16 Dec 10
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-vick-dogs
This sorry piece of human garbage who is considred redeemed by other posters now wants a dog? I thought it was a condition of parole for him to stay away from dogs, owning them or having anything to do with them. This dude is so remorseless he thinks nothing about openly stating he wants a dog!
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by scacchipazzowow... do you have a life?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-vick-dogs
This sorry piece of human garbage who is considred redeemed by other posters now wants a dog? I thought it was a condition of parole for him to stay away from dogs, owning them or having anything to do with them. This dude is so remorseless he thinks nothing about openly stating he wants a dog!
17 Dec 10
The continually irrational hatred of Michael Vick is just ridiculous. He was already Vastly over punished. Here are a few people athletes who killed humans (not dogs). I'm against hurting animals for no reason but let's put it in perspective we are a society that actually raises animals for slaughter (beef pork) and boils animals alive (lobster) for food.
There was no thread talking about how Jim Leyritz got drunk, crashed into and killed a human (not merely a dog) while driving with a suspended license, killing the woman. While awaiting trial he was arrested for battery. Nevertheless after trial he received a year probation and a $500 fine. Leonard Little blew a .19 after driving drunk and killing someone and received probation. Dante Stalworth has a similar story.
Only a fool thinks dog lives are more important than human lives.
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by quackquackWho ever said a dog's life was more valuable? When have I said Vick deserved more puishment than those you mention or that I approved of the light treatment of Little, Leyritz et al? None of those you constantly bandy about has anything to do with the issue at hand. You really think Vick is redeemed? You don't think Vick would easily be any of those you mention? You think a torturer of animals would have regard for human life? And you call me a fool? None of those you mention was ever mentioned as possible MVP. Few things have made as sick as Taschard Choice seeking out this thug's autograph after the Phillie-Dallas game. Allegedly the autograph was for his two year old nephew! Lastly, irrational? Hatred? When have I posted anything irrational or spewed out hatred? Facts, merely facts! The man's a thug. Would you have him over for dinner? Would you like him around your kids, spouse, pets? Would you like him to date a loved one?
The continually irrational hatred of Michael Vick is just ridiculous. He was already Vastly over punished. Here are a few people athletes who killed humans (not dogs). I'm against hurting animals for no reason but let's put it in perspective we are a society that actually raises animals for slaughter (beef pork) and boils animals alive (lobster) for fo ...[text shortened]... orth has a similar story.
Only a fool thinks dog lives are more important than human lives.
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by scacchipazzoIt is impossible to determine whether someone is redeemed. I can say that Vick was punished (excessively especially when compared to those athletes who kill humans and don't serve jail time), that he rededicated himself to his craft and he is better than ever. He is an excellent teammate, he has stayed out of trouble and he is the most exciting player in the NFL.
Who ever said a dog's life was more valuable? When have I said Vick deserved more puishment than those you mention or that I approved of the light treatment of Little, Leyritz et al? None of those you constantly bandy about has anything to do with the issue at hand. You really think Vick is redeemed? You don't think Vick would easily be any of those you ...[text shortened]... ? Would you like him around your kids, spouse, pets? Would you like him to date a loved one?
Perhaps you believe we should execute people for dog fighting or perhaps you believe people who dog fight should not be allowed to be productive members of society after their jail sentence is up. Those would be radical views but at least I'd understand it. Perhaps you believe only people who live up to your moral standard should be able to win sports awards but Cam Newton and family shopped around for a six figure college contract. Why are you not upset about his Heisman trophy? I think it crazy that you only talk about Vick.
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by quackquackThis thread is about Vick, not Newton. I deplore moderate punishment for heinous crime. My objection to Vick is that he is allowed a livelihood which is a privilege, not a right, after committing a heinous crime and for which he even fialed to plead guilty. Redemption begins with admission of guilt. Thus far I fail to see any such admission. I don't dispute Vick is playing at an exceptionally high level and making the best of his opportunity. However, consider this. Sociopaths become more emboldened as sociaty looks the other way. Vick is putting out feelers. That's their MO. See what they can get away with. Then their acts become more thuggish. I would never deny anyone their livelihood, but perps, pervs, miscreants and such should flip burgers, dig ditches, etc., not be allowed into a priviliged group simply because they're good at their craft. Because of Vick Phillie got rid of a a good guy in McNabb.
It is impossible to determine whether someone is redeemed. I can say that Vick was punished (excessively especially when compared to those athletes who kill humans and don't serve jail time), that he rededicated himself to his craft and he is better than ever. He is an excellent teammate, he has stayed out of trouble and he is the most exciting player i ...[text shortened]... y are you not upset about his Heisman trophy? I think it crazy that you only talk about Vick.
Simply because I don't mention every miscreant who walks the halls of professinal or college athletics disqualifies me from talking about Vick. I daresay your moral standards are way tougher than mine since you deny me my right to speak out for lame reasons. As far as I know Cam Newton knew nothing about his father's shenanigans. Hvae others ben punished harshly for similar acts. Sure! Out of my control. However, NCAA tends to punsih towards the future rather then those committing the violation such as what happened to SMU with the death penalty.
Death penalty should be reserved for such crimes that merit execution and are clearly outlined in the penal code of states that favor such punishment.
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by scacchipazzoI have no idea why you think it is more of a privelege to play in the NFL than in the NCAA. Your excuplation of Cam Newton because he had no idea that his father was selling his services is ridiculous. If you are into fair punishment for sports crimes, ask where the money went (you don't think the Newton's decided on Auburn without getting paid do you?), why the SEC felt they did not have to report this claim, why the Newton's though John Bond would/ could get them great amounts of cash? why the NCAA feels that Cam Newton's father requesting/ getting cash is not an illegal benefit attributed to Cam Newton. Auburn could win the National Cahampionship and Newton won the Heisman even though it is at best very questionable how they acquired their best player. This goes to the core of the sport and to me is of far greater concern than whether Vick gets a dog.
This thread is about Vick, not Newton. I deplore moderate punishment for heinous crime. My objection to Vick is that he is allowed a livelihood which is a privilege, not a right, after committing a heinous crime and for which he even fialed to plead guilty. Redemption begins with admission of guilt. Thus far I fail to see any such admission. I don't dis ...[text shortened]... execution and are clearly outlined in the penal code of states that favor such punishment.
Vick's exercising of his right to go to trial has nothing to do with whether or not he was sorry and he continuously says he is sorry (which seems to be important to you).
17 Dec 10
Originally posted by quackquackLeyritz received a light sentence because he was acquitted of DUI manslaughter. Vick wasn't acquitted on his felony charges.
The continually irrational hatred of Michael Vick is just ridiculous. He was already Vastly over punished. Here are a few people athletes who killed humans (not dogs). I'm against hurting animals for no reason but let's put it in perspective we are a society that actually raises animals for slaughter (beef pork) and boils animals alive (lobster) for fo ...[text shortened]... orth has a similar story.
Only a fool thinks dog lives are more important than human lives.