NAACP Atlanta Head: Vick Would be Treated Better if He Killed a Person

you just made my point for me.... michael vick is NONE of those.

 

I know nothing about Vick... but I really could care less about either aspect of this case. I don't really consider dog fighting that severe of a crime, and I don't care if gambling was involved. Am I going to hell?

 

Justify what?

 

Watching Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel

How wide spread is this 'sport'?
Looking at this thing it is VERY wide spread.
Underground training tapes
'regulation' size rings

I guess I am naive but I did not know it was this wide spread.

Rocket River

 

Why is it that there is always some racial element attached to the way black people are covered that isn't there when we're talking about Linsday Lohan, or Paris Hilton, or Ken Lay? I never hear anyone talk about drunken whoring and corporate fraud being a part of white culture the way I have heard people talk about dog fighting being a part of black culture lately. It seems there is a significant perception in our society/media that race plays a bigger factor in stupidity/criminality when you're black than it does when you're white.

 

I havent seen people say Vick's actions are a result of black culture.

 

I never see people say serial killing is a result of white culture either, but anyway. I have heard quite a bit on radio this past few weeks how dogfighting is a part of urban culture, ie black culture. If that's the case, why isn't drunken whoring and corproate fraud every bit as much a part of white culture and why doesn't the media, society, or any of you talk about it or insinuate it when the latest scandal breaks? It's then that white people, as many blacks are, will be in the position of having to disassociate themselves from the likes of Linsday Lohan and Ken Lay not solely because of their behavior but also because of their shared race. That's what this whole thread is about. Why in the hell else would anyone give a damn what a local NAACP chapter head has to say about Mike Vick?

 

what point, no one is justifying dog fighting, people are saying the moral outrage is outlandish, worse than what it is for people who have been involved in the death of human beings.

 

This is what bothers me. NO ONE said it was worse than killing a human being. If he killed a guy, it would get 10X more publicity. He did something wrong, he needs to get punished. No one is treating this like he killed a human

 

the law isn't, the media and some fans are, just my opinion

 

What specifically has the media done besides report on the story? Are there any editorials that you can point to?

 

Post of the thread right here.

 

I think we need something to be morally outraged about every couple of weeks. Imus, Lohan, Vick...etc.

Every couple of weeks there is something.

 

not the media, vick scolded by a u.s. senator

link


link

See, this is why prison is too good for people capable of this kind of cruelty. This is why Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, if he cops his own plea or is eventually found guilty of federal dogfighting conspiracy charges, should have to join the rest of his Bad Newz Kennels crew and do some hard time at the Atlanta Humane Society.

Just prison? Nuh-uh. Instead, doghouse during the day, then federal big house at night.

drew carey on david letterman said he wouldn't watch the nfl this year is vick was playing.

here's a houston chronicle column today (by a black columnist since we have to play this game) defending the media coverage.

link

 

After all, the events in Iraq or Afghanistan aren't outrage worthy for the public consfciousness.

 

If he was guilty of murder, there would be even more coverage. I geurentee it.

 

Yeah, I was wrong about the last point. I didn't know he admitted to killing the dogs.

I read your posts and I give you props for being real about your "sport". At least you are real enough to say "Yeah, I kill these animals for the hell of it" and not give me a bunch of excuses to make it "ok".

 

So you are basically saying it is ok to kill the animal in the name of "sport" as long as it doesn't suffer? So it's ok to kill it just for fun basically? I can see killing to fulfill the need to eat or even for population control maybe, but everything else you listed seems like an excuse to make killing the animal "ok". Tradition, family bonding, etc....the animal is still being killed...maybe not tortured (and I don't know if I believe that after reading Lil Pun's posts), but still killed in the name of fun/sport.

I do agree that it's based on how we define morals. I think things like hunting and bullfighting are just more accepted in general, so most deem them to be ok. However, I don't see how one can't be honest and say "well, I am killing this animal in the name of fun". If someone killed my loved one, or tortured and killed my loved one...at the end of the day my loved one is still dead, right? If someone says I murdered your mom but it was quick and she didn't feel anything....does that make it better?

Plenty of animal rights groups have issues with the rodeo for various reasons (the use of bucking straps, tail twisting, using electric cattle prods, etc).

And to clarify, I do not condone what Vick did. I just don't get how folks who kill or put animals in uncomfy/unnatural situations for sport/fun/entertainment can be pissed at dogfighting.

 

You guys are aware that bullfighting is illegal in this country, right? I've heard a couple of references to that here and I'm not sure what the correlation is.

 

I think I have seen threads about bullfighting on here. I know I have seen running ot the bulls threads on here, and I don't recall too many people having issues with the harm done to those animals.

The correlation is there is a lot of outcry about dogfighting, by man people who are fans of other sports where animals are injured or killed in the name of fun. I have no issue with Vick being prosecuted for doing something illegal, or for folks getting mad at him for participating in illegal activities. I do find it funny for folks who enjoy other sports where animals are killed (hunting) or arguably suffer (rodeo, the zoo, etc) to condemn dogfighting (not the killing of losing dogs, but just dogfighting in general). It's similar to folks who think smoking weed is so much worse than drinking liquor, from a moral "this is a harmful drug" standpoint, not a legal one.