General chatter - am i the only one who feels for michael vick?




HookemHorns
12-10-2007, 05:01 PM
before you all jump down my throat... i'm trying to understand this...

what michael vick did was horrible and i do agree that he should serve time. but i honestly think he feels bad for what he did and although i think he should serve time, i think it would be more useful if instead he was in jail, he went around the community and talked to kids and say what he did was bad and do alot of PR campaigning for peta . he is a role model to tons of kids/people and he fell from grace and i'm saddened that he did what he did. but i don't understand how gary colllins who killed a guy from a dwi gets to serve only like 83 days and the case is closed and michael vick has 23 months. do we value animal life more than human life? what a slap in the face for the people's family that gary collins killed. and the verdict was read the same day. i dont understand. anyway, i do feel for micahel vick and i think he's mentally sick and im gonna pray for him. the damage has been done. its time to try to correct what is done. i see more use for him campaigning around the country to inner city youths about the wrongness of dog fighting than sitting in a cell . i guess i'm trying to look for best case scenario (there can't be one in this case, but you know what i mean).


Glory87
12-10-2007, 05:10 PM
Hopefully, he will go around the country and speak to kids about his mistakes after he gets done serving his jail sentence :)

To me, that is the best case scenario (I don't know about the other trial you mentioned). Vicks tortured animals. He deserves to go to jail. It would be nice if he could share what he learned with kids.

Just to add, I don't feel the least bit bad for him. He was on the top of the world, a millionaire, wonderful job, adulations of fans, he had everything. All he had to do was obey the law and he couldn't do that.

Chrysalis
12-10-2007, 05:11 PM
For one thing, they're unrelated -- the guy who killed a guy while driving drunk probably should have served alot more time (I don't know the details on that one, and am being too lazy at the moment to go look it up and come back). As far as Vick goes, it isn't just about the fact that he killed several dogs. He also supported illegal gambling operations from his home, lied about it, willingly allowed and participated in those animals being killed because they couldn't fight well enough (nevermind the fact that fighting dogs is illegal and cruel), and spent a significant amount of time lying about it before he finally agreed to a guilty plea...which happened only after he realized his gambling buddies weren't going to save his butt. Add that to the fact that he is a public figure who is a role model to many children. Personally, I think that also plays a part in it -- many public figures and rich characters (i.e. Paris Hilton) have gotten off VERY lightly when committing crimes, to much public condemnation. I think we'll see some tougher sentences being handed down to show that "the law" isn't as biased as it appears to be. Then again, I could be reading a lot into this. :)


HookemHorns
12-10-2007, 05:13 PM
why is nick hogan still not in jail? things like that make me wonder. i'm sorry. but i know vick should be in jail... but if you are gonna apply justice.. it shoudl be to all.

Lainey2
12-10-2007, 05:27 PM
I do not feel sorry for him. I agree with the above poster who said he had everything, and all he had to do was obey the law. It is very sad what greed can do to a person. I saw a picture of Mr. Vick on the internet, holding up an adorable puppy. The poor puppy probably didn't realize what he was in for. Animals are completely dependent on humans to take care of them, and dogs are the most "loyal" animals ever. My dogs will come and lay at my feet, when I'm sick on the bathroom floor. How someone who already has everything, can be so cruel to a helpless animal is beyond me. I'm not comparing animals to humans and saying they are worth more, but they certainly do deserve our TLC, since they are helpless without it. I hope he does educate children on what he's learned when he gets out of jail.

ellabella
12-10-2007, 05:33 PM
We could spend the rest of our lives comparing the "punishments" that people get, and would never find anything even remotely "fair" about any of it. That doesn't mean that Michael Vick deserves any kind of break, here. What he did was monstrous, and whether others have done more - or less - monstrous things is completely irrelevant. As far as going around talking to kids after he gets out (which is certainly preferable to his going around talking to them INSTEAD of being locked up) I'd just as soon he didn't speak to any kids that I care about. Glory is right on target - he had it ALL - and that still wasn't enough. My suspicion is that he'll serve his time because he has no choice, but I think it's highly unlikely that it's going to restructure his character, which, put frankly, seems to be sadly lacking.

nelie
12-10-2007, 05:40 PM
I am glad that he is going to serve time for it as it was a horrendous crime. I honestly feel that someone who mistreats animals doesn't respect life in general. I hope he learns and I hope it sends a message out to others who mistreat animals that it is not ok.

I also do believe you can't compare crimes but I will say this... certain things in life are accidents and some are on purpose. Drunk driving is stupid and I don't understand how any body can do it but accidental deaths happen all the time. It is actually one of my biggest concerns with driving in that I hope I'd never hurt someone else while driving. There is no accident in torturing animals though.

cbmare
12-10-2007, 05:42 PM
Well, the accident involving Gary Collins was not his fault. However, he did plead guilt to the DUI. That doesn't excuse his driving under the influence. Perhaps because there was an accident and someone died, even though the accident wasn't his fault, it may make him think harder about not taking a cab next time. He was arrested several years ago in N.O. as well.

Nick Hogan has a family that is trying to get him out of trouble. I hope they don't succeed. He was racing on city streets in nasty weather and had an accident. His passenger, a soldier just back from Iraq, is in a coma and may have some brain damage. He wasn't wearing his seatbelt. Still, I hope the family won't be able to just get the kid a slap on the wrist because of the famous daddy.

Michael Vick is getting just what he deserves. He's facing another sentencing as well. His chums got what they deserve as well. I have no sympathy for the over paid jocks who seem to think that money can buy them class and that their excrement doesn't stink.

Chrysalis
12-10-2007, 05:50 PM
One more thing about Vick -- he also tested positive to a court-ordered drug test after being found guilty but before the sentence was handed down. AFTER he already knew he was in trouble, and at that time facing 12-18 month, he turned around and broke the law again and..oh yeah....lied about it.

Yahoo Sports had an interesting article called "Vick spit on the legal system"...I can't post the link since I have less than 25 post count, but you can check it out on Yahoo.com.

I understand your point that drunken drivers need to have accountability and punishment as well, but that doesn't mean that Vick isn't getting a sentence that is in accordance with his actions.

Shy Moment
12-10-2007, 05:57 PM
I would not want this person talking to any children I know. Just because you say you are sorry doesn't make eveything ok. Looking at his actions over and over he is not sorry.

JayEll
12-10-2007, 06:00 PM
Well... sports figures need to be accountable for their actions like everyone else. I liked watching Vick play, but I was done with him when I heard about the dogfighting etc.

Besides, he hasn't served the sentence yet, and we don't know where he'll serve it or what conditions will be handed down.

I can't be sorry about his conviction because he brought all of this on himself. I do feel sorry when I see people with potential and all the breaks do such a foolish thing. It's a sad situation.

Jay

HookemHorns
12-10-2007, 06:01 PM
all good points. it's kinda weird. on sports AM radio , the majority of people sympathize and feel bad for vick. maybe it's a guy thing? or sports fan thing? i dunno. some guy mentioned how its crap how child predators/molestors. serve less jail time than vick. another guy mentioned how pit bulls are viscous in nature and know nothing but to attack (they are like only one of the few animals that have a lock jaw mechanism in the world to kill). and that's why sometimes pit bulls freak out and attack children sometimes. {--- that's what the guy said on the radio.

another guy mentioned culture.

who knows.

but i hope vick turns his life around and realizes his mistakes . i do want to see him play in the future and comeback and play (only if he really feels for what he did). the radio station was talking about how in our sick society of celeb obsessed TMZ stuff/ shock stuff , how he will get his fans back after he serves his time. anyway thanks for the mini debate. the only thing we can do now is pray for him

kaplods
12-10-2007, 06:17 PM
You really can't compare sentences, and when I was a probation officer, I always told my clients they had to look at "fair" as any punishment the law allowed, and anything less than that should be seen as "lucky."

I think when anyone breaks the law, especially intentionally (and there was nothing "accidental" about the circumstances of this case) they have to be prepared to accept the consequences, whatever they are. If they get anything less than the maximum allowable by law, they should consider themselves lucky. (which I think is the case here. I don't think he received the maximum sentence.)

That doesn't mean I don't feel sympathy for people. When I was a PO, I actually hurt for many of the people I worked with, because many of them were very good people who just made one or sometimes many mistakes.

That being said, I tend to have the least sympathy for celebrities, because I know they are generally getting the best legal representation that money can buy, and often get "breaks" average citizens and the poor don't have a chance at.

Glory87
12-10-2007, 06:34 PM
another guy mentioned how pit bulls are viscous in nature and know nothing but to attack (they are like only one of the few animals that have a lock jaw mechanism in the world to kill). and that's why sometimes pit bulls freak out and attack children sometimes. {--- that's what the guy said on the radio.


I don't get this. Because pit bulls can be aggressive (which is why Vick picked them in the first place) it's okay to torture them? You would feel differently if Vick were drowning and hanging cocker spaniels? Since some tigers have killed people, do I get to set them all on fire?

Don't get me wrong, I believe any dog that aggressively harms a child (or an adult, for that matter) should be put down - humanely put down.

Vick didn't kill those dogs because they were aggressive. They weren't aggressive ENOUGH to win dog fighting matches and so they were worthless. He didn't have to kill them so brutally, he did that because he's an *******. Dogfighting itself is slow torture - hanging and drowning a helpless animal just shows the extent of his sickness. You don't think that Vick went in mano a mano with the dogs and was defending himself when he killed them because they were aggressive (wrestled them away with his bare hands)? He killed bound, defenseless, helpless dogs.

cbmare
12-10-2007, 06:38 PM
Some of those dogs that were rescued had to be put down because they couldn't be retrained.

Let's not forget that he got popped for pot as well. He was supposed to stay away from drugs. He smoked and failed a drug test the next day. He tried, unsuccessfully, to argue that the test was wrong. His attorney tried to argue that he did it because he was depressed and needed self medication. I'm glad that one didn't work as well.

He still faces charges from the state. He deserves what he's gotten.

AmberD
12-10-2007, 06:43 PM
On a certain level, I do feel bad for Vick. That's not to say he doesn't deserve his punishment, he absolutely does. Dog fighting, however, was part of how he grew up. I think I read some where that his grandfather or father had been taking him to dog fights since he was a boy and I think he just grew up thinking, illegal or not, this was 'normal'.

I know that doesn't excuse the behavior. I know that plenty of children grow up around horrible things: drugs, alcoholism, abuse and don't grow up to do those things themselves. I do believe that he is remorseful, but he still needs to face his punishment.

All in all though, I feel sorrier for the dogs.

shelby897
12-10-2007, 07:28 PM
Be careful what you wish for -- when I was in high school the manager of a extremely famous musician was incarcerated at the prison my mom worked at -- part of his plea deal was community service so he asked the musician to speak to high school students about drugs and my mom used her connections to send him to my school -- lovely -- his point was "don't do drugs until you've accomplished what you want, than have at them"!! So, unless you could prove to me Mr. Vick is seriously remorseful (not just that he got caught), I wouldn't allow him around my kids. I doubt he did what he did for the money, it wasn't like he needed it, I'm sure it was for the rush he got and I doubt that easily goes away.

And, apparently the gentleman Gary C killed made an illegal turn in front of him, so I wonder if sober or drunk if the accident was not something he could have avoided. However, having a family member killed by a drunk driver, I have little sympathy for them either.....

techwife
12-10-2007, 08:00 PM
No, I don't feel bad. He's a bad influence on the kids that idolized him and now the kids that idolized him will know what happens to people that torture animals. End of story.

GatorgalstuckinGA
12-10-2007, 08:59 PM
i don't feel bad at all. As an animal lover and one who has dealt with dog fight vitims...its is cruel. I don't care if you "Grew up" around it...its still illegal and wrong!!!!!!! He deserves what he got...and yes maybe it seem harsh but he deserves it. And for him to say that pit bulls are aggressive dogs and he's just utilizing them for what they are meant to do..that's bs. Pitbulls are only aggressive due to poor breeding and poor training. I've worked with them and know what loving and wonderful dogs they can be.
then there some people who blame the punishment on the color of his skin. I actually saw a great article (i think it was either yahoo or msn) a few months back that was written by a black man who loved sport and thought Vick got his just punishment. I'm sorry but Vick did so many things wrong...the illegial dog fights, illegial gambling..and the drugs...hmmm to me it wasn't enough. There's three crimes right there. I think its important to make sure people who are in the spot light get punished appropriately. Weather its drunk driving or dog fighting. Remember Vick was suppose to be a roll model that kids looked up to. I think he deserves what he got. But that's just my 0.02$

Rhighlan86
12-10-2007, 09:12 PM
I don't feel bad for him in the least. I kind of wished he got more, but that's me personally. I was listening to a man speak about it on the radio and he said that Vick is going to be in a minimum security prison, while it will be no fun, it's not like it is a max security, it is very much more laid back. He was given every opportunity to help himself and he didn't. I know that people on the news said through family he did not think that he did anything wrong, he thought he was doing a job, but I honestly think that no one can think that killing the animals the way he was was ok. There is a reason this is illegal, he knew it was illegal at least, every bit of what he was doing was illegal. He then lied about it. I think that everything he has been doing is a publicity stunt and trying to get out of jail time and feel that he is not sincere, now if he comes out of jail and continues to do this work then I will take back my words. At this time I can't feel sorry for him, he had no sympathy in what he was doing at the time and so I don't want to return that to him

Also, I don't believe in him saying that the dogs were untrainable, I have personally trained those types of dogs it just takes time and patience and the proper training. I completely agree with Gatorsgal, Pitbulls are only aggressive because people make them that way. They are actually some of the sweetest dogs I've seen (here at the university many guys get them b/c they are a status of aggression, but they are surprised when they get dogs that are sweethearts.)

babenwaiting
12-10-2007, 09:57 PM
Michael Vick is getting exactly what he deserves. I, for one, would never pay to see him play. I don't think any football team would touch him when he gets out of jail eventually.

kaplods
12-10-2007, 10:00 PM
I agree that a dog being a pit bull, doesn't guarantee viciousness. Our humane society "rehomes" pitbulls frequently, though often they often have a "no cats," or "no baby" requirement for the families (mostly as a precaution against the people lacking common sense. Even a miniature poodle shouldn't be left along with a toddler - for the child's sake and the dog's.)

Any large dog, but especially those bred for aggression or protectiveness have to be bred and trained well. That is the human's responsibility. That being said, the only two pit bulls I ever met personally were the most submissive dogs I've ever seen. One, named "X" (the owner had a cat and another dog at home named Y and Z) was so submissive that if you so much as looked at him, he'd flop on his back and piddle all over himself, wriggling like a puppy.

I think many people have the mistaken idea that dog fights are sort of like a canine version of a wrestling or boxing match, where the dogs fight, but walk away relatively unscathed. This is far from the truth. This isn't a case of one guy saying to another "I bet my dog's tougher than your dog." Even when not fighting, fighting dogs are severely abused to make them more aggressive. Sometimes they're fed gun powder (causing extreme pain while slowly killing the dog). Dogs that can't be made aggressive enough to fight, are killed by humans (if they're lucky) or used as "bait." Not wanting to "waste" good fighting animals, the "wimpy" dogs are used for the fighting dogs to "practice" on. If the humane society manages to rescue any of these "bait dogs" they almost always have to put the animal down (not because of it's temperment, but) because of it's severe injuries (eyes, ears muscles... torn away).

Many jurisdictions always crack down as hard as they can on participants in dog or cock fighting, because not only do these activities involve some of the most horrendous examples of animal abuse, they're also very strongly associated with severe human on human crimes as well.

It's such a violent sport, that I have a hard time believing that anyone who is involved in it, isn't at risk for harming people as well. Working in social service and law enforcement, I've found that most people, even the most hardened criminals, tend to treat their animals better than they treat most people. People who abuse animals often have a very frightening indifference to suffering - animal or human.

ennay
12-11-2007, 11:55 AM
but i honestly think he feels bad for what he did .

I dont think he feels badly for what he did at all, he just feels bad for getting caught.

There are many cases where I think there are better punishments than jail time (most white collar crime) but this is not one of them.

I agree that some other people have had ridiculously light sentences for crimes, but that doesnt mean that the fix is to make this one lighter, the laws have to be fixed . In the state of Oregon there is no vehicular homicide/manslaughter. A woman with no drivers license passed a pack of cyclists in a no passing zone in the rain and killed one. She was fined for driving without a license, the fact that someone died was immaterial. The law here is what is broken. But you dont let all the other people who killed someone out of jail to "compensate".

Ready4aChange
12-11-2007, 12:57 PM
He doesn't seem to feel any remorse. He continued to lie about his part in the brutal tortures and deaths of so called "underperforming" dogs -- that means he was unwilling to take responsibility for his actions and crimes which means he can't possibly feel remorse for them. I think he got off too easy -- as well as the other 2 men who were convicted. If he does actually learn his lesson, he will have plenty of time after he gets out of prison to talk to young people. I also think he should donate a certain percentage of whatever money he makes to animal rescue organizations -- for the rest of his life. He knew what he was doing was wrong -- I don't agree with the idea that this is somehow excusable because of the environment he grew up in -- I think it's a harmful message to send to young people growing up in a similar environment. It's basically like saying, "Hey kids, look around -- this IS you and it's okay if you continue doing all of these horrible things you see around you because we don't really think you can be any better than that so we excuse you" which is just wrong (even if that's not what people are intending) -- we need to be aware of the messages that can be read in our actions and reactions and I think (even if the intent is to be understanding and/or helpful) this is a very negative and harmful message to send to young people today.

Smiling_Sara
12-11-2007, 05:33 PM
most ppl feel bad......once they get caught.

lilybelle
12-12-2007, 01:09 PM
As an animal lover, I am not at all sorry for Vick. Giving millions of dollars to a person may buy them a fancy suit, but you can't take the THUG out of a THUG. He had it all and squandered it away because of greed and cruelty. IMHO, the only football he should be involved with in the future is what he gets to watch sitting next to the other inmates.

I've never seen him show an ounce of remorse. I agree with others, I wouldn't want him talking to my kids about being kind to animals. We lead by example, not by useless TALK.

GirlyGirlSebas
12-12-2007, 03:50 PM
Vick had numerous opportunities to "come clean." Because of his status in the sport's world, he thought he was above the rules and laws that apply to us "common" people. The Falcon's and the NFL are well rid of him. No, I don't feel sorry for him at all. He has a God given talent that brought him a lot of wealth. Instead of using his wealth to make a positive impact on our society, he used his wealth to make more money in a vicious and horrible manner!

jules1216
12-12-2007, 07:36 PM
As a mom to two very spoiled and docile pitbulls who have NEVER bit anyone....no I don't

also know a guy that rescued a pit bull who had been a breeder--she spent her life before he got her in a pen having litter after litter for dog fighters....when she was worn out they would have shot her....

the people who run these rings and the people that pay to bet are all cruel

LisaMarie71
12-12-2007, 09:03 PM
Add me to the people who do NOT feel sorry for that moron. He could've had a great life but he ruined it because he was a big old idiot. Sorry, it's true. He thought he could get away with whatever he wanted, apparently. I hear a lot about him because I live in Virginia and I went to VA Tech. I know very little about football because I find it about as interesting as watching paint dry, but I think it's completely absurd that someone would throw away a career like that and do such despicable things. He should get more than 23 months. I'm repulsed by the way sports stars and other celebrities are allowed to get away with things and end up believing the rules (and laws) don't apply to them. Obviously he didn't get away with it, but I bet he's surprised that he didn't. "But wait...um...I'm good at football. Shouldn't I get to do whatever I want?" Heck, I even see that attitude with some of the football stars in the high school where I teach. And sadly, their parents often perpetuate it, expecting teachers to let them get away with stuff and not have to work as hard on academics.

mom2fivesweeties
12-12-2007, 09:49 PM
I am a crazy animal fanatic with 3 dogs who are my babies. There is NO reason in the world to abuse helpless animals. Why do they do it? To show they are "big and bad" and because they CAN? Dogs ask nothing from anyone on this earth except to be fed, given water and a little love. Even without the love, they will be loyal to their master up to the point of death or torture which is what these dogs got from this very very sick man and his coherts in crime.

A friend of mine and I think he should donate millions of dollars to the Humane Society of America, the ASPCA and any number of animal rescue organizations. Made to put his money on the line may make others think twice. If they are so sick as to abuse animals, no amount of incarceration will help. People like him don't however, want to give their money to the "lowly" animals.

One more thought: We have a son whom we adopted at 3 years old. He has PTSD from his family of origin. He has been in and out of psych hospitals and EVERY time he is re-admitted, they ask if he ever ABUSED animals. What does that tell you? It tells you that for a human being to do this, the professionals consider that person a DANGER to people and reasons for being in a psych hospital.

Lori

BerkshireGrl
12-12-2007, 09:50 PM
Do I feel bad for Michael Vick? Not one iota.

He first plead not guilty, that is until his 2 co-defendants rolled over on him. Then he got a plea bargain down from a 5 year maximum to 23 months.

From a Forbes article: "Vick initially denied any knowledge about dogfighting on the property. He changed his story after the co-defendants pleaded guilty and detailed Vick's involvement."

He first lied about his involvement in the dog fighting... then lied about his own hands-on killing of dogs... then lied about using pot when he was to be drug-free during his pre-trial release...

I mean, come on! One of his methods of eliminating dogs that weren't aggressive enough in his dog fights was to wet them down and electrocute them. This is someone to feel sorry for? And he wasn't even supposedly in it for prize money payouts... I guess he was just in it for the fun?

He was also brought to court in 2003, by a civil suit filed by Sonya Elliot, for knowingly giving her herpes. At the time he was using the alias he also used to get herpes treatment: "Ron Mexico". The suit settled for an unreported sum of money.

So... yeah, sure I'll pray... for him to stay FAR AWAY from kids. I don't think the world needs any charity work that involves him spreading his false humility.

aphil
12-13-2007, 07:46 AM
One more thought: We have a son whom we adopted at 3 years old. He has PTSD from his family of origin. He has been in and out of psych hospitals and EVERY time he is re-admitted, they ask if he ever ABUSED animals. What does that tell you? It tells you that for a human being to do this, the professionals consider that person a DANGER to people and reasons for being in a psych hospital.[/B]

Lori

They also use information like this in profiling serial killers. Many serial killers as children abuse/torture animals. It just shows that at a young age, they don't value, or show remorse for, life. Later on, it can get worse-and transfer over to other humans.


As far as my personal opinion, I don't feel sorry for him at all. I live in Indiana, and our two sports teams are literally like night and day. The Colts football team are doing charity work, going to children's hospitals, and doing all of that sort of thing in the news...while the Pacers basketball team are on the news all of the time for basically being "thugs". The members are always involved in bar fights, shootings, court appearances, and what have you.

I hate it when a sports star, celebrity, or whatever else thinks that their status and money entitle them to be above the law. You have some celebrities and stars who use their status to promote charities and do good things...and you have the others who do whatever they want, and expect to get away with it.

I don't think that Vick is sorry...especially because his behavior with those animals was repeated over and over...and he has other instances of damaging behavior, such as the incident with the herpes. That shows he has no regard for the lives of animals, OR women.

I know many don't believe in my views...so I will be as restrained as I possibly can-but I think that if punishments were allowed legally to mirror the crime (Castration for child molestors, etc....) that we would have a LOT less crime. It isn't fair to me, that someone can torture and mutilate someone or something, and then be sent to a prison where they are fed 3 meals a day, do jobs to earn money for cigarettes and phone cards, watch tv, and lift weights.

techwife
12-13-2007, 07:53 AM
It isn't fair to me, that someone can torture and mutilate someone or something, and then be sent to a prison where they are fed 3 meals a day, do jobs to earn money for cigarettes and phone cards, watch tv, and lift weights.

....and he'll likely be coronated as king of the prison the minute he gets in there, to boot. I like your insinuation of punishment for him better than a prison sentence. Prison for him won't be a punishment, IMHO.

flowerindarain
12-13-2007, 08:57 AM
Yes, he may have grown up around it, but he had the choice to either abuse innocent animals or not. He chose to abuse and kill those poor dogs :cry: and is choosing to not show remorse. I don't feel the least bit sorry for him, he seems to feel sorry enough for himself.

freiamaya
12-13-2007, 02:58 PM
There are LOTS of cultural practices which are not acceptable, and lots of "traditions" that people grow up around which just don't cut it in today's society -- wives burning themselves on their husband's funeral pyre, "honor killings" which are carried out here, racist group membership, female genital mutilation, polygamy, and so on. Not so long ago, we all encouraged others to "have one for the road", and drunk driving was considered "culturally acceptable" (think back to the 1970s). Being a "cultural practice" doesn't make it right.
His conduct shows his character, and I don't want that type of character publically rewarded.
Jail is a fine, fine place, and then, hopefully, complete and utter obscurity...
Maya
:)

ennay
12-14-2007, 12:42 AM
but i don't understand how gary colllins who killed a guy from a dwi gets to serve only like 83 days and the case is closed and michael vick has 23 months. do we value animal life more than human life? what a slap in the face for the people's family that gary collins killed

Going back to this even though I put the comparison as not relevant....

I dont believe this is placing the value of animal life above the human life. If I had to sit in a courtroom and was told one guy got 83 days and one guy got 23 months- you pick... I would do it the same way.

Gary Collins went out with the intention to get drunk. (semantics aside) While he certainly should be held liable for the results of that decision, I do not believe that he in any way had INTENT to harm another human being. He was stupid, moronic, etc, but I dont believe he was making that conscious choice to harm another. While he should have been able to see the POSSIBILITY of causing harm, it wasnt his purpose.

Michael Vick tortured, maimed and killed for the purpose of torturing maiming and killing. There was evil intent behind his actions, he did them full in knowledge of the outcome of his actions.

Its not the victim that differentiates the cases, its the thought behind it that tells me Vick is a greater harm to society.

aphil
12-14-2007, 09:04 AM
I agree with ennay. It is the same as someone killing someone in a car accident, vs. someone abducting and murdering someone on purpose. Someone dies in both instances, but one was accidental, the other on purpose.

lola06
12-14-2007, 10:31 AM
I agree with the original post. I believe what Vick did was wrong, but I don't think the punishment fits the crime. I think there is a fundamental flaw in the way in which people are punished and for what in this country. For example, in the state of New York selling and possessing cocaine carries a MUCH lighter sentence than crack, which is typically found in poor urban communities as opposed to the more affluent communities that typically uses cocaine.

I also think the lobby for animal rights is much stronger than other causes, which informs how people are punished in our society. And I absolutely DO believe in comparing sentences in the context and for the purpose of analyzing our criminal justice system. Historically, the US in well-known for punishing people VERY subjectively.

I know there were a few comments about the fact that Michael Vick had "everything" and he got what he deserved. But there are several people in our society who commit heinous acts of violence or are complicit in such acts, like in the Iraq war, yet most go unpunished. Our Vice President can "accidentally" shoot someone, but there's no punishment. Our president can send more troops to Iraq with no resolution in sight, and there's no punishment. He's lied to the American people on several occassions, yet there is no punishment.

The criminal justice system isn't only supposed to be punitive, there should be an element of rehabilitation. Most people may not want to hear that, but rehabilitation in the long-run is better for creating a safer society. Once all the jails are filled then what?

Sorry for the long post.

aphil
12-14-2007, 11:31 AM
I personally don't think 23 months is too long for purposeful, repetitive, killing and torturing. I just don't. It seems short, actually, to me.

But then again, I think that child killers and molestors shouldn't get 10 years, 20 years, etc. I think they should be castrated and get life with no parol, or death penalty. (But I know and accept that not everyone believes in the death penalty...and I don't want to argue about that here.)

I don't think that it is Vick's sentence that is unfair, but OTHER cases that are unfair. (such as OJ getting off for double murder...someone only getting 5-7 years for brutal aduction and rape, etc.)

I don't think that Cheney's incident really has any similarity, simply because it was an accident. Accidents happen, but once again, that is different than doing it on purpose. Do I think he should have gone to jail-no. Do I think that the victim has the right to sue for medical bills, and pain and suffering-YES.

There was a driver recently in our town who was in an accident that caused a power outage for half the town for a few hours. He was drinking, and got off with a DUI. Do I think that was enough-NO.

The reason why, is because the outage affected my husband's company. They make auto windows/windshields, and my husband had glass going through the safety tempering furnace. When the power went out, the glass got stuck in there too long (conveyor wouldn't bring it out, because there was no power.) and the glass melted everywhere-destroying everything and causing multi-million dollar damage in just minutes, plus downtime that cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars an hour. (They were down for a couple days.) Do the math.

I don't think someone spending the night in the slammer and the DUI is good enough. There were other businesses (including where I work as well) that were all down for hours, costing loss of money for many, many people. Millions and millions of dollars altogether, in our small town. Unfortunately, the police can't do anything other than deal with the DUI-the companies and businessed have to sue this guy on their own for damages.

kaplods
12-14-2007, 01:27 PM
The penalties for dogfighting have been high, long before most states (except maybe California) even considered "animal rights," as a factpr. I don't think the penalty has much to do with the dog "victims" at all, but rather the but rather the "criminal underworld" connections it has had. I think that you can argue that it is a crime about "class" in that it isn't exactly the "sport of kings" and you're not going to find a lot of upper middle class men and women seeking out the dog and cock fights.

Knowing the criminal justice system from the inside out, even with "truth in sentencing laws" in place in more jurisdictions a 23 month sentence does not mean 23 months incarcerated. In fact, I would wager that he's more likely to do 1/2 of his sentence or less than he is do 2/3 or more.

Knowing what I know about houw sentences are decided, I stick by my statement that anything the law allows is "fair" and anything less is "lucky."
There are many factors that go into a persons sentence, factors most of us will never know, unless we go down to the courthouse and ask to see the court file (they are available to anyone who requests to see them - at least that was true in the county I worked in Illinois. I imagine there is a lot of red tape in some areas, though). In my experience, the biggest factor was ticking off the judge. Is that fair? Well, it's reality. If he's the guy making the decision, it doesn't hurt your case to be very, very respectful. I advised so many of my probationees to "kiss up to the judge," and those that listened did a lot better than those who did not. Such as a lady who wore a very, very obscene t-shirt to court. She got a stiffer sentence than she would have, if she had made a different wardrobe choice. I happened to see her after court, and I was astonished that anyone would wear THAT in public, let alone in front of the judge. Was it fair? Not, really I guess, but the judge took it as a sign of disrespect (knowing the woman, I think it was more a sign of severe stupidity).

There are also "minimum" sentences for every crime, and I don't know what the minimum sentence is for the crimes Vick is convicted of. That might have tied the judge's hands, or (as I suspect) his disrespect for the law and those in authority may have had a lot more to do with his sentence (if in fact it is a harsher than average one). Lying to authorities, inconsistent testimonly, arrogance or a disrespectful attitude, these are all things that in my experience guarantee a harsher sentence. I saw many people get away with repeated "second chances," just because they behaved politely when arrested and incarcerated and could present a humble, contrite appearance in front of the judge.

aphil
12-15-2007, 09:04 AM
kaplods-I completely agree with you.

A friend of mine is a probation officer, and her husband a police officer-and they can't believe what people *do* sometimes. Why would you wear a shirt with the "F" word on it to court, or interrupt or backtalk to the judge???


:?:

I just don't get it sometimes-where people's thought processes come into play.

EZMONEY
12-15-2007, 08:03 PM
We live in a sick society....if he comes around my golden's I will shoot his eye out! Does that then make ME the bad person?

NemesisClaws
12-15-2007, 08:34 PM
Don't feel sorry for the fellow either....just feel bad for all the dogs that suffered under his and other's hands....

It does make you wonder though....most serial killers and whatnot generally do show an incident in their childhood where they have abused or tortured animals....makes you wonder how long it would've been before Vicks got bored with this "activity" and graduated to humans...after all, if you've got no issues with doing it to animals, making the leap to humans isn't all that difficult...

mom2fivesweeties
12-15-2007, 08:54 PM
AMEN, GARY!! YOU AND ME BOTH!!!! MY BABIES BETTER NOT BE THREATENED BY ANYONE LIKE THAT SICK PERSON!!!
LORI

Diana the Hun
12-17-2007, 08:40 AM
I'm truly the most empathetic person I've ever known, and I simply cannot muster any pity for this man. What he did makes me shake with rage. I cannot bear the thought of animal cruelty and, while I don't like to wish ill on anyone, I hope Karma repays him tenfold for the suffering he caused those animals. I have no tolerance for the suffering of animals, I don't care what colour you are or your social status (hello, celebrities in fur, I'm looking at you too!).

Can any of you look into your pets' eyes and bring yourself to strangle, beat up, electrocute or send them to a violent death? There has to be something seriously wrong with anyone who can do such things, and statistically it has been proven that most of history's notorious serial killers started out hurting neighbourhood animals.

BerkshireGrl
02-03-2008, 02:16 AM
The follow-up for the poor dogs that fought for Michael Vick

The New York Times writes about how great people are helping the dogs trust people again, here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/sports/football/02vickdogs.html

Jewelieta
02-03-2008, 11:39 AM
Thanks for posting that article! I for one absolutely love pitties. They AWESOME dogs - so sweet and loving. :) I wish I could take one of those dogs in. Though, my cats would totally veto. lol

sockmonkey70
02-03-2008, 02:28 PM
I feel for him....not because I in ANY way approve of what he did...but for the fact he was given a much harsher penalty than any normal person in that situation. I could have understood not letting him go with a slap on the wrist since he's a celebrity..But they gave him double the time an average person would have gotten for this crime. I hate the way our system can pick and choose who to make an example of, and who gets off easy.

So I guess it's more of a protest of our system when I think about it...I am a huge animal lover...I can't imagine what it takes to hurt an innocent animal.

kaplods
02-03-2008, 05:09 PM
After reading this article, I can't imagine that anyone would have an iota of sympathy for him. Chemical burns, pulling all of a dog's teeth out so it wouldn't fight forced breeding, filing a dog's teeth down so it couldn't hurt the "champions."

Do you know what "anyone else" in this situation would get? Because I certainly don't. I worked for 8 years in the court system with juvenile offenders and then as an adult probation officer, and in my experience disrespectful, unrepentent offenders, especially if they are disrespectful directly to the judge (which I believe has been documented in Vick's case) usually get the maximum - even if they have no money at all. Restitution is based on the offender's ability to pay, and Vick has the ability to pay. I don't see that as "unfair" because the percentage of his assets going out to this case is certainly much lower than any of the cases I was ever involved in. So in this case, I don't see him as being treated any differently than any of the offenders I worked with.