We were sent this link today by a fellow pissed off pit bull patron: ARTICLE It has been discussed on message boards over the last week, but I really felt the need to chime in.
First, I have to let down Matt some more when I correct him: Vick was sentenced to twenty-three months in prison, not sixteen. He may have to spend more time than that behind bars as his state trial has not even happened yet - the trial that addresses animal cruelty, among other infractions. Vick’s federal trial didn’t address the shootings, drownings, electrocutions, and beatings (to death).
I don’t know where your information comes from, but I don’t believe any business would touch Vick again for endorsements. Please let us know which endorsements you believe he got back.
Just a little heads-up Matt: dog-fighting is *illegal in all fifty states, so no, it’s not okay if Vick, or anyone else, chooses to fight their dogs. I’m surprised the University at Buffalo doesn’t can your ass for openly supporting felony activities. Perhaps you are in favor of other such felonies that you would like to share with your readers.
Don’t fool yourself for a second with your cat analogy. With more than sixty million pet cats in the US, their owners would have been even more vigilant than those disgusted by what Vick did to his own canines. You have to remember, Vick killed Pit Bulls, a breed that society has NOT put on a pedestal and barely even considers to be worthy of the moniker Dog, yet even non-doglovers were appalled by his actions. And FYI Matt – there is a HUGE pit bull overpopulation problem and there has been for more than a decade, so your distorted theory about overpopulation being a litmus test for our tolerance for cruelty is completely off the mark, as are your beliefs about property rights. Vick was not torturing his refrigerator and it is remarkable that you don’t allow the difference between an inanimate object and a living being.
For your sake, I’ll point out the difference between shooting a deer for food and beating a dog’s head into the ground because it wouldn’t fight another of it’s kind, for it’s masters pleasure: The former is necessary or else we would have to eat said deer alive. The latter is unnecessary, sadistic, torturous, cruelty. I’m also pretty sure you are aware that there *are cultures that eat dog, but they skip the torture.
That you believe no one was affected on a personal level by Vick’s cruelty and killings is pointless. We’re all personally unaffected by crimes committed across the globe to those we’ve never met, but that makes the crimes no less serious. And no, our culture does not sympathize more with dogs than people; our prison system is overflowing, mostly with people who committed crimes against our own, while in large, most animal cruelty goes unreported, is reduced to a lower crime, or is thrown out of court, and not to mention, is only a misdemeanor.
To end my rant, consider for a moment that the eight dogs of which you speak were dogs that Vick and his boys killed in one particular month during his six-year dog-fighting venture, do the math Matt. How many others would that mean they likely tortured and killed, and how many other dogs of his died in the pit? And then include the dogs that he fought during his high school and college days.
The bigger picture of which you speak also must include what you have unwittingly left out – that Michael Vick has some part to play in this, an enormous part. He knew he was committing serious crimes and yet chose to risk *everything. It’s as simple as that, Matt.
Here is another link on the theory that "It's just a dog."
