So Long Michael Vick

Originally posted by Phlabibit
A sad thing about free-range chicken (I've heard) is all they need to do is crack the door for 20 minutes or so a day and it's now "free range".

I don't like the whole "Well this, this, this, this, this!" arguments. There are priests who rape kids, there are people starving in Africa, there's war in the middle east... so why do you care about Micheal ...[text shortened]... ing awful and unconscionable and I'm not needing to compare it to anything else.

P-

Who's asking you to grin and bear it? I'm just pointing out that you're like a priest who rapes kids, condemning a priest for raping kids.

By pointing out that you are also an animal torturer, I'm not asking you to grin and bear a crime against dogs. I'm asking you (and society in general) to reappraise your own actions which promote cruelty against animals.

In the post I quoted above, you said "I trust the government to regulate how these animals are treated and killed", but in this quoted post, you say "A sad thing about free-range chicken (I've heard) is all they need to do is crack the door for 20 minutes or so a day and it's now "free range"." So you trust them, even though you KNOW that they are pandering to large corporations in making laws which make it easier to fool people into thinking that you're not torturing animals.

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Just an observation on the hypocrisy of the apparent emotional response to this case (which, I'll have to admit to knowing nothing about).

If you think a battery chicken doesn't live a life of torture, you're living in lala land.
http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/egg-battery.html

The fact that they face a life of torture so that people can eat th ...[text shortened]... ic, free range chickens/eggs, then you too are an animal torturer. On a GRAND scale.

D

There is a large difference between animal torture for entertainment and animal torture to reduce the market costs of a basic need.

Originally posted by Palynka
There is a large difference between animal torture for entertainment and animal torture to reduce the market costs of a basic need.

Since when has chicken been a basic need?

Chicken consumption continues to rise, as price decreases, driven by more and more intensive factory farming (ie: more intensive torture), bigger chickens (due to chemicals), and shorter growing time (again due to chemicals).

End of the day, chicken eaters tolerate torture of animals because they like cheap chicken meat, ie: they get pleasure from eating it. While there is obviously a difference, I don't see it as huge as you claim.

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Since when has chicken been a basic need?

Chicken consumption continues to rise, as price decreases, driven by more and more intensive factory farming (ie: more intensive torture), bigger chickens (due to chemicals), and shorter growing time (again due to chemicals).

End of the day, chicken eaters tolerate torture of animals because they like cheap ch ...[text shortened]... om eating it. While there is obviously a difference, I don't see it as huge as you claim.

D

Food is a basic need. Chicken is food and by far the cheapest type of meat you can find in the market. So yes, chicken is a basic need for those who have economic problems meeting basic needs.

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Who's asking you to grin and bear it? I'm just pointing out that you're like a priest who rapes kids, condemning a priest for raping kids.

By pointing out that you are also an animal torturer, I'm not asking you to grin and bear a crime against dogs. I'm asking you (and society in general) to reappraise your own actions which promote cruelty against an ake it easier to fool people into thinking that you're not torturing animals.

D

YOU DON'T KNOW ME, MAN!

I'm not the rapist, I eat local eggs here in my state. They are kept in a fenced area with a roost they freely walk in and out of. My beef is the same, I'll take some pictures of it on my drive to work tomorrow if you like. I'm not going to fight the US on how they raise food for other states that are not as lucky as my state for being a farming community.

I am going to say the Michael Vick has done something worse than most any farming business in the USA. Dog fighting is a pleasure sport, and with it also comes "baiting" where they actually take YOUR dog and break it's hips so their dog can get the taste for blood and learn to kill.

Also, when I say I trust the US... I rust that there isn't someone gouging the eyes out of these animals for kicks. I trust they are being treated as best they can and processed quickly and painlessly as possible.

Again, there are a lot of bad things in the world, and I can't solve much of it if any of it, but I'm not a hypocrite by saying Vick is a heartless loser who deserves hard time... more time than he will probably get.

P-

Originally posted by Frank Burns
Yes Mr. P,
Well the most urgent charge, and the charge that will be most damaging to him is the crossing of state lines to commit this crime. Like you I am awaiting his confession. If he chooses to fight it, they will amend the charges and he will certainly face more severe penalty.

Your father is right. The other participants have folded like c ...[text shortened]... I'll look for your response when I get there. My best to you and those you love.

Frank

For once i agree with you,Mike Vick is a jerk anyone who would treat dogs like that is a moron and so are the people who try to defend him.

Originally posted by Phlabibit
YOU DON'T KNOW ME, MAN!

I'm not the rapist, I eat local eggs here in my state. They are kept in a fenced area with a roost they freely walk in and out of. My beef is the same, I'll take some pictures of it on my drive to work tomorrow if you like. I'm not going to fight the US on how they raise food for other states that are not as lucky as my state ...[text shortened]... a heartless loser who deserves hard time... more time than he will probably get.

P-

Forget it, Phlabby. Only I am pure enough to condemn Michael Vick.

You know, there are some wonderful tofu products out there.

😉

Originally posted by myteamtrulystinks
it is sad that animals are more important than people

Its just some of the animals.and some of the people

Hey Dogs, so do you think MV will get to start for the NFL All time Prison team? 😲

Originally posted by cashthetrash
Hey Dogs, so do you think MV will get to start for the NFL All time Prison team? 😲

Yeah, his brother can play wideout.

Originally posted by cashthetrash
Hey Dogs, so do you think MV will get to start for the NFL All time Prison team? 😲

Yeap, but as a WIDE RECIEVER!!!😀

Alright folks. Today is the day Vick must admit guilt... but to what?

Vick needs to be honest today, and take his bullet. I think he's going to say something stupid that the judge is going to NOT LIKE.

I believe Vick wants to wash his hands of participating in any of the dog killings. He wants to say he knows it happened, but will not say he had a hand in it.

I believe he wants to clear his name of gambling, but who puts up all that money for a venture where you don't make a dime back? He bet. He killed. I think the judge has strong info pointing to this.

So, how is this going to play out today?

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Alright folks. Today is the day Vick must admit guilt... but to what?

Vick needs to be honest today, and take his bullet. I think he's going to say something stupid that the judge is going to NOT LIKE.

I believe Vick wants to wash his hands of participating in any of the dog killings. He wants to say he knows it happened, but will not say he had ...[text shortened]... the judge has strong info pointing to this.

So, how is this going to play out today?

P-

I am not sure what you mean by saying something stupid, but it certainly seems plausible to me that Vick admitted to what he did. He financed an operation and was there and agreed to the killing of dogs. Why would the judge care whether he said he personally killed a dog (especially if that fact never happened). Furthermore, it seems very plausible that this was not a business venture for Vick (the way a land or real estate investment is) his goal was entertainment/ status of owning a winning dog and therefore he might not have expected to get the money from winning bets.
If the prosecutor and Vick's attorney agree on a fact pattern there should be a plea.

Originally posted by myteamtrulystinks
I am not sure what you mean by saying something stupid, but it certainly seems plausible to me that Vick admitted to what he did. He financed an operation and was there and agreed to the killing of dogs. Why would the judge care whether he said he personally killed a dog (especially if that fact never happened). Furthermore, it seems very plausi ...[text shortened]... bets.
If the prosecutor and Vick's attorney agree on a fact pattern there should be a plea.

Saying something stupid:

Judge has evidence that Vick bet on dogs, or activly participated in the killing of dogs... Yet Vick says things like this did not happen.

Do you honestly think Vick would enter dogs into a fight and not bet? Sounds ridiculous to me.

His saying something stupid is anything he says that the judge has evidence against.

P-