NFL conditionally reinstates Michael Vick

**Cricket** · 07-27-2009, 05:50 PM

I am disappointed in this decision . . .

NFL conditionally reinstates Michael Vick
http://blogs.usatoday.com/thehuddle/...st-week-6.html

History on this if you are not familiar with the story...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071701393.html

**pctec** · 07-27-2009, 08:18 PM

I do not normally post in the political forum but...
I think Michael Vick is a total loser who need his behind beaten...

sfod_d223 · 07-27-2009, 08:44 PM

If this monster can be "conditionally" re-instated then Pete rose needs his place in the Hall of Fame as soon as possible!!

lordspace · 07-27-2009, 09:32 PM

Maybe he's getting 2nd chance ?

John Scott · 07-28-2009, 02:02 AM

Why is he a monster?

**Zap** · 07-28-2009, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

Why is he a monster?

Definition: Monster

Although I can't speak to the specific reason sfod called him a monster, I think he qualifies under...

Quote:

freak: a person or animal that is markedly unusual or deformed

I think his behaviour could be considered unusual.

AND/OR

Quote:

a cruel wicked and inhuman person

I also think his behaviour could be termed "cruel" without much imagination.

John Scott · 07-28-2009, 08:36 AM

Quote:

I also think his behaviour could be termed "cruel" without much imagination.

Cruel being defined as:

Quote:

1: disposed to inflict pain or suffering

Most of us are then cruel. I don't know a single human being who hasn't inflicted pain and suffering, and I really can't think that Vick inflicted more pain and suffering than the rest of us.

blazin1 · 07-28-2009, 09:07 AM

Let Michael Vick PLAY! He is a baller with sick skills and the NFL will make more money than it will lose when he is inked on an NFL team. Bet on it. PETA can talk crap but will shut up when he pays them $$$.

I do not think what he did was right. I love animals and think he was terribly wrong for doing what he did but he paid with his time in jail. On that note let the smack talk begin. I know you all don't agree with me but it's my opinion.

LET MIKE VICK PLAY!

**pctec** · 07-28-2009, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

Most of us are then cruel. I don't know a single human being who hasn't inflicted pain and suffering, and I really can't think that Vick inflicted more pain and suffering than the rest of us.

Oh C'mon John... when was the last time you used dogs to fight for your entertainment? You are just being ridiculous now...

Now I remember why I do not bother with this section of the forum...
I am done with it...

John Scott · 07-28-2009, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pctec

Oh C'mon John... when was the last time you used dogs to fight for your entertainment? You are just being ridiculous now...

Now I remember why I do not bother with this section of the forum...
I am done with it...

I eat meat every day. Where do you suppose meat comes from?

StrongInTheArm · 07-28-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I eat meat every day. Where do you suppose meat comes from?

From cow fights. Those dairy farmers should be locked up man!

**Muddy** · 07-30-2009, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm

From cow fights. Those dairy farmers should be locked up man!

Oh man! I laughed so hard! I had to read it to my wife (in context) and we both had a laugh!

Allen Farlow · 07-28-2009, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I eat meat every day. Where do you suppose meat comes from?

John, how can you even consider any connection between the two? We do not force animals to fight each other to the death at slaughterhouses. What an inane comment.

And you honestly don't believe that Vick inflicted more pain and suffering on animals than the rest of us? I am astonished!

Sorry, John, but I don't see very many people going out of their way to deliberately force animals to be tortured.

A single fighting dog could win fights and be forced to fight in ten or fifteen consecutive fights before finally meeting a cruel end. That amounts to a total of more than two or three hours of torture. Many dogs, when losing fights, are not killed but left severely injured, suffering horribly before being given any care (if they are lucky enough to receive anything other than being picked up and thrown out of the barn, left to bleed to death). If they don't die on their own many are shot or beaten to death by angry owners.

These animals know very little love while alive and being taught to fight, and the only way out is death.

And to use animals in such a cruel and inhumane manner for profit? That alone is why this scum of a man should never be allowed to make the millions he will undoubtedly reap playing in the NFL. (He didn't just train dogs or fight them, he was operating it! "Vick, 28, pleaded guilty in August 2007 to a federal charge of bankrolling a dogfighting operation at a home he owned in Virginia." That quote is from here.)

The only reason he is playing again is greed on the part of the team owner. It's all about making money. You have to have the talent to make the gate.

It is a shame that Michael Vick has such talent and that he allowed himself to fall into criminal activities, but even though he has supposedly paid the price demanded by society, he has not paid the price as far as I am concerned.

How about Michael Vick reinstating all of the animals he is directly and indirectly responsible for killing during the operation of his criminal enterprise?

The man's mental state is such that he will do anything for a buck. He has no conscience, no ethics and no compassion for any other living creature. He is scum.

I seriously hope he gets attacked by a pack of rabid pit bulls.

**Hades** · 07-28-2009, 10:57 AM

Every employer has the right to decide who works in his company and who doesn't.

Sure this guy must pay the fine or maybe even be in prison for what he did but I don't see anything wrong with the NFL allowing him to continue working.

mr.joebert · 07-28-2009, 11:13 AM

Send him over here to Tampa Bay. We blow money on quarterbacks regularly, it would be nice to get a real one for a change.

**Cricket** · 07-28-2009, 12:42 PM

An added note . . .

Quote:

Dogs that did not perform up to expectations were killed by electrocution, hanging, drowning and other violent means by the dogfighting ring.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3148549

**Zap** · 07-28-2009, 12:46 PM

As humans, we do sometimes inflict pain and suffering on others.

But, I can honestly say that I've never electrocuted, hung or drowned anyone.

I think the difference, here, John, and what makes him a monster, is that most of us don't set out to purposely inflict pain and suffering on others.
And, for the most part, the pain and suffering we do inflict is in a whole different league, if you'll pardon the pun.

John Scott · 07-28-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

John, how can you even consider any connection between the two? We do not force animals to fight each other to the death at slaughterhouses.

As if there is a difference. To suggest that animals have the right to be treated humanly, while maintaining that it is perfectly okay to breed them by the millions and kill them at will is a bit contradictory and self serving, no?

Quote:

And you honestly don't believe that Vick inflicted more pain and suffering on animals than the rest of us? I am astonished!

How many thousands of animals were kept in captivity and killed for me? I don't know, and frankly I don't care either.

This outrage over Vick's dog fighting seems misplaced. I'm outraged that a fellow human was deprived of years of his life by a government that I subsidize. That's inhumane. Not to mention that the government has no right to do what it did, considering he didn't harm any humans (at least in that case - other things he did may be blame-worthy).

Quote:

A single fighting dog could win fights and be forced to fight in ten or fifteen consecutive fights before finally meeting a cruel end.

In nature, animals kill one another every day without being arrested and prosecuted.

Quote:

And to use animals in such a cruel and inhumane manner for profit? That alone is why this scum of a man should never be allowed to make the millions he will undoubtedly reap playing in the NFL.

And slaughterhouses operate for humanitarian purposes?

As far as I can tell, the dog fighting here in Japan is all for profit. I used to think it was cruel, but then I realized that would just be absurd to suggest that we can kill them at will, but not inflict pain at will. Of course we can inflict pain on animals. They have no rights, and insofar as they have no ability to become party to a social contract, they can never have rights.

Quote:

He has no conscience, no ethics and no compassion for any other living creature. He is scum.

That very well could be, but I would say that if he has no compassion and no ethics, the government that incarcerates people for their lack of compassion is a bigger problem. And that's what happened there. His morality didn't match yours, so you put him in prison.

Quote:

I seriously hope he gets attacked by a pack of rabid pit bulls.

You don't see the irony in that statement?

**Hades** · 07-28-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I would say that if he has no compassion and no ethics, the government that incarcerates people for their lack of compassion is a bigger problem. And that's what happened there. His morality didn't match yours, so you put him in prison.

That is not a valid reason.
You can't go through life acting deliberately as you please and then say "I have a different moral, don't punish me." Laws don't consider morals, laws are the same for everyone.

John Scott · 07-28-2009, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hades

That is not a valid reason.
You can't go through life acting deliberately as you please and then say "I have a different moral, don't punish me." Laws don't consider morals, laws are the same for everyone.

So where do you get the right to impose your morality on me? That's precisely what happened here.