Prime time on Vick

And as you might expect, he's getting some heat



I would've never thought Mike Vick, one of the NFL's most exciting players "? the man who makes the network execs smile every time he plays "? would ever be indicted for crimes against man's best friend.

The potential impact could be devastating.

He could lose millions worth of endorsements. Nike has already suspended the release of his new shoe. He could lose millions he was supposed to get from the Atlanta Falcons, if the club decides to cut him. That's unlikely, but it could happen if he's convicted or makes a plea arrangement.

Or his reputation might wind up so stained that he's never forgiven in the court of public opinion. That would be too bad for the 27-year-old superstar.

This is all the result of perspective.

What a dog means to Vick might be a lot different than what he means to you or I. Hold on, don't start shaking your head just yet. Listen to me.

Some people kiss their dogs on the mouth. Some people let their dogs eat from their plate. Some people dress their dogs in suits more expensive than mine, if you can believe that.

And some people enjoy proving they have the biggest, toughest dog on the street. You're probably not going to believe this, but I bet Vick loves the dogs that were the biggest and the baddest. Maybe, he identified with them in some way.

You can still choose to condemn him, but I'm trying to take you inside his mind so you can understand where he might be coming from.

I'm sure all of the animal activists and Humane Society folks have a dart board with Vick's picture in the center of it. And if he plays this season, PETA is going to picket every stadium where he plays.

Still, I must ask the question: Where is all of this going?

By now you've read all of the accusations about the cruelty involving the dogs "? and I'm not just talking about their duels to the death. All of that is enough to make me cringe because I have three highly-trained protection German shepherds, just in case someone wants to rob my family.

Believe me, you don't want to deal with them. With one German command, our dog Yascho turns into Cujo. And for the record, I live around the corner from the police station, so it won't take them long to show up and save you from the dogs.

Now back to Vick.

Why are we indicting him? Was he the ringleader? Is he the big fish? Or is there someone else? The fights allegedly occurred at a property that he purchased for a family member. They apparently found carcasses on the property, but I must ask you again, is he the ringleader?

This situation reminds me of a scene in the movie "New Jack City," when drug dealer Nino Brown is on the witness stand and eloquently says, "This thing is bigger than me."

Are we using Vick to get to the ringleader? Are we using him to bring an end to dogfighting in the United States?

The only thing I can gather from this situation is that we're using Vick.

Was he wrong? Absolutely. Was he stupid? Can't argue with that. Was he immature? No doubt. But is he the ringleader? I just can't see it.

I believe Vick had a passion for dogfighting. I know many athletes who share his passion. The allure is the intensity and the challenge of a dog fighting to the death. It's like ultimate fighting, but the dog doesn't tap out when he knows he can't win.

It reminds me of when I wore a lot of jewelry back in the day because I always wanted to have the biggest chain or the biggest, baddest car. It gives you status.

Can I pause for a moment to ask you a question?

Who shot Darrant Williams? Remember the Denver Bronco cornerback? I'm just more concerned about bringing to justice someone who killed a human. Or finding out who broke into Miami Heat forward Antoine Walker's home, tied him up and robbed him at gunpoint.

We're attacking this dogfighting ring the same way a teenager attacks his MySpace page after school (by the way parents, make sure you monitor your kids). We should have the same passion for man that we have for man's best friend.

The reason this is turning into a three-ring circus is that baseball is boring, basketball is months away, football is around the corner and we in the media don't have a thing interesting to write about.

How will this end up? I have no idea. All I know is Falcons fans better pray because Vick's backup is Joey Harrington. Enough said.

God bless and God willing I'll hollah at you next week.

http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs....707230309/1010

Well I think I'm in the same boat with Primetime. Why isn't there the same outrage over crimes against humans? Baffles the heck out of me. I don't condone animal cruelty of any kind but cruelty and crime against other humans should be at the top of the food chain BAR NONE.

How in the world can anybody agree with a word of that garbage? If Vick had harmed a human, then that's the crime he'd be punished for. He apparently committed a felony. I don't care if it's Grand Larceny, shoplifting, or whatever. If he's guilty, then he needs to be punished. Plain and simple.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: imya_huckleberry</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I think I'm in the same boat with Primetime. Why isn't there the same outrage over crimes against humans? Baffles the heck out of me. I don't condone animal cruelty of any kind but cruelty and crime against other humans should be at the top of the food chain BAR NONE. </div></div>

I guess part of it has to deal with him being a role model for so many kids out there .. it doesn't exactly look good when one of the most popular NFL players is an active participant in dogfighting.

I say ban him from the NFL and let him learn his lesson fair and simple.

Fight a dog go to jail, sale drugs to a kid get a slap on the wrist. Great system we got here, and I personally dislike Vick. I'm pulling for him to beat this though, it's a dog, he should be fined and forced to do community service and be barred from possessing dogs again.

WOW. I really can't believe you said that PVFAN. I agree that drug sales should be punished much greater than it is, but if he did cruel things such as mentioned in the indictment to animals anyone deserves time for that. That is not a person you want left out on the streets IMO. Plus, you do get into the issue of illegal gambling, and possible tax evasion.

how comical, wont cheer for a baseball player using steroids but cheer for a dude that bangs dogs heads into the ground. Ive heard it all.

people who sell drugs to kids deserve to go to jail AND people that abuse dogs deserve to go to jail too. Its like saying, why focus your efforts on Vick when you havent caught Bin Laden? Out of 260 million people, I think we can do both at the same time.

I know I'm in the minority on my opinion on this one. I dont cheer for Vick, what Vick does on the football field is genuine, what Bonds does is not. There both wrong, Bonds breaks the law, plays sports, Vick breaks the law and could go to jail. Domestic assault doesn't carry the same penalty as killing a dog, stop and think about that. Vick should be punished, but I think we should get our priorities straight.

I guess what I'm saying is, you dont see this type of outrage over Pac-Man Jones, (involved in shooting) or Ray Lewis, both men were allegedly involved in a murder. People dont line up on the streets to boo them.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mega</div><div class="ubbcode-body">how fukin comical, wont cheer for a baseball player using steroids but cheer for a dude that bangs dogs heads into the ground. Ive heard it all.
</div></div>

Comical? Almost as comical as you cheering for former Cane Ray Lews (up for murder) yet putting down a man up for killing a dog. Dog>Human? If convicted Vick should be punished accordingly.

There is a difference in just killing and animal, and abusing them and then senselessly killing them by cruel means.

During due process it will all come out. If Vick is found innocent then he should be allowed to play. Lewis was found innocent and is allowed to play.

A dog is not greater than a human. Senseless killings deserve time either way. Of course with human murder you generally get life, or close to it. With animals you get a couple of years. Big difference.

Um probably because Ray Lewis was innocent and the Atlanta DA forced a trial when they didnt even have a case. Same as the Duke Lacross thing. There was no case to be won yet the DA forced the issue.

I just think the penalty's for harming humans (domestic violence, assault, etc) should be higher than that of killing animals.

Im sure when someone goes to jail for murdering a person, they are going to get more time for that than murdering a dog.

PVFAN, the penalties are much stiffer. Its just that generally, some people who commit murder are actually sort of smart, and can figure out a way to get away with it (reasonable doubt). Most people who murder animals, and abuse them, generally isn't that smart in covering it up if they are caught by the law.

Assault and other crimes do not face penaltys similar to what Vick is facing.

You're not exactly right there. It depends upon the level of assault. 1st degree assault is much stiffer.

The sentence for a first degree offense is imprisonment for not more than 20 years and payment of a fine of not more than $30,000.

In 2nd degree assault if a persons uses a dangerous weapon AND inflicts substantial bodily harm the potential penalties are increased to not more than ten years and to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000.

And so forth and so on. It all depends upon the level, plus generally with upper level assault cases, those charged are rarely given a bond opportunity. Vick and the others were bonded. Plus, they are facing 3 charges that add up to the 6 year, and $350,000 fine maximum.

I'm not exactly wrong either, agreed?

Yeah, but spitting on someone shouldn't require 5 years in the clink either. Really you have to go to 4th degree assault or maybe 5th for a lesser penalty than Vick is facing combined on 3 charges.

Lets go another route, look how many replies, Vick's dog fighting has compared to the sudden death of Skip Prosser. Granted, Vick is a bigger name. It just amazes me, when OJ was found not guilty people rejoiced, Ray Lewis walked and you rarely hear the murder issue brought up, why is it that if Vick does happen to walk I dont think he'll be given the same treatment. People are obsessed over animals, espeically cats and dogs. They treat them as humans in many cases, thus this result. I'm just saying in the end their animals, not humans. My family owns some goats, recently 4 dogs killed our goats, if we go kill these dogs (which legally we can) you wont see an outroar like Vick is having.

Theres a big difference there. If you did go kill them, I assume you will do it by gun, relatively humanely. Your not gonna electrocute them, or hang them or drop them head first from 20 ft in the air. You also aren't training them to fight, or betting on them either.

You do still hear people talk about OJ getting away with murder. Not every one rejoiced. Mainly just the minority communities for the most part, and really probably not half of them.

Ray walked after a trial that didn't really have great evidence on him. The OJ verdict is a far greater injustice than the Ray Lewis case.

Plus, if Vick is proven innocent, I am sure you are right. His reputation is ruined. Of course, he may come clean, and if so, you can look to Kobe for someone drug through the ringers and has started to rebuild his endorsement opportunity and jersey sales, etc. Of course, also, none of those other mentioned were facing federal charges. Something that results in a guilty verdict 95% of the time.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My family owns some goats, recently 4 dogs killed our goats, if we go kill these dogs (which legally we can) you wont see an outroar like Vick is having. </div></div>

If those dogs are anyone's pets, it is a felony in the state of VA to kill them, either on your property, public property, private property (fairly recent new law).

Kobe was up for Rape, (no case) yet he was allowed to work and do his job, something Vick will probably be not allowed to do. Kobe up for rape and works Vick let dogs fight and cant work. Dogs are killed everyday (yes humanley) but they are still killed everyday. Go to a slaughther house, and tell me thats humane. This along with cockfighing has been going on forever, and it will never stop. Were not talking about 101 dalmations here there pitbulls, there vicous animals by nature. I dont understand why people would want to go to a dog fight or cock fight for that matter but I know plenty that do, (cock fights dont know any dog fighters) and they treat it as a sport and gamble on it. I've turned down guys trying to get me to go, it's not my thing but these guys love it. It's their animal they bought it, they trained it, they can do what they want with it. Thats my opinion anyway.

Thats a dumb law then, a very dumb law. Were out $100 for each goat because some dog owner cant keep their dogs in line, and there is no way to find out whose dogs they are.

Out of curiousity whats the penalty for your animal going onto anothers property and killing their livestock?

I'd say it's the same as most property loss statutes, maybe add in some running-at-large...
Would have to look it up to know - there likely is one on the books. Have no idea if it's a felony or misdeanor.
If you found the owners and they're homeowners I'd recommend filing a claim on their insurance (if they didn't pay for them outright).

You are supposed to pay for average auction price (going rate or what not) that the livestock is worth if your pet kills another persons livestock.

My grandfather had this happen with one of his dogs a couple of years ago before he passed. A neighbor accused his dogs of doing it, and yes one was a stray my Pa had taken in so it may have, but I doubt the other did. He had to pay for 3 goats I believe.

Thats similar to somebody coming into your hosue to rob you and you end up killing them to protect whats yours only to end up charged with murder.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thats similar to somebody coming into your hosue to rob you and you end up killing them to protect whats yours only to end up charged with murder. </div></div>

No - you'd have to catch the dogs in the act of killing the goats for those two scenarios to equate. Going out and hunting them down after the fact is a little different than killing someone in the act of harming your life and home.

If you hunt someone down after they rob you, then it IS murder.

We have people who saw the dogs killing the goats. Those dogs endangered our livelyhood, at $100 a goat that wasn't a cheap scenario. FWIW, we didn't kill the dogs.

Found that law you asked about:
(as it reads, the dog has to be found in the act for killing it to be 'ok', with the exception of animal control through the court system)

3.1-796.116 Dogs killing, injuring or chasing livestock or poultry.
It shall be the duty of any animal control officer or other officer who may find a dog in the act of killing or injuring livestock or poultry to kill such dog forthwith whether such dog bears a tag or not. Any person finding a dog committing any of the depredations mentioned in this section shall have the right to kill such dog on sight as shall any owner of livestock or his agent finding a dog chasing livestock on land utilized by the livestock when the circumstances show that such chasing is harmful to the livestock. Any court shall have the power to order the animal control officer or other officer to kill any dog known to be a confirmed livestock or poultry killer, and any dog killing poultry for the third time shall be considered a confirmed poultry killer. The court, through its contempt powers, may compel the owner, custodian, or harborer of the dog to produce the dog.

Any animal control officer who has reason to believe that any dog is killing livestock or poultry shall be empowered to seize such dog solely for the purpose of examining such dog in order to determine whether it committed any of the depredations mentioned herein. Any animal control officer or other person who has reason to believe that any dog is killing livestock, or committing any of the depredations mentioned in this section, shall apply to a magistrate of the county, city or town wherein such dog may be, who shall issue a warrant requiring the owner or custodian, if known, to appear before a general district court at a time and place named therein, at which time evidence shall be heard. If it shall appear that the dog is a livestock killer, or has committed any of the depredations mentioned in this section, the district court shall order that the dog be (i) killed immediately by the animal control officer or other officer designated by the court or (ii) removed to another state which does not border on the Commonwealth and prohibited from returning to the Commonwealth. Any dog ordered removed from the Commonwealth which is later found in the Commonwealth shall be ordered by a court to be killed immediately.


3.1-796.118 Compensation for livestock and poultry killed by dogs.
Any person who has any livestock or poultry killed or injured by any dog not his own shall be entitled to receive as compensation the fair market value of such livestock or poultry not to exceed $400 per animal or $10 per fowl, provided that: (i) the claimant has furnished evidence within sixty days of discovery of the quantity and value of the dead or injured livestock and the reasons the claimant believes that death or injury was caused by a dog; (ii) the animal control officer or other officer shall have been notified of the incident within seventy-two hours of its discovery; and (iii) the claimant first has exhausted his legal remedies against the owner, if known, of the dog doing the damage for which compensation under this section is sought. Exhaustion shall mean a judgment against the owner of the dog upon which an execution has been returned unsatisfied.

Local jurisdictions may by ordinance waive the requirements of (ii) or (iii) or both provided that the ordinance adopted requires that the animal control officer has conducted an investigation and that his investigation supports the claim. Upon payment under this section the local governing body shall be subrogated to the extent of compensation paid to the right of action to the owner of the livestock or poultry against the owner of the dog and may enforce the same in an appropriate action at law.

Vick's in trouble for much more than killing animals. If you read the indictment, you wouldn't believe most of it. It was told today that if he plead Guilty, future charges wouldn't be brought, but if he plead Not Guilty he would have a ton of other charges dropped on him in the blink of an eye. I'm just waiting for Marcus to be mentioned in this. If they're as close as most brothers, there's no way he wasn't involved or known about it.

Nike Suspends Vick Contract Without Pay

FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. - Nike suspended its lucrative contract with Michael Vick on Friday, while Reebok took the unprecedented step of stopping sales of his No. 7 jersey.

Facing protests from animal-rights groups, Nike announced it was suspending Vick's endorsement deal without pay, as well as halting sales of Vick-related shoes and other products at its retail stores.

Reebok, the official uniform supplier of the NFL, said it would stop selling Vick's replica jersey at retail stores and through its Web site.

The moves came one day after the Atlanta Falcons quarterback pleaded not guilty to federal dogfighting charges in Richmond, Va.

"Nike is concerned by the serious and highly disturbing allegations made against Michael Vick, and we consider any cruelty to animals inhumane and abhorrent," Nike spokesman Dean Stoyer said in a statement.

Since Vick has not been convicted of any crime, Nike left open the door to resume its business relationship with the star player if he's acquitted.

"We do believe that Michael Vick should be afforded the same due process as any citizen in the United States," according to the statement. "Therefore, we have not terminated our relationship."

Vick is barred from the Falcons' training camp while the league investigates his actions for possible violations of its new personal conduct policy.

Although Reebok does not have a business relationship with Vick, the Massachusetts-based company serves as the official supplier of apparel and equipment to all 32 NFL teams. Through that deal, it holds the coveted rights to sell jerseys at the retail level.

"We just find the allegations very upsetting and very disturbing," Reebok spokeswoman Denise Kaigler said. "While this is just the beginning of the legal process and we know that it has to have time to run its course, we felt that making this decision now was important and the right things to do."

Reebok said it also was willing to take back any unsold Vick jerseys that are returned by retail outlets.

Kaigler said she already had received numerous e-mails in support of the decision. Even though numerous NFL players have run afoul of the law, this is the first time Reebok has stopped sales of an individual jersey.

"The number of e-mails and statements we're getting from consumers was pretty telling about how disturbing people find these allegations to be," Kaigler said.

I'm totally on board with you PVFAN. It's just a matter of common sense in my opinion. I'm all for punishing the dude but this thing has gotten way out of hand. I've known police officers who fight chickens and nobody thought it was that big of a deal. When did crimes against dogs become more important that crimes against humans in our society. It seems all messed up to me. Wrong is wrong and fighting dogs is wrong but it is not as bad as harming another human being in an inhumane way. It doesn't matter to me if I'm in the minority on the issue. I think of a dog as any other animal. I've seen kids pull the legs off of grasshoppers or take the tail off of a firefly aka lightning bug and adults be around and not say a word. Should everyone get locked up for that?

Huck/PV, the difference between the kids messing around with bugs or someone shooting a dog that's killing their goats is this: Vick and his kennel raised these dogs inhumanely from pups for the sole purpose of bloodsport. It's not that these were pets and this was a hobby...it can't be dressed up like that just to make it look better. These were animals raised and trained to react in a violent fashion towards anything in it's path, including humans.

It's not a thing of it's their animal, they can do what they want with it, if in this particular case they're trying to encourage their already violent nature. It's a danger to society to breed these animals to be violent because one never knows when they're going to snap and attack a human. Vick may have not hurt a human being directly, but he would be responsible if one of his dogs attacked a person and killed/hurt them.

So two things--human safety and the inhumane treatment of the dogs itself are good enough reasons to make sure that Vick goes to prison, not just a fine or slap on the wrist. Defending Vick's actions in any shape, form, or fashion is just despicable in my book. He may have not even actively done any of this, but he condoned it and enabled others who were at this house in Bad News to have a place to stage these fights and abuse these dogs...regardless of their violent nature. It's a copout excuse to be apologetic towards this due to police officers or any other type of person getting away with cock fighting which is also wrong. Just because people get by with it doesn't make it wrong and punishable to the fullest extent of the law.

Interesting perspective in a post I found on the falcons team website:

FALCONS_777:
Peta and all the far left wing kook groups want Vick banned from football, these are the people who know nothing about football in general and they are made up of the homosexual crowd, the tree huggers, the Transexuals, the men with pink hair and nipple rings, The communists ######s who hate America and therefore hate pro sports which is one of the true American enterprises.

Meanwhile conservative whites like myself, those of us who know a little about American history stand with Vick because we are instilled with a little concept the liberals do not have.........COMMON SENSE !! Vick deserves his day in court and whatever the verdict turns out to be, the left wing kooks have once again revealed themselves, I just hope the black community will now see that the democrat liberal left wing media is just as happy and willing to prematurely fry a Black man as any other if it fits their agenda !!!!!

1. this has nothing to do with football, football shouldnt even be mentioned in the first paragraph

2. this is not a political situation and has nothing to do with what party you are, whether youre gay, or if youre a woman with a richard.

3. Why do you have to be conservative and white to know about history. Sounds about as racist as it gets.

4. Of course Vick deserves his day in court, most people are rational enough to agree with that but when dogs are found on your property the finger is going to be pointed at you so he better have a good case for himself because he has to win in court plus a court of opinion.(Think OJ Simpson)

5. There is no morality in killing dogs regardless of what color you are or how you vote. This isnt a racial issue so dont make it one.

You could call this an interesting perspective if you want people to see the ignorance and biggotry that still resides in the deep south. Outside of that, its a lame attempt to be factual.

A lot of redneck bigots yell "COMMON SENSE" when they feel their over the top perspective makes perfect sense in some weird, twisted way. That's not an interesting perspective, that's the Klan's perspective. You sure that's from the Falcons site or did you go to David Duke's by mistake?

Just go to their message board...read it yourself. I didn't say it was a perspective I endorsed. It is simply another perspective. What makes a leftist view hold any more weight or significance? Why did you use redneck and bigot in a context as if they were one in the same?

Old Cane went a little far with his perspective. I'm with you on this James.