Vick's Co-defendant gunna deal

[Samarta]

You know this is quite interesting to me. The fact that someone could watch animals put in a situation for human entertainment fight to the death or worse near death and left to die and feel nothing is beyond me. Now the point is does it make it wrong. Who am I to judge that? What about when people actually go out to the barn or yard or whatever to get dinner? What do they feel when they ring a neck or chop a head off? If anything, they feel they are 5 minutes closer to a full belly. I couldn't do it, but does it make it wrong? Who am I to judge that? On the other hand, you have all the statistics about violent criminals that got their start with animal cruelty and how they end up locked in a cell, because they snapped and took a baseball bat to someone, or assaulted someone and when questioned felt or showed no remorse. Not everyone thinks alike and with this thread, one's personal opinion feeds right into the other person's statistics of what could potentially happen. Now if I see a horse break down, I turn the other way, and the same goes with dog fighting or anything else where an animal is suffering. But if someone is near me and isn't bothered by the sight of it, I don't go claiming to have discovered a potential violent criminal either. Do I hope Vick has played his last down ever and if the indictment is true gets big time punishment? Absolutely!! Do I understand that there may be people out there saying "they were pit bulls, that's what they were bred to do!" Absolutely! I truly see both of your points and as I said, it's pretty interesting.......

[hurricanefrank]

Morality debates aside, let's not lose sight of the fact that all of us are to abide by the rule of law. What Mr Vick is alleged to have done is against the law. If he's guilty then he'll be sentenced pursuant to established guidelines accordingly. And if that happens the NFL will have lost (at least for awhile) one of its most overrated players.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by hurricanefrank

Morality debates aside, let's not lose sight of the fact that all of us are to abide by the rule of law. What Mr Vick is alleged to have done is against the law. If he's guilty then he'll be sentenced pursuant to established guidelines accordingly. And if that happens the NFL will have lost (at least for awhile) one of its most overrated players.

Contrary to what some say, I'd be totally fine with that happened. Only my reasoning would be not because of the morality issue but the stupidity one.

Originally Posted by Samarta

You know this is quite interesting to me. The fact that someone could watch animals put in a situation for human entertainment fight to the death or worse near death and left to die and feel nothing is beyond me. Now the point is does it make it wrong. Who am I to judge that? What about when people actually go out to the barn or yard or whatever to get dinner? What do they feel when they ring a neck or chop a head off? If anything, they feel they are 5 minutes closer to a full belly. I couldn't do it, but does it make it wrong? Who am I to judge that?

I think it comes down to intentions. People who use their own farm animals as food do so to eat. They dont torture the animals. Wringing the neck is a fairly quick, fairly painless way to kill food in the form of a bird. The people want to efficiently and quickly kill the animals so they can get down to butchering. I had to wring the neck of a goose that had been shot by a friend. The goose was flailing around in a rice paddy (he cussed at himself for a bad shot that did not lead to a clean kill). It was not pleasant and I actually completely tore the head and neck off and sent the body of the goose catapulting 50 yards. My friend got mad and said I should not hammer throw the bird (geese are quite large). I had never done it before and just wanted to make sure the bird was not suffering.
I think this is very different than putting animals together knowing they will tear each other apart and suffer... very different. Killing animals for food is not a new invention by humans. Neither is torturing animals for some thrill. But I would argue the torture for thrill is done on a much smaller scale and is clearly not done for survival (eating). Its done for entertainment. Torture for entertainment. Very different.

[Samarta]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I think it comes down to intentions. People who use their own farm animals as food do so to eat. They dont torture the animals. Wringing the neck is a fairly quick, fairly painless way to kill food in the form of a bird. The people want to efficiently and quickly kill the animals so they can get down to butchering. I had to wring the neck of a goose that had been shot by a friend. The goose was flailing around in a rice paddy (he cussed at himself for a bad shot that did not lead to a clean kill). It was not pleasant and I actually completely tore the head and neck off and sent the body of the goose catapulting 50 yards. My friend got mad and said I should not hammer throw the bird (geese are quite large). I had never done it before and just wanted to make sure the bird was not suffering.
I think this is very different than putting animals together knowing they will tear each other apart and suffer... very different. Killing animals for food is not a new invention by humans. Neither is torturing animals for some thrill. But I would argue the torture for thrill is done on a much smaller scale and is clearly not done for survival (eating). Its done for entertainment. Torture for entertainment. Very different.

Oh I agree 100%, I was just saying that it takes a different kind of person to be able to do that....now survival is a whole different ingredient.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Samarta

You know this is quite interesting to me. The fact that someone could watch animals put in a situation for human entertainment fight to the death or worse near death and left to die and feel nothing is beyond me. Now the point is does it make it wrong. Who am I to judge that? What about when people actually go out to the barn or yard or whatever to get dinner? What do they feel when they ring a neck or chop a head off? If anything, they feel they are 5 minutes closer to a full belly. I couldn't do it, but does it make it wrong? Who am I to judge that? On the other hand, you have all the statistics about violent criminals that got their start with animal cruelty and how they end up locked in a cell, because they snapped and took a baseball bat to someone, or assaulted someone and when questioned felt or showed no remorse. Not everyone thinks alike and with this thread, one's personal opinion feeds right into the other person's statistics of what could potentially happen. Now if I see a horse break down, I turn the other way, and the same goes with dog fighting or anything else where an animal is suffering. But if someone is near me and isn't bothered by the sight of it, I don't go claiming to have discovered a potential violent criminal either. Do I hope Vick has played his last down ever and if the indictment is true gets big time punishment? Absolutely!! Do I understand that there may be people out there saying "they were pit bulls, that's what they were bred to do!" Absolutely! I truly see both of your points and as I said, it's pretty interesting.......

Sam,
I agree that this thread is interesting.
The only thing I'll add is that there's a huge difference between killing an animal for food (quickly and without suffering) and watching one die slowly, suffering for entertainment. It's the difference between stopping at KFC for a big bucket of deepfried on the way to the cockfights.
And, for those that put in the effort to get a horse on to the track, all I can tell you is there is incredible care and patience. When one is injured, or worse yet euthanized, there is an emotional loss.
Interesting thread.

[3kings]

I think Vick is a dirt bag and is in the wrong. I don't agree that there is a connection between dog fighting and committing crimes against other individuals. My issue with this topic is the millions of dollars spent to build the case against Vick. I do not condone his actions but I beleive our goverment money can be better spent.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 3kings

I think Vick is a dirt bag and is in the wrong. I don't agree that there is a connection between dog fighting and committing crimes against other individuals. My issue with this topic is the millions of dollars spent to build the case against Vick. I do not condone his actions but I beleive our goverment money can be better spent.

how does it cost money? cops get paid the same regardless of the case they work on, and da's are on a salary....and there is a connection between dog fighting and other crimes, most notably drugs--it was a drug bust that lead to the finding of the dog fighting ring. one of the initial articles when all this first came out said that most involved in one, are involved in the other.

and don't forget, it was vick who was caught a few months ago at the airport with a bottle with a hiding place--which smelled of marijuana.


and most serial killers start out on animals.

[3kings]

It costs a great deal of money to build a case of this magnitude. There are many jurisdictions involved, local,state and federal. How come there has been no further mention of the drugs? Dog fighting happens in seedy sections of most cities on any given weekend but is not prosecuted to this extent. Let me stress that I think it is a dispicable crime, but does not warrant this type of prosecution.

Originally Posted by 3kings

It costs a great deal of money to build a case of this magnitude. There are many jurisdictions involved, local,state and federal. How come there has been no further mention of the drugs? Dog fighting happens in seedy sections of most cities on any given weekend but is not prosecuted to this extent. Let me stress that I think it is a dispicable crime, but does not warrant this type of prosecution.

Oh yes it does when you are an NFL QB. If it was not prosecuted to the fullest you would get the "oh there goes another entertainer getting off light". These are the days. If you are in the limelight and commit a Federal crime, expect to get hit.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Oh yes it does when you are an NFL QB. If it was not prosecuted to the fullest you would get the "oh there goes another entertainer getting off light". These are the days. If you are in the limelight and commit a Federal crime, expect to get hit.

i think anyone involved in a federal crime should look out. i would imagine that once the surface was scratched, they found elements of a huge case, not the typical small time dog fighting. this covers multiple states, multiple crimes, and a lot of money changing hands--what they call an ongoing criminal enterprise.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 3kings

It costs a great deal of money to build a case of this magnitude. There are many jurisdictions involved, local,state and federal. How come there has been no further mention of the drugs? Dog fighting happens in seedy sections of most cities on any given weekend but is not prosecuted to this extent. Let me stress that I think it is a dispicable crime, but does not warrant this type of prosecution.

two of the defendants have to report for drug testing--sounds to me that they are up on drug charges, as the other two do not. also have electric monitoring on those two. repeat offenders, or facing charges beyond the dog case.

also, i'd hate to see money cited as a reason not to investigate crimes. again, most fed, state, local are paid to work regardless of type of case.

[Supah Brother]

Originally Posted by 3kings

I think Vick is a dirt bag and is in the wrong. I don't agree that there is a connection between dog fighting and committing crimes against other individuals. My issue with this topic is the millions of dollars spent to build the case against Vick. I do not condone his actions but I beleive our goverment money can be better spent.

Vick is a complete dirt bag and should be banned entirely from the NFL. You can tell alot about a man by the way he treats his animals.

http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/abuse_connection.php

[Samarta]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Sam,
I agree that this thread is interesting.
The only thing I'll add is that there's a huge difference between killing an animal for food (quickly and without suffering) and watching one die slowly, suffering for entertainment. It's the difference between stopping at KFC for a big bucket of deepfried on the way to the cockfights.
And, for those that put in the effort to get a horse on to the track, all I can tell you is there is incredible care and patience. When one is injured, or worse yet euthanized, there is an emotional loss.
Interesting thread.

agree....hell there is emotional loss to the fan, I can't imagine being and owner, trainer, and probably the one that endures the greatest pain, the groom...

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Samarta

agree....hell there is emotional loss to the fan, I can't imagine being and owner, trainer, and probably the one that endures the greatest pain, the groom...

Samarta,
Being a breeder, all I can tell you is the thrill of seeing them stand up for the first time on those wobbly legs. Lots of people along the way become very involved in the horse's development from that point on. Lots... the breakers, the hot walkers,the barn crew...so much goes into a horse before it even gets to its first race. It's painful for everyone.