Vick Sentenced to 23 Months For Dog Fighting

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

WTF is the difference? Are you serious? You honestly can't see the difference between hunting and raising animals to tear each other apart before torturing and killing them?

my point exactly. The MANNER in which they both happen is the difference. As I said before, you can disagree with both, but one is far more cruel than the other.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

He's went from THE star of the NFL

I think that I may agree with your post but you completely lost me with that line.


Here, I'll fix that one for you...

Originally Posted by Deattribution

He's went from THE MOST OVERRATED player in the NFL

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Noble_Platypus

my point exactly. The MANNER in which they both happen is the difference. As I said before, you can disagree with both, but one is far more cruel than the other.

Exactly

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I think that I may agree with your post but you completely lost me with that line.


Here, I'll fix that one for you...

My comment had nothing to do with his skill level, overrated or not he was at one point the biggest star in the NFL, over the last year or two it's been relegated a bit because of his play but he still was/is one of the NFL's biggest names.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

1. Where were the Jimmy Swaggert tears???

2. Some people are actually discussing the possibility he didn't know this was illegal. Hello????? He bought a secluded property, painted all the buildings black, and held the fights at about 3 a.m. He knew it was damn wrong, but loved to see dogs rip the flesh off each other regardless.

3. A black culture thing .. and that should give him some sort of a pass or semi-pass on this?? Hell, I grew up in a white suburban culture, where lifting the Ronald McDonald helium balloon inflator from McDonald's and letting the air out of our teacher's car tires was a regular thing. We still knew it was wrong and could get us in trouble.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

This is flat-out false. Documentaries do it all the time (see the PBS mention above just as an example). But mainstream TV, etc pretty much never show a "boobie" in a non-sexual context. They're not separated from each other because of the industry, not because of some arbitrary public reaction. I am more than willing to admit there are groups that will complain if they do, but heck you can pick a topic and find a group that will complain about it.

Much of this conversation started because of the Janet Jackson incident, which continues to be misconstrued by those trying to defend nudity on TV. People who bash those who complained love to use the violence vs nudity argument and distract everyone while talking about the nipple, when the whole show was a complete disgrace. It was not about a "boobie", although it was the clear line that allowed the FCC to act. And it was also inappropriate for the main show that was going on that it was placed.

As for the difference in public reaction, keep in mind there was plenty of protest over the showing of "Saving Private Ryan" not too long ago on violence grounds.

As to the whole fantasy point, I was just trying to make a case for why they are viewed / treated differently, and it is related to how responsibly they present them each.

The best way to test my theory is probably to have a TV show take one of their new moms and have her breast feed on the show. Then we'd find out real quick how right or wrong I am.

I will grant you points for the PBS reference, that is an exception to my argument. Although since no one watches PBS, I can see why there isn't much uproar. Please stop bringing up the Janet Jackson thing. I am not defending or championing that event. I still think it was totally overblown, but it was out of place, no doubt about that. I am talking nonsexual nudity that is part of a television comedy or drama show (a perfect example would have been Ross accidentally walking in on a topless Monica in the bathroom to add to the comedic effect).

And I agree with you that the breastfeeding mom on a show would be a perfect example of what I am talking about. And that's where I know I would win the argument. The uproar would be deafening if that ever happened on a prime time network television show.

The rest of you may now return to your regularly scheduled Mike Vick discussion.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

(a perfect example would have been Ross accidentally walking in on a topless Monica in the bathroom to add to the comedic effect).

Damn, if you got your way back in time, I would've seen Judith Light's titties by now.

Hi-ho.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

WTF is the difference? Are you serious? You honestly can't see the difference between hunting and raising animals to tear each other apart before torturing and killing them?

View the end result. Both are getting killed for sport. One is a white thing so it is less evil/cruel and one is a black thing so it is wrong and should be an outrage.

Can't let them brothers do that lassie while we make sport of bambi's mama. I mean damn there ain't nothing wrong with hanging bambi's mama head in your office for your buddies to see while you smoke a cigar.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Noop

View the end result. Both are getting killed for sport. One is a white thing so it is less evil/cruel and one is a black thing so it is wrong and should be an outrage.

Can't let them brothers do that lassie while we make sport of bambi's mama. I mean damn there ain't nothing wrong with hanging bambi's mama head in your office for your buddies to see while you smoke a cigar.

Guess what, dogfighting isn't a black thing. There are lots of dog owners of all ethnicities, races, and creeds that have come out against it.

Cockfighting involves what we consider "lesser" animals to dogs, is done primarily by "white people" and still is looked down upon just as much as dog fighting. But anyone who would call cockfighting a "white thing" would be just as misguided as you.

People of all backgrounds don't want animals in pain. Is that hard for you to understand above your desire to find a racial fight?

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

Guess what, dogfighting isn't a black thing. There are lots of dog owners of all ethnicities, races, and creeds that have come out against it.

Cockfighting involves what we consider "lesser" animals to dogs, is done primarily by "white people" and still is looked down upon just as much as dog fighting. But anyone who would call cockfighting a "white thing" would be just as misguided as you.

People of all backgrounds don't want animals in pain. Is that hard for you to understand above your desire to find a racial fight?

1000+ posts and you haven't realised noop makes everything into a race issue?

Something sanctioned by the government > something illegal whether you agree with it or not.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Noop

View the end result. Both are getting killed for sport. One is a white thing so it is less evil/cruel and one is a black thing so it is wrong and should be an outrage.

Can't let them brothers do that lassie while we make sport of bambi's mama. I mean damn there ain't nothing wrong with hanging bambi's mama head in your office for your buddies to see while you smoke a cigar.

Remember, it's not the destination, it's how you get there...

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

People of all backgrounds don't want animals in pain. Is that hard for you to understand above your desire to find a racial fight?

Listen I agree with most if not all of what you said. I am just saying hunting is just as bad as dog fighting. It is just the perception of those two seem to be in line with accepting hunting as the lesser of two evils.

I do not forgive Vick for what he did nor do I condone dog fighting or hunting but you have got to call a spade a spade when someone tries to justify hunting.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Chubby

1000+ posts and you haven't realised noop makes everything into a race issue?

Something sanctioned by the government > something illegal whether you agree with it or not.

Go back under your bridge you troll.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Noop

View the end result. Both are getting killed for sport. One is a white thing so it is less evil/cruel and one is a black thing so it is wrong and should be an outrage.

Can't let them brothers do that lassie while we make sport of bambi's mama. I mean damn there ain't nothing wrong with hanging bambi's mama head in your office for your buddies to see while you smoke a cigar.

Noop, Stephon Marbury is on line one for you. Tell Jamie Fox you'll call him back.

[DaddyTorgo]

i think i might actually have to use the ignore button because of this thread

dennis leary would point out...it has nothing to do with race. it has to do with cute lil animals that are domesticated that we want to protect versus animals that are weird looking and live in the woods that we don't feel any personal connection to.

Noop...as much as you want it to be about race, it's not. Give it up man. It's like being the boy-who-cried-wolf. You just weaken the argument and make people sick of hearing it when there are times when it might actually be true + appropriate to use.

[Noble_Platypus]

I guess to noop being shot in the head once and dead is exactly the same as being locked up and beaten for years, then torn apart by another animal before being hung or drown until you die, because the end result is the same, right noop?

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Noble_Platypus

I guess to noop being shot in the head once and dead is exactly the same as being locked up and beaten for years, then torn apart by another animal before being hung or drown until you die, because the end result is the same, right noop?

I do not condone either period. However to me hanging the head of your kill on your wall is morbid.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Chubby

1000+ posts and you haven't realised noop makes everything into a race issue?

Something sanctioned by the government > something illegal whether you agree with it or not.

Some things just drive ya crazy no matter how many times you see it. Noop seems like an intelligent guy, hate to see anyone overly-influenced by negative biases.

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally Posted by Noop

I do not condone either period. However to me hanging the head of your kill on your wall is morbid.

Where do you get the notion that by saying one is worse than the other it somehow means you condone the lesser? I have said repeatedly, you may not condone either one, but one is far more cruel to the other.

[Noble_Platypus]

Its not killing a deer or killing a dog, its killing a deer or beating/abusing a dog for years then killing it slowing by drowning or hanging.

[Fidatelo]

Interestingly, if hunters had to kill their prey by slamming them on the ground with their bare hands I'd probably give the 'sport' more credence...

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Interestingly, if hunters had to kill their prey by slamming them on the ground with their bare hands I'd probably give the 'sport' more credence...

Really?

Even if their "prey" was so painfully loyal and obedient that pretty much all it ever really wanted to do was please the hunter so it willingly ran over it his arms?

I am no fan of hunting. Never have been, never was, but, based on what I know about hunting (I am not talking weird "big game" hunting where animals are raised just to be slaughtered) and what I know about dog figthting, the comparison just doesn't really work.

[JPhillips]

Noop is leaving out that if a deer was treated the same way these dogs were that would be a crime.

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Noop is leaving out that if a deer was treated the same way these dogs were that would be a crime.

Thats because there is no racial aspect to it.

[molson]

This thread is still on the hunting thing?

WHAT'S THE POINT

One's legal and one isn't. If you don't like it, write your congressman. It has nothing to do with Vick.

And the fact that someone thinks that the only reason that hunting is legal and dog fighting isn't is that the former is a "white sport" while the latter is a "black sport" is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on this board.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Noop

Go back under your bridge you troll.

Says the pot to the kettle.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Says the pot to the kettle.

Does your behavior merit you being called a troll? Or were you merely implying that I was a troll which by the defination I have seen on wikipedia is "someone who someone who intentionally posts messages about sensitive topics constructed to cause controversy" I did not intentionally mean to stir the pot and have a few of you go bat shit on me. I was giving my opinion and you all responsed with yours but Chubby didn't offer much other then calling me a racist.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Noop

I was giving my opinion and you all responsed with yours but Chubby didn't offer much other then calling me a racist.

I thought Chubby pretty much nailed it, is what I meant.

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I thought Chubby pretty much nailed it, is what I meant.

agreed

[Noop]

Oh okay. Nice to know I am a racist. Thanks fellas.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Noop

Oh okay. Nice to know I am a racist. Thanks fellas.

Ummm, you always have been here. It's just you were/are too immature to understand why. Racism takes many forms and we all have at least some of it. But others see race in a much more polarizing us-vs-them context. That's where you come in.

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally Posted by Noop

Oh okay. Nice to know I am a racist. Thanks fellas.

acceptance is the first step, they say.

[Noop]

No doubt. You got to say F the BS and call it how you see it.

[Richard Weed]

Originally Posted by Noop

No doubt. You got to say F the BS and call it how you see it.

Sometimes how you see it is racist. Not necessarily you (well, in this case yeah you), but people in general can see things with partiality but not deem it as such. I think this applies here.

[Richard Weed]

Dola, also there is nothing wrong with calling you how you see it; you just have to understand that there are consequences with doing so.

[Noop]

I really don't care because I am not racist. I have nothing against people of other races or cultures. All of this is interpretation, I interpreted it one way and the majority of you did differently. I agreed with everyone that both was wrong but felt that both in my opinion where just as cruel. In the past I have mostly commented on the reactions of people to certain issues or news stories. Again if this makes me racist then so be it although I do not agree with it that is everyone's opinion and I can't change it.

Over the years I have strayed from posting in these topics to in-depth because it was always the same cast of characters whose sole purpose was to pick and chose my statements instead of viewing the entire body of work. I must admit when I was younger I didn't do a good job at expressing my views and often left gaping holes in my statements.

Looks like I suffer from the same problem now so I will continue on expressing my opinions so that I am clearly understood. I harbor no ill will toward any person on this board or thread and want that to be understood.

On that note I will gracefully bow out of this thread.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Really?

Even if their "prey" was so painfully loyal and obedient that pretty much all it ever really wanted to do was please the hunter so it willingly ran over it his arms?

I am no fan of hunting. Never have been, never was, but, based on what I know about hunting (I am not talking weird "big game" hunting where animals are raised just to be slaughtered) and what I know about dog figthting, the comparison just doesn't really work.

I must be totally off lately, people are missing my points all over this thread.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Noop

Again if this makes me racist then so be it although I do not agree with it that is everyone's opinion and I can't change it.

The racism that everyone is talking about has to do with this idea you have that dog fighting is illegal because it is a black thing. Dog fighting is certainly not a black thing as rednecks have been doing it since before blacks had any rights in this country (and is still very prevalent in "rural white america"). Dog fighting was outlawed in England in 1835 and outlawed in most states throughout the 1860s.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Noop

View the end result. Both are getting killed for sport. One is a white thing so it is less evil/cruel and one is a black thing so it is wrong and should be an outrage.

Can't let them brothers do that lassie while we make sport of bambi's mama. I mean damn there ain't nothing wrong with hanging bambi's mama head in your office for your buddies to see while you smoke a cigar.

There it is!!! It just has to be a white / black thing right? Do you actually believe the shit that you type or do you just like trolling this crap?

In the sport hunting example: Are these hunters raising the animals to tear each other apart and torture them before killing them?....

Never mind. You obviously have no fucking clue so why even bother addressing this issue anymore.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

As much as Noop denies it, his quote above is there in black and white. That is about as racist a statement as they come. Yet he follows it up by saying he's not a racist. I don't think he knows what that word means.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

As much as Noop denies it, his quote above is there in black and white. That is about as racist a statement as they come. Yet he follows it up by saying he's not a racist. I don't think he knows what that word means.

that or laboring under the popular misconception that a minority can't be racist

[Crapshoot]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...preview/070828

Worth reading. Easterbrook makes a lot of the points on what's allowed with meat. Did you know that electrocution is considered a "humane" method of killing according to the USDA, and the dogs are killed for greyhound racing every year?

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...preview/070828

Worth reading. Easterbrook makes a lot of the points on what's allowed with meat. Did you know that electrocution is considered a "humane" method of killing according to the USDA, and the dogs are killed for greyhound racing every year?

On the greyhound thing, it IS considered despicable, and there are rescue groups devoted to getting hold of the retired race dogs and finding them decent homes.

[Karlifornia]

First it's dogfighting, then it's hunting, then next it'll be fishing, then next it'll be pouring salt on snails, then next it'll be killing dust mites.. I am anti-dogfighting, anti-hunting, but pro eating meat...I don't like fish....I'm anti-snail death....I'm pro killing dust mites.

So, does that make me humane? I think I'm on the borderline


It's like that "Shithole State is better than USC because Michigan beat USC, Iowa beat Michigan, Cincinnati beat Iowa, and Shithole State beat Cincinnati"

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by From the article

The animal-ethics distinction between Vick's actions and lawful game hunting are murky at best. A first-time offender should go to prison over a murky distinction?

Stuff like is so off base, there is nothing murky behind it - one is legal, and one isn't. Two wrongs don't make one right anyway - he's not the only person ever being prosecuted for dogfighting, or the last one. If anything, it should be taken more seriously and hopefully it will now, not less.

The way people constantly try to twist and turn this is the only thing that is sickening, and it also further fuels the racial debate (which is another joke). Nobody hunts dogs, if people were having seasonal dog hunting competitions then there would be a comparison.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

Stuff like is so off base, there is nothing murky behind it - one is legal, and one isn't. Two wrongs don't make one right anyway - he's not the only person ever being prosecuted for dogfighting, or the last one. If anything, it should be taken more seriously and hopefully it will now, not less.

The way people constantly try to twist and turn this is the only thing that is sickening, and it also further fuels the racial debate (which is another joke). Nobody hunts dogs, if people were having seasonal dog hunting competitions then there would be a comparison.

legal != ethical

[Surtt]

Because violence breeds violence, dogfighting endangers communities wherever it occurs. Aside from hurting animals, it nurtures a violent mind-set that makes it easier for people to brutalize other people. The results of a recent Chicago Police Department study bear this out: Of those arrested for animal crimes, including dogfighting, 65 percent had past arrests for battery.

These statistics, coupled with the sheer moral turpitude involved in torturing our canine companions to death, should be enough motivation for Americans to accept that dogfighting is no sport. It's a social scourge that we all must take part in fighting.

I have been as anti-dog fighting as anyone in this thread, but I need to call BS on this.
So the same people who dog fight commit violent crime.
Even if the same people commit both crimes there is no way to prove one causes the other.
There is no cause and effect here.


I hate when journalists throw out misinformation like this.
Or more to the point, state opinions as facts.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by BrianD

legal != ethical

There is nothing ethical about doing something you know is not only cruel but also illegal.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

There is nothing ethical about doing something you know is not only cruel but also illegal.

I would argue that something that is illegal isn't necessarily unethical. Segregation was legal but not ethical. At one point drinking alcohol was illegal, you I wouldn't consider it unethical. Smoking pot is illegal, but I wouldn't consider that unethical either. Dog fighting is a horrible activity. It is clearly illegal. Some would argue (not me) that it isn't unethical.

My point is that you can't say the ethical argument is moot because it is illegal. Ethics and legality don't always go hand-in-hand.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I would argue that something that is illegal isn't necessarily unethical. Segregation was legal but not ethical. At one point drinking alcohol was illegal, you I wouldn't consider it unethical. Smoking pot is illegal, but I wouldn't consider that unethical either. Dog fighting is a horrible activity. It is clearly illegal. Some would argue (not me) that it isn't unethical.

My point is that you can't say the ethical argument is moot because it is illegal. Ethics and legality don't always go hand-in-hand.

Ethics are subjective, law isn't.

I understand the point you're trying to get across but it still doesn't make it any less disgusting the way people are trying to soften the blow - a move they wouldn't be doing if this wasn't Michael Vick. It has less to do with ethics and more to do with controversy and creating the illusion that he's being treated unfairly when he isn't.

If this were the first time someone were being charged for it then sure, but where are all the arguments for the treatment of his other 3 co-defendants? They'll get as much if not more time than him.