Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Talented guy, problem was he and his brother were both arrogant and thought they could do whatever they wanted.

I remmber when his brother was kicked off the VT team and his response was who cares, time to take it to the next level and get paid.

Vick lied to prosecutors and never really showed contrition. He lied every step until the evidence mounted against forced him to admit some of the things he did.

Sad, but I could care less about someone who with $121 million would spit on anyone else.
VERY expensive lesson. Hope he can make some positive changes in his life during his jail time and have an opportunity to redeem himself.

"Sad, but I could care less about someone who with $121 million would spit on anyone else."

This statement reminds me more of many corporate CEO's, mainly Enron comes to mind but there are many others who either receive golden parachutes for running the company into the ground or get indicted after cashing in and are able to keep much of the profits by selling stock options early. They spend a couple years in prison (MAYBE) then keep their profits while the shareholders try to pick up the pieces.

With Vick, only he and his family lost money. With noted CEO's, only the stockholders lost money. Who is the bigger villian?

Yes, the crimes are ugly. On BOTH sides. Greatly reducing the retirement investments of a person is also very ugly.
Slap on the wrist...I would have preferred to see him treated like he treated some of those dogs, i.e. drowning him to death, repeatedly smashing him against the ground until he died. He had no problem doing these things to innocent dogs that did nothing more than lose fights. There are more than 6 billion humans in the world, what is the point of having him continue to exist? Seems like a waste of resources, 100% of it a result of his own conscious, voluntary choices. He probably also bought expensive wine and mixed it with mountain dew.
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
Slap on the wrist...I would have preferred to see him treated like he treated some of those dogs, i.e. drowning him to death, repeatedly smashing him against the ground until he died. He had no problem doing these things to innocent dogs that did nothing more than lose fights. There are more than 6 billion humans in the world, what is the point of having him continue to exist? Seems like a waste of resources, 100% of it a result of his own conscious, voluntary choices. He probably also bought expensive wine and mixed it with mountain dew.


I feel your passion and it is so cruel to kill dogs in the manner that he did, but this is human life we are talking about. No matter what animal is involved, the human life takes precedence.

Dog fighting existed before Vick, and will exist afterwards. It is a part of certain cultures. I am not excusing what he did by any means, but we should put it in context. He is serving 2 years for it and lost everything. What more do you want?

Isn't hunting murdering animals as well?
quote:
Originally posted by Sticky2:
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
Slap on the wrist...I would have preferred to see him treated like he treated some of those dogs, i.e. drowning him to death, repeatedly smashing him against the ground until he died. He had no problem doing these things to innocent dogs that did nothing more than lose fights. There are more than 6 billion humans in the world, what is the point of having him continue to exist? Seems like a waste of resources, 100% of it a result of his own conscious, voluntary choices. He probably also bought expensive wine and mixed it with mountain dew.


I feel your passion and it is so cruel to kill dogs in the manner that he did, but this is human life we are talking about. No matter what animal is involved, the human life takes precedence.

Dog fighting existed before Vick, and will exist afterwards. It is a part of certain cultures. I am not excusing what he did by any means, but we should put it in context. He is serving 2 years for it and lost everything. What more do you want?

Isn't hunting murdering animals as well?


I don't completely agree. If a human was attempting to kill my dog, I am pretty sure that I would use enough force against that human that I would not care if it died in order to prevent my dog from dying. I would not think that particular human's life had precedence over the life of my dog. There are more than enough humans around, far too many in my opinion. I would not advocate the death penalty or anything similar for this sort of crime, but I would also certainly not be upset if I heard that some pet owners had their way with him...and to be so talented and rich, yet decide to do something so awful certainly goes a long way to show what kind of a person he is.

Yes, certain primitive cultures engage in a wide variety of highly offensive behaviours, many of which can in my opinion be objectively condemned. Dog fighting existed before and will continue to exist. Humans are also killed by game wardens in some countries, when those 'poachers' are in the process of trying to kill endangered species. Those poachers are doing so in order to be able to sell the animals' bodyparts to primitive countries that believe the consumption of such bodyparts will, because of their magical powers, impart certain characteristics to those who consume those bodyparts...how sad, ludicrous, and unnecessary. I have no problem with game wardens shooting such people.

Sure hunting is murdering animals, eating meat is murdering animals, but a line has to be drawn somewhere on what is considered an acceptable sacrifice and what is a senseless, shameful, horrible action.

But why were you not outraged about the mixing of fine wine with mountain dew??? That was the only wine-related point that I raised?
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
quote:
Originally posted by Sticky2:
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
Slap on the wrist...I would have preferred to see him treated like he treated some of those dogs, i.e. drowning him to death, repeatedly smashing him against the ground until he died. He had no problem doing these things to innocent dogs that did nothing more than lose fights. There are more than 6 billion humans in the world, what is the point of having him continue to exist? Seems like a waste of resources, 100% of it a result of his own conscious, voluntary choices. He probably also bought expensive wine and mixed it with mountain dew.


I feel your passion and it is so cruel to kill dogs in the manner that he did, but this is human life we are talking about. No matter what animal is involved, the human life takes precedence.

Dog fighting existed before Vick, and will exist afterwards. It is a part of certain cultures. I am not excusing what he did by any means, but we should put it in context. He is serving 2 years for it and lost everything. What more do you want?

Isn't hunting murdering animals as well?


I don't completely agree. If a human was attempting to kill my dog, I am pretty sure that I would use enough force against that human that I would not care if it died in order to prevent my dog from dying. I would not think that particular human's life had precedence over the life of my dog. There are more than enough humans around, far too many in my opinion. I would not advocate the death penalty or anything similar for this sort of crime, but I would also certainly not be upset if I heard that some pet owners had their way with him...and to be so talented and rich, yet decide to do something so awful certainly goes a long way to show what kind of a person he is.

Yes, certain primitive cultures engage in a wide variety of highly offensive behaviours, many of which can in my opinion be objectively condemned. Dog fighting existed before and will continue to exist. Humans are also killed by game wardens in some countries, when those 'poachers' are in the process of trying to kill endangered species. Those poachers are doing so in order to be able to sell the animals' bodyparts to primitive countries that believe the consumption of such bodyparts will, because of their magical powers, impart certain characteristics to those who consume those bodyparts...how sad, ludicrous, and unnecessary. I have no problem with game wardens shooting such people.

Sure hunting is murdering animals, eating meat is murdering animals, but a line has to be drawn somewhere on what is considered an acceptable sacrifice and what is a senseless, shameful, horrible action.

But why were you not outraged about the mixing of fine wine with mountain dew??? That was the only wine-related point that I raised?


If someone is trying to kill your dog, you defending your dog with force you feel necessary is your decision. If I had a pet I was attached to and someone was going to cause the pet harm, I would defend it. Would I take a human life in the process? No, not unless that person was threatening another human life.

Sure there may be too many people around. But at what point are human deaths just a statistic? Is 1 life worth less because there happen to be 6 billion others? I guess maybe we are getting too philosophical.

I understand your point of view. I don't necessarily think it is wrong, I just believe human life should be valued higher than that of a dog.
Last edited by sticky2
quote:
Originally posted by Sticky2:
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
quote:
Originally posted by Sticky2:
quote:
Originally posted by Machine:
Slap on the wrist...I would have preferred to see him treated like he treated some of those dogs, i.e. drowning him to death, repeatedly smashing him against the ground until he died. He had no problem doing these things to innocent dogs that did nothing more than lose fights. There are more than 6 billion humans in the world, what is the point of having him continue to exist? Seems like a waste of resources, 100% of it a result of his own conscious, voluntary choices. He probably also bought expensive wine and mixed it with mountain dew.


I feel your passion and it is so cruel to kill dogs in the manner that he did, but this is human life we are talking about. No matter what animal is involved, the human life takes precedence.

Dog fighting existed before Vick, and will exist afterwards. It is a part of certain cultures. I am not excusing what he did by any means, but we should put it in context. He is serving 2 years for it and lost everything. What more do you want?

Isn't hunting murdering animals as well?


I don't completely agree. If a human was attempting to kill my dog, I am pretty sure that I would use enough force against that human that I would not care if it died in order to prevent my dog from dying. I would not think that particular human's life had precedence over the life of my dog. There are more than enough humans around, far too many in my opinion. I would not advocate the death penalty or anything similar for this sort of crime, but I would also certainly not be upset if I heard that some pet owners had their way with him...and to be so talented and rich, yet decide to do something so awful certainly goes a long way to show what kind of a person he is.

Yes, certain primitive cultures engage in a wide variety of highly offensive behaviours, many of which can in my opinion be objectively condemned. Dog fighting existed before and will continue to exist. Humans are also killed by game wardens in some countries, when those 'poachers' are in the process of trying to kill endangered species. Those poachers are doing so in order to be able to sell the animals' bodyparts to primitive countries that believe the consumption of such bodyparts will, because of their magical powers, impart certain characteristics to those who consume those bodyparts...how sad, ludicrous, and unnecessary. I have no problem with game wardens shooting such people.

Sure hunting is murdering animals, eating meat is murdering animals, but a line has to be drawn somewhere on what is considered an acceptable sacrifice and what is a senseless, shameful, horrible action.

But why were you not outraged about the mixing of fine wine with mountain dew??? That was the only wine-related point that I raised?


If someone is trying to kill your dog, you defending your dog with force you feel necessary is your decision. If I had a pet I was attached to and someone was going to cause the pet harm, I would defend it. Would I take a human life in the process? No, not unless that person was threatening another human life.

Sure there may be too many people around. But at what point are human deaths just a statistic? Is 1 life worth less because there happen to be 6 billion others? I guess maybe we are getting too philosophical.

I understand your point of view. I don't necessarily think it is wrong, I just believe human life should be valued higher than that of a dog.


I think it is (human life valued above animal life). Otherwise, Vick might be suffering the same fate of some of his less aggressive dogs. Do you think he might be getting the death penalty if he took part in the killing of innocent children? If you believe media reports, part of the severity of his sentence might be linked to lying about his involvement in killing the dogs (gasoline on the fire). IMHO, he got what he deserved.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×