Way OT, but Topical: Vick is Jail-Bound!

by Clueless on Jul 28, 2007 7:02 PM CDT

Yes, I'm Clueless, but I like my odds on this one: Michael Vick will be the star of the next reality show "The Real Longest Yard". One of his boys has apparently taken a deal and will spill the beans that Mr. Vick was very, very hands-on in singing "It's Just The Dog In Me!"

I'm predicting that when this is over, nobody is going to have much sympathy for Michael. Let's hope that his little brother pays attention before the Vicks become a tag-team in the prison system.

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Vick

Wow. He's screwed. Not that I feel sorry for him.

Animal cruelty sucks, and if Vick's guilty of involvement in a dog-fighting ring, six years in prison isn't enough for what he did.

"Then I met some friends for a beer, went to a BoDeans's concert, and son of a vondruke, if I didn't leave him at the concert hall."

by RCCook on Jul 28, 2007 6:58 PM CDT reply actions

I know a guy

who went to college with me who lived out in west virginia. I'm not exactly sure of his living situation but he apparently had a barn if that paints a picture. Anyway, he would laugh at us when we took our house dog to the vet because the thought of spending money on animals was completely foreign to him. From what I gathered, there were lots of animals on his property that needed care and he would either let them die or put them out of their misery. Now granted, this is a far cry from what Vick did which amounts to torturing animals, but is my friend guilty of anything or would he at least have your understanding?

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jul 28, 2007 7:03 PM CDT reply actions

Was that an open-ended question to everyone?

IMO... I would imagine that level of negligence would constitute some level of animal cruelty. Of course, it depends on what type of animal they are (cute or leather).
At any rate, I'm sure he could have just as easily made the decision not to own the animals, and either profit off of them, or simply get rid of them by giving them away.

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Jul 28, 2007 9:05 PM CDT up reply actions

it was open ended

but you missed part of my point. It probably is illegal and if he had grown up in the suburbs, it seems a bit appalling, but in the country, I can at least respect (or was forced to respect) the fact that some people don't hold animal's lives in the same way as humans. I think a section of the population have no idea that animal cruelty laws exist or that they can be liable for animal negligence.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jul 28, 2007 9:15 PM CDT up reply actions

I think I'm getting your point...

My previous response was a little more about does it constitute cruelty. But I see your question was more along the lines of, is it okay to prioritize when deciding whether or not to put more emphasis on taking care of yourself, or other humans... or taking care of animals. (maybe, that was your question)?

It's pretty obvious that in extreme circumstances, you're going to run to save your infant child before your family pet. But in your friend's circumstance, he probably could have gotten rid of the animals instead of making them suffer (if that was the case).

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Jul 29, 2007 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions

Pre-emptive Apology

for commenting on my own diary, but I want to say something about my view of Michael Vick.
In my opinion, he was one of the all-time greatest, and most exciting to watch, college football players ever. I remember watching the VT-FSU game to this day. He was my football hero at the time...loved watching him do his thing. It's a sad sight to see a guy with everything screw up so badly.

"There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 - 1832)

by Clueless on Jul 28, 2007 7:04 PM CDT reply actions