Posted on 08/17/2009 8:47:08 AM PDT by Federalist Patriot
He has been punished according to the legal system, so I don’t see why he should be punished further.
I understand the “mistake” part. First, it should be mistakes (plural).
Also, Vick did was premeditated and thought out. He planned it far in advance.
Lastly, there is something unsettling knowing he got pleasure from torturing an animal till it died is unsettling. No I’m not talking about the dogfighting itself. I’m talking about the fact that he admitted to thinking up “novel” ways to torture dogs to death (hanging, drowing, electocuting) because he thought it would be “fun”.
The torture, not the dogfighting, is what strikes me in the gut. He’s been punished and should be able to work now, but I’ll never be able to look at him again without that bad feeling in my gut over the tourture.
And this comes from a Falcon’s fan that used to also be a big Vick fan.
Exactly.
Playing in the NFL is a privilege, not a right. If the NFL no longer wants to live down to the sobriquet of the National Felons' League, they'd have every right to raise their standards of conduct for players. And I wish they would.
I'm about sick and tired of all the self righteous, sanctimonious and judgemental finger pointers who say otherwise. Remember the next time you screw up and need someone's forgiveness just how you judged Vick...ask yourself if that's the measure you want to be judged by.
The guy was sentenced and did his time! He paid his debt! From what I have seen he has demonstrated genuine remorse. Sheesh, BACK OFF. Give the guy a chance.
Dogs are like children in that they are innocent. It takes a really sick person to abuse an animal.
That is the reason for the outrage.
I haven’t been following this as closely as you, has he said why he thinks what he did was wrong? I have seen that he said it was a mistake and that he didn’t know why he did it.
Freegards
In the meantime silence roars as how many innocent babies have their brains sucked out?
I also don't buy the argument that “an ex con who couldn't run the 40 in 4.4 seconds or throw a ball 70 yards, wouldn't be getting such an opportunity”.
So what? Ex-cons with marketable skills are going to have more opportunities than ex-cons without them, just like everyone else.
A few questions for you...
Should priests who molest kids be allowed to return to the priesthood after they serve their time?
Should Chief Financial Officers who get caught embezzling money be hired to oversee the finances of another company after they serve their time?
After all, that’s the job they were trained to do.
No one is saying he should not work. Just that he should not work in the NFL. Embezzlers do not get jobs at banks or working with money. Until all sports orgs - amauter and pro - start kicking and banning the thugs from their outfits, they will never be free of the Vicks, Stallworths, et al.
The guy was sentenced and did his time! He paid his debt!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
“Paid his debt to society” is a term that gets under my skin.
Criminals are PUNISHED, but the NEVER pay their debt to society. NEVER. The damage criminals do to society is evidenced in thousands of ways (from homes with bars and alarms, to women afraid to walk alone on the streets.) That’s the DEBT criminals owe, because it is their activy that causes it. That can never be paid off.
I agree with her, too. What he did wasn’t a “mistake”. It’s an extreme character flaw that is a common thread running through all serial killers of humans; they start with animals. It’s not something that can be fixed; it’s woven in to the fiber of their beings.
He can work again — cleaning toilets. I’m sure there are a few decent people who could fill his place in sports and pull in the millions. And he needs to be watched all the time. Like pedophiles, sadistic animal abusers will do it again.
Exactly, the purpose of jail is to serve as punishment, and as a deterrent to crime, it does not pay back society.
As someone who has zero interest in football (particularly pro), I really do not care whether a private organization of which I am not a part decides to hire someone. I do, however, object to NFL’s anti-trust exemption.
Truth be told, I sorta feel that way about letting people who voted for Obama continue to vote.
I understand the Vick case got so much attention because of his stature in the league and the how inhumane the animals were treated, but how many other cases get swept under the rug by the NFL and people are going crazy over them?
In 2007, 9 players on the Bengals roster had run-ins with the law.
In 2005, 17 players for the Vikings flew hookers in for a night if partying and sex on a boat.
Donte Stallworth killed a man while drunk driving.
Ray “100% Innocent” Lewis.
Michael Irvin.
Ricky Williams.
Jamal Lewis.
I could go on and on. All these guy either still play, or played out their careers.
What makes Vick any different? He did some horrible and evil things to dogs. He also did his time in the slammer.
Where’s everyone protesting the one year suspension on Stallworth? HE KILLED A MAN! He gets a slap on the wrist by the justice system and by the league and no one protests.
Like I’ve said before, let the market decide what kind of business decision this is. If he’s bad for business, he’ll likely not play after his contract is up.
But I have feeling all the armchair QB’s protesting this stuff will forgive him once he wins a game for the Eagles.
Isn’t there a connection between Serial Killers and Animal torturers?
I think what he did was sick and something we really need to monitor.
While he did serve his time, why should this man get rich again playing for the NFL?
He needs to get a real job like the rest of us not have everything handed to him. I am disappointed anybody will let him play again, but it’s the free market. If they want to, fine.
That has nothing to do with what I said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.