• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Michael Vick pwned!

Loss of revenue and career in the case of Vick is in the millions and is not recoverable. I would have given him 9-12 months, as big a fine as the law allows, and court costs with three years probation. IMO, that would be alot for killing dogs.

I agree...and for the people who don't think the punishment is enough, what exactly do you want, death?

Seriously, how much more do you want him to lose? What would make you "whole" again?




BTW before some genius reads that as me defending Vick... wrong.
 
Conservative talkshow host Joe Scarborough (sp?) said it best this morning: "Yesterday Michael Vick was sentenced to 23 months in prison for animal cruelty. Look, I just gotta say it. Child molesters are getting 7 months and 2 years probation for raping children, and rapists are getting 18 months for raping women, but he get 2 years for animal cruelty? A dog is more important now? I'm a dog lover, and if anyone harmed my dogs, I'd be willing to fight, but this sentence shows everything that's wrong with our system."__________________

Exactly. It's goofy as hell.

Vick is the Great Satan... pass it on.
:rolleyes:
 
What this thread needs is a can of worms.

I am someone who loves dogs and abhors what Vick did. And while I don't hunt, I don't really have a problem with it.

But I'm not quite sure why dog fighting (where an animal will certainly be hurt and may die) bothers me so much and hunting (where an animal will definitely die) doesn't really bother me.

I've noticed that some of the TBers who hunt are the ones angriest about Michael Vick.

Is it because of our attachment to dogs?
Is it because of the mindset of hunters vs dog fighters?
Or is it simply because one is legal and one isn't?

Just curious.
 
What this thread needs is a can of worms.

I am someone who loves dogs and abhors what Vick did. And while I don't hunt, I don't really have a problem with it.

But I'm not quite sure why dog fighting (where an animal will certainly be hurt and may die) bothers me so much and hunting (where an animal will definitely die) doesn't really bother me.

I've noticed that some of the TBers who hunt are the ones angriest about Michael Vick.

Is it because of our attachment to dogs?
Is it because of the mindset of hunters vs dog fighters?
Or is it simply because one is legal and one isn't?

Just curious.

Or is it because hunters often put bullets in dogs' heads when they are no longer effective?
 
+1 on the state charges being a waste of the courts money if they allow sentence to be served concurrently.

No one has mentioned that it isn't just the dog charges he is being sent up for, he is also getting extra time because he was the moneyman behind the whole horror show, and he was too stupid/arrogant to show up clean for his hearing.

This was an entire compound of organized professional dog fighting that spanned states and years. If it was Bubba Thug and Thug Bubba prize-fighting their dogs in an alley then yes, 2 years seems a bit harsh. No less cruel to the dogs, but there is a scale issue here people.
They manufactured killing dogs through torture and deprevation for fun and profit. These monsters should get 10yrs hard time, not 23 months in a "prison camp".

I want to see Vick featured on MSNBC's Lock-Up. A decade at San Q would be a much more befitting punishment.


As far as the child molesters go, touch a child you get dead or permanent incarceration. No second chances, no parole. Just dead or in a box forever, a self-administered lethal dose of sedatives available by request 24-7.

That's brilliant, given the fact that hard evidence isn't always available and people have been wrongly accused before.

Then again, it fits in perfectly with the motif here... angry people going off the deep end over someone else's reprehensible behavior... while ignoring all the other reprehensible behavior around them.
:D

They should cut off his arm.
:mad:

Yeah.
:rolleyes:
 
What this thread needs is a can of worms.

I am someone who loves dogs and abhors what Vick did. And while I don't hunt, I don't really have a problem with it.

But I'm not quite sure why dog fighting (where an animal will certainly be hurt and may die) bothers me so much and hunting (where an animal will definitely die) doesn't really bother me.

I've noticed that some of the TBers who hunt are the ones angriest about Michael Vick.

Is it because of our attachment to dogs?
Is it because of the mindset of hunters vs dog fighters?
Or is it simply because one is legal and one isn't?

Just curious.
I don't hunt anymore, but I used to, so I might have an answer for you that may make some sense.

Whenever I did hunt, I had a problem with putting a rifle round in a deer's chest. I didn't like killing the things, but I understood my objective was to kill it quickly, and I knew I'd use every part of that deer, be it for food or for the hide or whatever, by the time I was done with it. There was a purpose, much like raising cattle for beef and leather and milk has a purpose.

Dog fighting is just gambling. It's some guy throwing these dogs' lives on the line so he can try to make some money when the one he bet on kills the other.
 
What this thread needs is a can of worms.

I am someone who loves dogs and abhors what Vick did. And while I don't hunt, I don't really have a problem with it.

But I'm not quite sure why dog fighting (where an animal will certainly be hurt and may die) bothers me so much and hunting (where an animal will definitely die) doesn't really bother me.

I've noticed that some of the TBers who hunt are the ones angriest about Michael Vick.

Is it because of our attachment to dogs?
Is it because of the mindset of hunters vs dog fighters?
Or is it simply because one is legal and one isn't?

Just curious.


Nice can. Glad you opened it.

Attachment to dogs? Yep... what other animal do people regularly kiss on the mouth?:D. They're like family, some moreso than actual humans.

The hunter mindset? Yep... they're not all hunting for food or clothing, many of them are doing it for the rush of killing something just for the hell of it. That's all. And some have the balls to call it a sport. Fine, then give the squirrel a (large enough) opposable thumb, some ammo and a Glock and have at it.

Legality? I seriously doubt that's the issue. Cockfighting isn't legal either but I seriously doubt there'd be this kind of uproar.

You left out the love-hate relationship with wealthy professional athletes. A big part of the can IMO. Huge... and few will admit it.
 
I don't hunt anymore, but I used to, so I might have an answer for you that may make some sense.

Whenever I did hunt, I had a problem with putting a rifle round in a deer's chest. I didn't like killing the things, but I understood my objective was to kill it quickly, and I knew I'd use every part of that deer, be it for food or for the hide or whatever, by the time I was done with it. There was a purpose, much like raising cattle for beef and leather and milk has a purpose.

Dog fighting is just gambling. It's some guy throwing these dogs' lives on the line so he can try to make some money when the one he bet on kills the other.

And hunting for sport?
:hmm:
 
And hunting for sport?
:hmm:
...Yeah, I had just finished writing my post whenever I read yours. I never called it that, and after a while I lost the taste for shooting those deer and just went back to eating beef unless one of my redneck family members brought some venison by for me to try.

I think those who hunt for sport, those who hunt just to get that last ten point buck that's been missing from their den wall, are no better than Vick.
 
Seriously, how much more do you want him to lose? What would make you "whole" again?
I certainly don't think that he needs excessive punishment or to be put to death. As long as he is able to raise from the dead all the dogs he is responsible for killing both through his actions and through the actions of the people who effectively worked for him, he should be allowed to recover his life and career when his sentence is up. I think that's fair. If he can't do those things then, screw him, he can rot in prison for the rest of his miserable life.

- Dave