Vick's holding out for one year

[Crown Royal]

Not at all. I believe it is the same thing, which is why your whole bellyaching rant is irrelevant to me.

If you kill an animal, it's the same thing no matter what you do with it. Our society just tells us that certain things are right/wrong.

But the logic in killing a deer, or even shooting a dear and letting it get away, thus to suffer a tremendous amount.. just because you want to mount it on your wall... to say that it is really any different, regardless of the law or a hunter's self-serving "hunting etiquette", is absurd - just like your ridiculous, hypocritical puppy love tirade.

I'm not even sure what your point is. For one thing - you are talking about trophy hunting, which is certainly becoming a sport that people dislike anyway.

But are you saying that Vick's actions aren't so reprehensible because people are hypocritical in that they eat meat? Just because hunting is legal and dogfighting is not does not make dogfighting any morally less significant.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

Once again, your hypocrisy is staggering-- you're too morally pure to eat an animal, presumably because you think it's wrong to kill animals for food, yet you're defending a man who abused and killed them for fun...

And don't EVEN try to insinuate you're not defending Vick, I can show you the quotes...

So, how do you explain that amazing inconsistency, or more important, how do you rationalize it to yourself?? If as you suggest it's hypocritical for anybody who eats meat to want to see Vick punished to the fullest extent of the law for what he did, then it's vastly more hypocritical for you take the positions you have... you should be the biggest Vick critic, and you'd actually have the moral high ground over the rest of us... instead, you defend the guy...

Can't quite figure that one out...

No. No. No. And no again. You're all wrong; strictly spouting subjective conjecture about my view.

(I own a dog, by the way - a Belgian Sheepdog)

What irritates me about this whole ordeal, and why I am saying anything at all to the likes of similar fragmented, reactionary, emotional thinkers, is that people are running around acting like chickens with their heads cut off throwing the legal book at him for acts similar to that they themselves have committed in eating and hunting animals....

If you want to talk about hypocrisy, go look in the mirror and converse with yourself for a while. Then come talk to me when you have a better definition for what hypocrisy actually is.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

... instead, you defend the guy...

Can't quite figure that one out...

Here, I'll be more specific so that hopefully you can. I'm not defending his actions, rather I am able to separate myself from my appreciation of dogs, and my dog, long enough to rationalize that what they are doing to him is unjust, based on the grounds that people kill animals in similar fashions every minute of every day. That's the fact about it.

Am I saying go Vick, you done good? No.

But I'll weigh a citizen's right to justice over a beloved animal any day. Sure, I practice vegetarianism for moral reasons. But my morals also tell me that Mike Vick is being persecuted by a bumbling group of emotional hypocrites who don't have the insight, nor the mental faculties, to realize that what they do an a daily basis does, in fact, carry the same END RESULT... which is my whole point. It's the same thing - hypocrites.

 

[5Stars]

which is my whole point. It's the same thing - hypocrites.

You have no point...

Arn't you the one that said that killing a dog is the same as killing a dear or a cow for food except that one is illegal and the other legal, therefore thay are "not the same thing"?

Just want to clear that up....




"But I'll weigh a citizen's right to justice over a beloved animal any day." Also, this gem...are you saying that Vick "has a right" to kill dogs?

 

[silverbear]

Here, I'll be more specific so that hopefully you can. I'm not defending his actions, rather I am able to separate myself from my appreciation of dogs, and my dog, long enough to rationalize that what they are doing to him is unjust, based on the grounds that people kill animals in similar fashions every minute of every day. That's the fact about it.

But that's not a fact at all... name one "legal" endeavor that abuses animals by making them fight to the death...

You might be a vegetarian, but the natural impulse of humans is be omnivores, which means eating meat is a basic instinct for them... that necessitates the killing of the animals you wish to eat...

This is fundamentally different from abusing animals for amusement and/or profit...

 

[Seven]

No. No. No. And no again. You're all wrong; strictly spouting subjective conjecture about my view.

(I own a dog, by the way - a Belgian Sheepdog)

What irritates me about this whole ordeal, and why I am saying anything at all to the likes of similar fragmented, reactionary, emotional thinkers, is that people are running around acting like chickens with their heads cut off throwing the legal book at him for acts similar to that they themselves have committed in eating and hunting animals....

If you want to talk about hypocrisy, go look in the mirror and converse with yourself for a while. Then come talk to me when you have a better definition for what hypocrisy actually is.

Eating an animal is similar to drowning them in buckets, slamming them to the ground and fighting them to the death? Fight to the death.........I don't think cows have it in 'em.

I'd love to hear you theory on hunting.


BTW........I use my fireplace. Shall I refrain from celebrating Arbor Day?

 

[silverbear]

Here, I'll be more specific so that hopefully you can. I'm not defending his actions,

Not once have you CONDEMNED his actions, either... nope, your "outrage" seems to reserved solely for those of us who have...

This is, of course, a tacit endorsement of what he did...

 

[fortdick]

Eating an animal is similar to drowning them in buckets, slamming them to the ground and fighting them to the death? Fight to the death.........I don't think cows have it in 'em.

I'd love to hear you theory on hunting.


BTW........I use my fireplace. Shall I refrain from celebrating Arbor Day?

Actually, he has convinced me. Since dog fighting is a hot topic now, and all the canine promoters are laying low, me and the homies are going to go down to the slaughter house and watch 'em kill some cows. That ought to be fun.

And everyone remember, next Tuesday is euthanasia day at the pound. I still have some tickets if you wanna PM me with an offer!

LEt's go watch critters die! Boy Howdy, what fun!

 

[Seven]

Actually, he has convinced me. Since dog fighting is a hot topic now, and all the canine promoters are laying low, me and the homies are going to go down to the slaughter house and watch 'em kill some cows. That ought to be fun.

And everyone remember, next Tuesday is euthanasia day at the pound. I still have some tickets if you wanna PM me with an offer!

LEt's go watch critters die! Boy Howdy, what fun!

I'll buy lunch. I know this place where they let ya walk up to a bovine and hack out what ya want while there still milling around. It's a little extra work if you want pork cause pigs is much faster. Well worth it though.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

Eating an animal is similar to drowning them in buckets, slamming them to the ground and fighting them to the death? Fight to the death.........I don't think cows have it in 'em.

I'd love to hear you theory on hunting.


BTW........I use my fireplace. Shall I refrain from celebrating Arbor Day?

From life <--act-->to death. That little area in between is a similar result. As in, from life to death and the killing of _____.


It's the same thing - no matter how you slice it.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

Not once have you CONDEMNED his actions, either... nope, your "outrage" seems to reserved solely for those of us who have...

This is, of course, a tacit endorsement of what he did...

No--But, could I, perhaps, on the other hand, be saying that the penalty is a little harsh?


I mean, sure, suspend him; fine him; put him on two years of probation. But I for one think that prison should be reserved for those who commit crimes against humans.

 

[silverbear]

But I'll weigh a citizen's right to justice over a beloved animal any day. Sure, I practice vegetarianism for moral reasons. But my morals also tell me that Mike Vick is being persecuted by a bumbling group of emotional hypocrites who don't have the insight, nor the mental faculties, to realize that what they do an a daily basis does, in fact, carry the same END RESULT... which is my whole point. It's the same thing - hypocrites.

I have to weigh my words carefully here, lest I get myself an infraction...

Equating the sadistic torture of dogs for pleasure with anything hunters might do and profit is stupid, plain and simple... if a hunter causes an animal to suffer, he's screwed up, it was surely not his intent (unless he's a sadist himself, which few are IMO)... he wants to kill his prey cleanly, with a single shot... further, they have a purpose for killing in the first place, be it for food, or for that "trophy" that you keep railing against... you might not like their reasons for doing what they do, but they are considerably different from the reasons anybody engages in dogfighting... if you can't grasp the moral difference between the two, there's no hope for you...

Nope, the closest you can come to a moral equivalent to dogfighting is what they do to put veal on our plates, and I'm strongly opposed to that as well... but it's legal, so there ain't no sense in me getting up on my high horse about it until they do something to make it illegal (which I would favor)... I'll eat all kinds of meat, I don't eat veal...

I'm not entirely unsympathetic to some of your arguments, though... I eat chicken, it's one of my favorite foods, but when I see a truck carrying crates of chickens to one of the local poultry processing plants (poultry is one of the big businesses here in the Shenandoah Valley), I look at those dozens of birds, stuffed into a small cage, crowded on top of each other, and I realize that some of them will be dead before they get to the plants, I get a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach, and I think there has to be a better, more humane way to get that fried chicken on my dinner plate...

 

[silverbear]

No--But, could I, perhaps, on the other hand, be saying that the penalty is a little harsh?

I don't know, largely because this is the first time you've expressed THAT opinion... to date, all you've done is attacked those of us criticizing him for our "hypocrisy"...

I might even have a little sympathy with that argument, though I personally think that what's he's reported to be getting is a little on the low side... I'd prefer to see him get the 5 years that is reportedly the max for the crimes to which he's pleading... but that, combined with whatever suspension from the NFL that Goodell deemed appropriate ( even including a lifetime ban) would be good enough for me... I don't think he should spend the rest of his life in jail or anything ridiculous like that... and if all he gets is 18 months and a suspension from the NFL, I can live with it...

That's because I clearly view animal abuse as a deeper and more insidious crime than you do... those who do such things are sociopaths at the deepest level, and studies of serial killers have told us that those types almost always get their start by torturing animals... throw in the guns, drugs and illegal gambling that are ALWAYS found at a dogfight, and I certainly think that those who engage in such activities should be punished by jail time... I think society is better off if those sadists are kept out of society, so that they can't harm it...

I mean, sure, suspend him; fine him; put him on two years of probation. But I for one think that prison should be reserved for those who commit crimes against humans.

Guns, drugs, illegal gambling... those all go hand in hand with dogfighting... aren't those crimes against humans, too??

That said, I reject your premise, I consider it highly appropriate that those who abuse animals should face jail time... it is the most effective way of reducing the amount of animal abuse out there...

I ask you, how would you feel if somebody stole your dog from your front yard, and sold it to others who used it for research purposes (a sheepdog would be too big to be effective as a "sparring partner" for dogfighters, hence this alternative hypothetical, which has happened to dog owners in the past)?? If those who stole your dog were caught, would you be telling the judge they shouldn't be jailed for it??

I'd appreciate an honest answer here, because it cuts to the heart of the argument you're making...

 

[Big Dakota]

No--But, could I, perhaps, on the other hand, be saying that the penalty is a little harsh?


I mean, sure, suspend him; fine him; put him on two years of probation. But I for one think that prison should be reserved for those who commit crimes against humans.

And some touch little boys, or believe in Big Foot, or even think the world is flat. Congrats on being in "that" MINORITY. And i'll gladly take an infraction.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

Guns, drugs, illegal gambling... those all go hand in hand with dogfighting... aren't those crimes against humans, too??

No, A does not equal B by automatic assumptive association. Incorrect, even by most premises of the law directness in regards to involvement to specifics is required for the purposes of the law arrests, enforcement and prosecution.

That said, I reject your premise, I consider it highly appropriate that those who abuse animals should face jail time... it is the most effective way of reducing the amount of animal abuse out there...

My premise is that we're societal hypocrites. My conclusion is that the punishment is too harsh considering that we're such hypocrites.

Note the difference, por favor.

I ask you, how would you feel if somebody stole your dog from your front yard, and sold it to others who used it for research purposes (a sheepdog would be too big to be effective as a "sparring partner" for dogfighters, hence this alternative hypothetical, which has happened to dog owners in the past)?? If those who stole your dog were caught, would you be telling the judge they shouldn't be jailed for it??

I'd appreciate an honest answer here, because it cuts to the heart of the argument you're making...

So let's have Mike Vick cost the tax payer at least hundreds of thousands of dollars, at this point. And jail Micheal Vick. Because justice couldn't possibly be better served by him making a significant donation to an animal charity, cause or special interest group organization....

I think if it were my dog, I'd rest better if "FiFi" didn't die in such vain as to merely serve as a means to see through that Mike Vick serves jail time.

People keep bringing up the great characteristics of dogs. They're probably the most forgiving species.

I think that it would serve a greater cause if "FiFi's" death were to be a cause that triggered a greater action (a significant monetary donation) than seeing through a vicious, puppy vendetta in Mike Vick serving jail time.

My "FiFi" is more forgiving than that. But that's just how my dog rolls, I guess.

And I don't buy the whole hunters aren't sadists thing, but somehow, Mike Vick is.

If you've ever hunted and know the feeling of hunting and keeping going back to do it.... yeah, well, it seems to be pretty much the same to me; whether it be for trophy, food, money... But I particularly don't like the trophy one. So the buck hunters get the thumbs down from me; same with all the other large game hunters. There's nothing justifiably humane about hunting with rifles or bows... nothing.

But back to the issue I have with the whole thing; his punishment. I think it's a little stiff. And think that 4 months of actual time would be the maximum that anyone should get; even for such atrocious crimes against animals; in that much I agree.

As far as the scope and actuality of this whole thing, we'll just have agree to disagree.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

And some touch little boys, or believe in Big Foot, or even think the world is flat. Congrats on being in "that" MINORITY. And i'll gladly take an infraction.

Basically, you're saying that i touch little boys, believe in big foot and that the world is flat.

When you can't when an argument with facts, make them up....




I won't report you; don't worry.

 

[Ben_n_austin]

I don't know, largely because this is the first time you've expressed THAT opinion... to date, all you've done is attacked those of us criticizing him for our "hypocrisy"...

I beg to differ. Look no further than this VERY thread... page #5 of this thread. I call into evidence exhibit A and post #64:

But in other societies, it's not quite like this. I don't want to harp on that point, though, to make an argument for Vick. And while I do think that he should be punished to some extent of the law. The punishment should fit the crime. And a man spending 12 months in prison is a bit harsh if you ask me.

Rather than look beyond our own society to see that Vick might be being treated a little harshly to serve as an example. Because the media can get herds attention because Mike Vick is such a highly touted celebrity figure, look within our own.

Not only have I took this position before, but...

Notice the word "our". I'm not picking on you or anyone in particular. I'm just making a point about our social norms and ethical standards as a society.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92933&page=5

Is there anything else that we're not officially clear on?

 

[silverbear]

So let's have Mike Vick cost the tax payer at least hundreds of thousands of dollars, at this point.

You do know that he's looking at a substantial fine as well as jail time, don't you??

Besides, are you arguing that Vick shouldn't go to jail because it costs us too much?? Couldn't that same argument be applied to EVERYBODY in prison??

Are you suggesting we should just open up the penitentiaries, send all the felons home, to save some money??

And jail Micheal Vick. Because justice couldn't possibly served better by him making a significant donation to an animal charity, cause or special interest group organization....

Nope, it couldn't... some crimes deserve PUNISHMENT... asking a rich guy to contribute money is no punishment at all, and absolutely no deterrent for him going out and doing it all over again...

It's like those companies fined for dumping toxic waste, the fines are a pittance to them, and they're back dumping the next day...

I think if it were my dog, I'd rest better if "FiFi" didn't die in such vain as to merely serve as a means to see through that Mike Vick serves jail time.

So, you WOULDN'T want to see those responsible for stealing your dog, and causing it to die a lingering, suffering death, go to jail??

And I don't buy the whole hunters aren't sadists thing, but somehow, Mike Vick is.

That just makes you a contrarian, without a logical limb to climb out on... excuse me if I have no respect for your inability to grasp such a basic difference...

If you've ever hunted and know the feeling of hunting and keeping going back to do it.... yeah, well, it seems to be pretty much the same to me; whether it be for trophy, food, money... But I particularly don't like the trophy one. So the buck hunters get the thumbs down from me; same with all the other large game hunters. There's nothing justifiably humane about hunting with rifles or bows... nothing.

I find that stance completely idiotic... sorry, no other way to say it... of course, that's the fundamental flaw in your "I'm more morally pure than you are" argument...

But back to the issue I have with the whole thing; his punishment. I think it's a little stiff. And think that 4 months of actual time would be the maximum that anyone should get; even for such atrocious crime against animals.

We'll just have to disagree.

Yeah, we sure will... I'm not in favor of giving sadists a slap on the wrist... if you were a judge, you'd be a felon's wet dream, not to mention a defense attorney... you'd make Judge Ito look competent...

 

[silverbear]

Basically, you're saying that i touch little boys, believe in big foot and that the world is flat.

No, he's not... he's saying your argument is on a moral and intellectual par with those who do such things... there is a significant difference...

 

[silverbear]

I beg to differ. Look no further than this VERY thread... page #5 of this thread. I call into evidence exhibit A and post #64:

OK, when I'm wrong, I'm wrong... I yield on that point...

Notice the word "our". I'm not picking on you or anyone in particular. I'm just making a point about our social norms and ethical standards as a society.

Your problem is that jailing animal abusers IS a societal norm in THIS society, and you live in THIS society...

Thus, it is incumbent on you to conform yourself to the societal norms of this society, or go find one more to your own liking...

Or you could always try to change the societal norms in this area, if you feel like playing Don Quixote... I don't think much of your chances on that one...

Bluntly, you don't get to determine what is right or wrong for society, only for yourself... and if your notion of what's right differs from that of society, then you're the one with the problem...

You might ask yourself if society's really wrong here, or if you are... when 1 person says "A", and 10,000 say "B", the smart money says that B is probably the right answer...