Some idiots actually think the NFL is wrong for giving Vick a 2nd chance.

@ehBeth,

Quote:

he didn't just bet on dog fights. he didn't just run a dog-fighting operation. he didn't just kill dogs.

he tortured living beings.

Through most of the time he was doing that, he was "acting normal" in the rest of his life. Or at least normal enough that most people wouldn't have suspected he was torturing dogs to death.

I don't know that I would willingly trust him around any living being that was less strong than he is. There is something very dark inside someone who can torture in the way he did.

Amen sister. Thank you. You serving in the US Army?

1 Reply

@electronicmail,

No.

Too old and too Canadian Wink

1 Reply

@electronicmail,

he didn't vote you down, doofus, I did.

please quit yelling stupid stuff, it hurts my eyes...

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

sorry no offense

thank God for the good neighbors Canadians (hold your cold fronts at home if you don't mind Ma'am other than that I got only your hockey players to complain about) and wish you a GREAT 2011.

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

You a buddy of creepy torturer Snoody boy? Drunk

1 Reply

@electronicmail,

ok, that takes care of the yelling part...

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

No yelling, just reporting the ******* bastard to the organization that's been paying for his food his roof the clothes on his back and for his goddam ******* STUDIES all those years.

I want no more homicidal torturers or suicidal crazies around US Army facilities but don't let that stop YOU from posting. You suit YOURSELF.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Thank you.

Just call me Bill. If I had bothered to use my imagination, I would have come up with a better username. I've considered changing the one I've got.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

Not to minimize it, but the danger to which Cheney has put the public at large in comparison to Vick is a drop in the bucket.

I believe there is quite a difference between harming someone/something in person v doing it at a distance. Being willing to kill is different from authorizing/commanding someone else to kill.

I'm absolutely no fan of Cheney, but I don't there's a useful comparison here.

1 Reply

I believe in the system. (we kinda have to)

I'm no personal fan of Mike Vick's. (I'm no hater either)

until such time that he behaves improperly, I have to give him the benefit of the doubt. he has done everything asked of him. and more, I believe in some cases.

would I let him watch my dog? no.

do I think he should have a letter branded on his forehead? no.

I am hopeful that he has hit bottom, and found a way to become a positive force in life.

we'll see.

(I have no hope left for Mr Cheney...)

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Right now he is acting normal.

this is the bit I keep coming back to.

he didn't just bet on dog fights. he didn't just run a dog-fighting operation. he didn't just kill dogs.

he tortured living beings.

Through most of the time he was doing that, he was "acting normal" in the rest of his life. Or at least normal enough that most people wouldn't have suspected he was torturing dogs to death.

I don't know that I would willingly trust him around any living being that was less strong than he is. There is something very dark inside someone who can torture in the way he did.

Do I believe that the darkness can be hidden? yes.

Do I believe that the darkness can be conquered? no.

Perhaps it can be. Perhaps it has been. I'm not 100% convinced.

He paid his debt, he is doing everything expected of him. As I already said here, if he messes up, he is being watched so closely by so many people, he will in some way pay. Until that happens, case closed for me.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

I feel this way because it exemplifies the Machiavellian disregard (ends justifying the means) for life in general. In my mind, it's all a matter of degrees. The type and degree of this 'crime' is/are far different.

As I stated (I think) earlier, I'm all for giving him (a man that has been convicted and served some time for such a heinous crime) a second chance. I feel that it's good that he's allowed to continue in his chosen profession. But as a civil libertarian, I feel that under NO circumstance should he be allowed around dogs. 'The resason I mention this facet of the issue is 'cause he's mentioned in the press he might want to have a dog. This literally makes me want to throw up at the thought. The libertarian in me says that he should be allowed to do so, but the dog lover in me says it should be prevented.

2 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

he might want to have a dog. This literally makes me want to throw up at the thought. The libertarian in me says that he should be allowed to do so, but the dog lover in me says it should be prevented.

Men who've raped 6-month old babies served their time too but they're banned for life from being around children and schools. In FLA they're banned from public housing.

You got to be NO "baby lover" or "dog lover" to understand why. I'm sorry but I'm about to really want to throw up reading any more weasely torture apologists.

What's the MATTER with you???

0 Replies

@Ragman,

He's not allowed to own a dog for at least two more years.

He is still on federal probation.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

For that matter, neither do I (make sense all the time). in person, I hope my dimples and tap-dancing make up for it.

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

That's a relief that he has 2 more years on that part of the sentence. The fact that he would even mention that possibility in the media could be seen as part of his pattern of insensitivity. Why not just shut up about that and keep making those public-awareness of dog cruelty/fighting campaign lectures that he does?

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

Why not just shut up about that

I think this may be a hint that he really doesn't get it. He's doing the required promotional work, but he doesn't get it.

3 Replies

@ehBeth,

No..and when I looked at some news of his recent actions around the bankruptcy and/or financial resolution to paying back creditors, he's still playing games. However, that is far different issue and pretty removed from the issue at hand. I feel that what I read (assuming that it's true) 'smells' of hints that he still has a deceptive shady business practices with regards tro paying back laons to his creditors.

Bottom line; I wouldn't want him as a business partner nor to apply for a loan in my bank. He'd have a tough time as a parolee convincing that he's kept his nose clean.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Quote:

I think this may be a hint that he really doesn't get it. He's doing the required promotional work, but he doesn't get it.

until and unless he starts killing dogs again or breaks his parole you don't have a valid complaint. Being sorry and/or being reeducated were not conditions for his freedom.

I think that he is showing the arrogance that I expect to see out of a QB who is good at what he does and who is ready to lead his team to victory. I would love nothing better the for him to give PETA and the rest of the "I live animals more than I love people" freaks the middle finger...it would be occasion for applause.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Hawkeye there is something very evil and very sick in the "soul" of a man who could do what Vick had done and for one I would not trust him to be around any child or animal I care about.

Nor would I care to allow a penny of my wealth either directly or indirectly to flow to such a man.

1 Reply

Some idiots actually think the NFL is wrong for giving Vick a 2nd chance.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know