tried to cover it up - he should not be allowed back on an NFL team.



I'm going to stop posting here because I think that we have all reached a stage where we have made our points - I understand this is hard for some but I just feel that this guy is not good for the NFL or for kids to model themselves after.

what guy in nj?

Sheeesh, kickin him out of a league that has nothing to do with dogs.. harsh considering he's doing fed time.. what if the dude stabbed someone?.. he'd probably get a year in jail and some people would probably say, "he only stabbed someone, its not like he tortured a dog, let him back in"

langleyparkjoe wrote:Sheeesh, kickin him out of a league that has nothing to do with dogs.. harsh considering he's doing fed time.. what if the dude stabbed someone?.. he'd probably get a year in jail and some people would probably say, "he only stabbed someone, its not like he tortured a dog, let him back in"

*whips out spoon*

In America, dogs > humans.

*stirs furiously*

I SAID KNOCK IT OFF, CLL!!

Irn-Bru wrote:I SAID KNOCK IT OFF, CLL!!

LOL, every time I post in this thread I think about what you said. I stayed away for a few days and couldn't help it. I promise I'll do my best to stay out.

I still laugh when I remember that baby cow you talked about watching his mother get eaten as a steak, with the universe shedding a tear that night.

While it's disgusting, the issue isn't the killing of dogs. The issue is the sadistic methods used to do it, and what it tells us of the mind of the tormentor. Anyone with any knowledge of psychology understands this. If one finds it easy to torture an animal, it is not a long walk to other, more heinous behaviors that only one with no conscience can live with. They feel no guilt... only disappointment in getting caught.

Minimize that all you wish, you can't change that truth. I see it all the time with the people I work with.

Countertrey wrote:While it's disgusting, the issue isn't the killing of dogs. The issue is the sadistic methods used to do it, and what it tells us of the mind of the tormentor. Anyone with any knowledge of psychology understands this. If one finds it easy to torture an animal, it is not a long walk to other, more heinous behaviors that only one with no conscience can live with. They feel no guilt... only disappointment in getting caught.

Minimize that all you wish, you can't change that truth. I see it all the time with the people I work with.

I'm not minimizing it, my point is that such twisted psychology as such isn't a crime. Sure, I recognize that there are animal cruelty laws, etc., but there is a considerable amount of hypocrisy in how they are implemented in the U.S. I can slit the throat of Daisy the cow, but God help me if I do the same to Sasha the dog.

This is the same mentality that punishes "hate crimes" with far greater severity than non-hate crimes for the same offense. . .if I've keyed your car then I owe you the same restitution no matter what motivated me to do it.

So my point isn't that Vick is "normal" or isn't a sick human being. In fact, I think he is. I'll never minimize the evil of dog torture, but it's necessary to criticize (and even laugh at) using all the wrong means to confront it.

I guess what I'm trying to say, CT, is that I don't like it when people assume I must be pro-animal torture or pro-minimizing Vick's personal issues just because I'm not on the same bandwagon as other people with respect to his punishment.

I basically agree with CLL's view as expressed in this thread, that Vick was the "face" of dog torture because he was a celebrity and so got harsher treatment than someone else would have. Not to mention the media frenzy over the whole thing. And then compare all of that to the attention some other NFL stars get when other human persons are harmed. It doesn't seem proportional.

I guess we should be able to disagree on that assessment of the media coverage without insinuations that CLL, me, or someone holding a similar view somehow condones Vick or wants to minimize it. It's not a personal attack but it's an incorrect analysis of what I think.

(And as for animal torture, I'd be happy to discuss that topic itself, including how I think it should be punished, etc., but that seems to be the subject for another thread in the lounge.)

I'm not sure why you all think he got a seriously harsh sentence? He got 23 months, whereas the judge was well within his discretion according to the law to put him in jail up to FIVE years. Sure, the sentencing guidelines stipulated 12 to 18 months, but Vick's incapacity to admit wrong, his prediliction to conceal the crime and his culpability in that crime, and his utter disdain for the law, meant the judge was not bound at all by those sentencing guidelines.

And stop with the murdering a human hyperbole. The minimum I think I can recall seeing for someone convicted of murder in a federal court was 15 years. The maximum was the death penalty (in a state that had the death penalty).

If you want a crime that's way out of whack with the punishment, it's not dog fighting. It's drug possession. In New York, for example, someone buying 10 dollars worth of a drug, if found guilty is exposed to a mandantory sentence of 1-3 years, assuming that person has no criminal history of course, and a maximum of 25 years.

For attempting to buy 10 dollars worth of drugs.

PulpExposure wrote:
For attempting to buy 10 dollars worth of drugs.

Now that is ridiculously harsh!!

Long story short...

When Mike Vick is strapped to a rape device, electrocuted, smashed to the floor, starved, drowned, etc, etc, I'll be ok with him.

Until then, he can burn in hell.

Countertrey wrote:Dog fighting is an analog of the drug culture. Where you find dog fighting, you find drug dealers, and often vice versa.

This part of your argument escapes me. I don't see how you're making the drug/dog fighting connection.

SkinsJock wrote: the fact that Lewis MIGHT have been involved with a person's death does not have anything to do with this - he was not found guilty of anything - Vick killed dogs and aggressivelty tried to cover it up - he should not be allowed back on an NFL team.

Lewis was found guilty of obstruction of justice. In other words he aggressively tried to cover up his, and others', misdeeds.

Everyone deserves a second chance. Vick was an exciting player and I'm not gonna lie, i was and still am a fan of his and hope to see him get another shot somewhere in this league. He will be fairly young and hungry when he gets out.

JSPB22 wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Dog fighting is an analog of the drug culture. Where you find dog fighting, you find drug dealers, and often vice versa.

This part of your argument escapes me. I don't see how you're making the drug/dog fighting connection.

It's simply a fact. Dog fighting and Drug dealing are analogous. Where there is dog fighting, there are almost always drug dealers... they often fund the kennels that provide and train the dogs. The cash that changes hands during events helps to launder their drug profits... Ask any law enforcement officer. That is a significant reason that law enforcement is willing to invest energy in the enforcement of dog fighting laws.

There is probably a cop here who will validate... I'm sure if JH shows up, he would as well.


Animal Legal and Historical Center report
From that article:

Dog fighters are violent criminals that engage in a whole host of peripheral criminal activities. Many are heavily involved in organized crime, racketeering, drug distribution, or gangs, and they arrange and attend the fights as a forum for gambling and drug trafficking. Within the last decade, enlightened law enforcement agencies and government officials have become cognizant of the clandestine culture of dog-fighting and its nexus with other crimes and community violence. Many individuals continue to deny the existence or scope of dogfighting in America, or they maintain that it is merely an isolated animal welfare issue

This is from a report by the Lafayette, Indiana Police Department:

Dog fighting typically is associated with other crimes such as drug trafficking, firearms possession, gang involvement, and gambling are just a few of the peripheral crimes tied to the fighting of pit bull dogs.

http://westlafayettepd.us/downloads/DOG ... %20LAW.doc
The photos are fairly graphic...

I guess what I'm trying to say, CT, is that I don't like it when people assume I must be pro-animal torture or pro-minimizing Vick's personal issues just because I'm not on the same bandwagon as other people with respect to his punishment.

It was unfortunate that my response fell following your post. It was not directed toward you... in fact, none of my replies in this thread have been, until this one. There were two posts shortly prior to yours that I was referring to... I have made no assumptions regarding your beliefs or opinions.

I apologize that I was not clear...

Heck, I even agree that Vick was made an example of because of his stature... I just happen to not care. The system is not fair, never has been, and never will be. Vick chose to behave in a manner that placed him at the mercy of the system, as it is. That was an unfortunate choice. Sucks to be him.

Irn-Bru wrote:I can slit the throat of Daisy the cow, but God help me if I do the same to Sasha the dog.

OK, but what does that have to do with Michael Vick? He wasn't convicted for slitting dog's throats. And I think his sentence was WAY too light. Not because he's a sick SOB but because of what he did to living, feeling, intelligent creatures. Those animals lived a nightmare of a life and by the time death came it was a blessing. Can you imaging living in a contained area where from the moment you're born you're trained to try to tear people apart while they try to do the same to you? And it goes on until you can't anymore and then your jailers bash your head in? I'm at a loss as to how you can write this off as a comparison to slitting an animals throat. And BTW, I'm a vegitarian so I'm not defending slitting Daisy the Cow's throat. except to French Canadian Liberals who think since I don't think slitting a cow's throat is the same as bashing it's head in I'm OK with it.