Posted on 08/22/2007 5:04:23 AM PDT by PurpleMan
Stephon Marbury, NBA star, "...You know, from what I hear, dogfighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."
(Excerpt) Read more at wjbf.com ...
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that insufficient evidence existed to convict Michael Vick of anything, so he escaped prosecution. Should the NFL then abdicate it’s moral responsibility to deal with Michael Vick?
Because that is the position the NFL took. They were going to be guided by the outcome of the legal proceeding against Michael Vick.
People are very eager to surrender their moral responsibilities to the State, and the State is only too happy to take them on.
“People who do torture animals and hurt them for fun are people who will do the same to their fellow human beings given the opportunity.”
This is exactly the point. There are a couple really sick posters on this thread.
I am not whining about it. I am certainly not chomping at the bit to set up a dog-fighting operation in my basement.
I was merely asking why dog fighting and cock fighting should be illegal.
As justifications go, this one seems a little thin.
“However”, dogs as with other domestic animals, are private property. As such, the owner has a right to kill these animals.
Since when were there no limits on a persons right to use private property?
If you read the article, that is not true.
And if they do give up their owners kill them for being 'losers'
I have seen pictures of pit bulls after fights and they sure don't look like they give up easy.
Clearly, as you yourself stated, some do die-don't they.
[ But Vick didn't worry about that, he just hung them when they wouldn't kill the bait dogs and cats. ]
You should read what you wrote. You said they fought to the death and when they didn't, he killed them. If they fought to death, how could Vick kill them?
Those dogs didn't make it to the pitbull fights, they were killed because they failed the trials.
How many dogs did Vick personally kill?
We are looking at least 8 that he hung and when 3 survived he drowned those.
But one would be one to many.
He will have many years contemplating his crime.
Maybe you can write him some fan mail and tell him how it really isn't a big deal.
Just like bear baiting and bull fighting should be, it is cruel to force an animal to fight.
Strange that one have that explained to him.
This has turned into Clarence Thomas 2.
It’s not the weight of the evidence that is important, it’s the seriousness of the charges. People will believe any outrageous thing because it bolsters their indignation. Stories about Vick being present when dogs were tortured to death suddenly become stories of Vick personally torturing scores of dogs to death.
I have yet to hear anyone say “Let’s stop dogfighting”. It goes on everywhere. It didn’t start with Vick and it won’t end with Vick.
Leonard Little, Jamal Lewis and Ray Lewis did a lot worse than Vick and they are still playing.
You aren't really attempting moral equivalence of cruel torture of animals with the killing of animals for food are you?
The NFL wasn't worrying about that when they suspended Pacman Jones and he hasn't been convicted of anything either.
Vick has admitted to his guilt, so what is the delay on the NFL dealing with him?
How does that justify anything?
No, the law is best used to protect those that are incapable of defending themselves, but deserve protection from those who would abuse them.
Amen.
Any hunter who does that deserves a Brooklyn-style beating in the parking lot.
Do you have a link to the article that says that Vick personally drowned dogs?
“I was merely asking why dog fighting and cock fighting should be illegal.”
This has been answered by many. This activity should be illegal because we reject the idea that a person should be able to injure or kill an animal for one’s own personal amusement. We believe that anyone enaging in this activity should be punished for it. That’s what the law is for.
You have made several references to the state not legislating behavior that should be the moral choice of the individual member of the society. And, certainly, there are specific instances of the so-called Nanny State on parade every day.
However, let me ask the question this way: Why is an individual entitled to engage in killing an animal with impunity and indeed without reproach simply for that person’s amusement and enjoyment? (Notice that I did not say kill your own dog. I am asking upon what foundation you base your entitlement to kill an animal for your own amusement, regardless of ownership.)
Very likely the owner of those dogs raised them for dog fighting.
That was in the testimony given by the guys who pleaded guilty.
They stated that Vick was personally involved in hanging the dogs and drowning them.
I am sure we will know more on Monday if the details of his guilty plea is released.
But what difference does it make to you-they were only dogs-right?
Here in central Pennsylvania we are ‘blessed’ with numerous “Puppy Mills”. When you get right down to the basics a Puppy Mill is just a farmer raising dogs like any other farm animal — a practice which most non-farmers (and that’s just about everybody) find offensive.
Our governor is attempting to shut down the mills, but the market for puppies will be served, one way or the other. My guess is that when PA, NY, CA and a few other states get done running dog breeders off their turf, we’ll be importing dogs from Mexico & Canada, where the long-arm of the Law can’t reach.
In 20 years you’ll buy your puppy off the internet & have him Fed Ex’ed to your door like an appliance. That’s the general direction of things as I see it.
How does one make the jump from "cruel" to "felony"?
I'll agree that it is cruel. No doubt. Morally repugnant, even.
But it is far from universally condemned. A heck of a lot of people in this country support dog and cock fighting.
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.