Michael Vick and Job offer

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by kstar

For Vick to actually show that he regretted what he did, he should be doing more than paying for the care of all the rescued dogs. He should be donating 95% of any paycheck that he ever gets to animal charities, I doubt the courts would have fought that. He should be apologizing and meaning it, not talking about the different "Michael Vick"s. He should be voluntarily entering the care of a psychiatrist.

I LOLd at the bolded. Man that was the best joke I've heard all day!
Personally, I think some people seem to forget that they are simply animals. Doesnt make it right or justify it, but some people place way too much value on animals. That may be the reason why a particular state has 4 times as many animal shelters as women's shelters. Vick financed the dog fighting. He watched dogs fight. Beyond that he has never admitted to or been convicted of actually harming dogs himself. So the calims that he needs to have done to him what he did to dogs are pointless because he didnt actually do anything to the dogs. As far as showing remorse goes, I think he's done that. He should get out of jail and play for any NFL team that wants him. (And there are some teams that could use him.) Hopefully he's been using his yard time wisely and stayed in shape.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

I LOLd at the bolded. Man that was the best joke I've heard all day!
Personally, I think some people seem to forget that they are simply animals. Doesnt make it right or justify it, but some people place way too much value on animals. That may be the reason why a particular state has 4 times as many animal shelters as women's shelters. Vick financed the dog fighting. He watched dogs fight. Beyond that he has never admitted to or been convicted of actually harming dogs himself. So the calims that he needs to have done to him what he did to dogs are pointless because he didnt actually do anything to the dogs. As far as showing remorse goes, I think he's done that. He should get out of jail and play for any NFL team that wants him. (And there are some teams that could use him.) Hopefully he's been using his yard time wisely and stayed in shape.

I understand what you're saying, as far as an emotional response to what he did; at the end of the day, he's done his time and should be allowed to move on with his life, like anyone else.

But even looking at it from an unemotional, logical point of view, his financing of the dog fights was a big part of what allowed it to happen, at least on that large scale. Allowing the dog fights to happen is "actually harming" the dogs (unless you know of some types of dog fights where no dogs are harmed). I think it's hard to minimize his culpability in this.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I understand what you're saying, as far as an emotional response to what he did; at the end of the day, he's done his time and should be allowed to move on with his life, like anyone else.

But even looking at it from an unemotional, logical point of view, his financing of the dog fights was a big part of what allowed it to happen, at least on that large scale. Allowing the dog fights to happen is "actually harming" the dogs (unless you know of some types of dog fights where no dogs are harmed). I think it's hard to minimize his culpability in this.

I don't think anyone is minimizing his culpability (in the sense that he was the 'proximate cause' of the dogfighting and subsequent injuries) - there is no doubt that he has blood on his hands from each dog that died or was injured.

However, while the actual dogfighting is barbaric in and of itself, you can certainly question his involvement in the barbarism that went above and beyond what was 'required' of dogfighting ipso facto. Basically you need to think more like a juror and less like an attorney, is what I'm saying - that whole "'Responsible' means different things" issue.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I don't think anyone is minimizing his culpability (in the sense that he was the 'proximate cause' of the dogfighting and subsequent injuries) - there is no doubt that he has blood on his hands from each dog that died or was injured.

However, while the actual dogfighting is barbaric in and of itself, you can certainly question his involvement in the barbarism that went above and beyond what was 'required' of dogfighting ipso facto. Basically you need to think more like a juror and less like an attorney, is what I'm saying - that whole "'Responsible' means different things" issue.

I don't think this is so much at odds with what I said, but I was looking at it a bit more broadly. I was responding more to the idea of whether Vick "harmed" the dogs himself, looking at the term "harm" broadly. I understand that these things exist on a spectrum, and that the guy who is financing things is on a different level than the guy who is doing the torturing of the animals.