I don’t watch football so I’ve never heard of the guy, but it’s assholes like him that make me despair for our species.
Vick case sheds light on dark world of dogfighting
No matter how Michael Vick’s indictment on charges of operating a dogfighting ring is resolved in court, allegations against the NFL star have forced mainstream America to confront the grisly image of canine death matches.
Law enforcement and animal-protection advocates who have participated in raids on the type of enterprises that the Atlanta Falcons quarterback and three other men are accused of running say the reality of the dogfighting underworld is even worse than most people can imagine.
They say seized dogs inevitably are euthanized, the plywood walls of the typical fighting ring are splattered with blood, and cruelty shrouds every aspect of the dog’s life.
“When you go to where these fights have happened, you’ll find a couple of dog corpses or a pit full of blood,” says Mack Dickinson, a Louisiana state trooper who heads that state’s dogfighting investigations. “We’ll open up their kennels, where they’ll put dogs after they’ve fought, and they’ll have blood all over the walls.”
Diane Jessup, a former Washington state animal control officer, says, “With dogs that don’t win, it’s not uncommon for them to be electrocuted, shot, hung or burned.”
“Let me at him!”
Even the US Senate got in on the condemnation.
[Senator Robert] Byrd, 89, said he would not prejudge the men’s guilt or innocence, but he left no doubts about his sentiments.
“I am confident that the hottest places in hell are reserved for the souls of sick and brutal people who hold God’s creatures in such brutal and cruel contempt,” he said.
“One is left wondering,” he said. “Who are the real animals: the creatures inside or outside the ring?”
And from another article, something I heard about on the radio this morning.
On April 25, Authorities seized 52 pit bulls from Vick’s Surry County property and also found equipment used in dogfighting operations including a “rape stand” used for forced breeding, treadmills, drugs to enhance fighting performance, and a blood-stained fighting pit.
Oddly, Vick’s website mentions nothing about all this. And then there’s this heartwarming story for those who are cat people.
29—and just because I have forgotten twice now, what attitude does chaining Vic in a cage with a brutilized dog reveal about one’s natural instincts towards violence. Funny to criticize something by advocating the same thing?
Dave, the storyline to watch for is this issue falling along racial lines. Vick has a large black following, as most think black quarterbacks have never gotten a fair shake in the NFL.
Already in Atlanta, the issue is straight down racial lines, with whites thinking he should already have been kicked off his team.
#9, I have sought professional help, 3x, but trust me, therapists are crazier than I am– I stay away from them sick folk.
But look at the irony. You are wishing lynching. Hmmm… is that a racist punishment? What about being civilized and giving him a prison sentence? You think you are better than he is?
Put yourself in the mind of the dog. He doesn’t know anything but wanting to kill another dog in a fight. It is like the scorpion that asks the fox to let him ride on his back while the fox swims across the river for him. The fox states the obvious that he is a scorpion and can kill him. The scorpion reasons that they would both drown if he did. The fox agrees. Midway between riverbanks the scorpion stings the fox. The fox, in his last breath, screams “why?” The scorpion states that it is in his nature. The dogs here were bred to have the nature of killing. You think that is bad but a higher consciousness has bred you to believe that you are an American, that you should kill other human beings if a president commands you. You see you can’t see yourself like the dog can’t see himself. Your response is typical of your awareness level. At your level you can’t see the whole picture. I can.
>>The dogs here were bred to have the nature of killing.
Nobody’s blaming the dogs.
They (or at least *I*) blame the fuckwads who breed them to have the nature of killing, then sit around watching them rip each others’ guts out for fun and profit.
>>that you should kill other human beings if a
>>president commands you
You may not have noticed, but most people think Dumbya is an asshole, and his trophy war is an abomination. He should send The Twins (his twins, not the Minnesota ones) over there for a while, to risk getting themselves blown to kingdom come, while the Iraqi parliament packs for trips to the Cote d’Azure and the Alps.
#34, what about the fuckwads who eat bacon? granted we don’t stand around to see pigs get slautered, we pay poor Mexican immigrants to do that. You can stand back and judge and (somewhat rightly) criticize their behaviour. But what about someone HIGHER THAN YOU that is watching and tolerating your inhumane treatement to pigs, cows, chickens? You don’t want to hear about that right? You want to be self-righteous but then turn around and make excuses about your own behaviour. Who out there that has commented on this post EATS MEAT? Go ahead, let me see how many contradict themselves.
As a fuckwad who eats (and loves) bacon, I try to eat organic, free-range stuff. And granted, being raised to be slaughtered for my Sunday brunch may not be the most rewarding life for a pig, but wtf are you gonna do? Life is a series of compromises.
On the other hand, I don’t sit around and watch pigs rip each other to shreds in my leisure time, and THEN carve them up for breakfast.
It’s the thought that counts. Most people either don’t know what goes on with farm animals, they are in denial about what goes on with farm animals, or they try to eat farm animals that have been treated humanely. They don’t revel in the carnage of animals tearing each other to bloody corpses, cheering and waving fistfuls of dollars hoping that their dog staggers to its death last.
That takes a very special kind of person. Maybe one that should be quarantined.
I won’t go so far as to say the Vick situation might have an upside. But when a famous/celebrity asshole is busted, it may have a trickle down effect onto the hordes of more anonymous assholes involved in betting on dogfights. This is also an opportunity for Nike (and Arthur Blank) to “just do it” and 86 Vick’s contract to make it clear that there are still a few things corporations won’t do to make a buck. Or at least not make that argument completely indefensible.
Also, on the issue of nature vs. nurture and fighting dogs. The reason Pit Bulls have become the poster dog for this problem is likely more because of their ability to take punishment then aggression traits that show up in some dogs of the breed. There may be some breeding for bad temperament, but I suspect most of the jag-offs doing this would not have the patience or the intellect to breed three generations of hot headed gerbils. Finding an large strong alpha dog and then subjecting it to brutal treatment which conditions the dog to believe (correctly) that any encounter with another dog will be a matter of life and death is all it really takes. All so that a group of hicks and Vicks jonesing for some blood sport betting can have a five minute adrenalin rush.
36&37==Ok, we all dissapprove of dog fighting, but do you also draw the line that it should be illegal as opposed to disreputable? How do you define FREEDOM then?
#16
Unfortunately, that is not true. People were/are in fact breeding dogs for their ability to fight and that is one of the acts of which Vick is accused.
#22
This is different than the Duke case. There is simply no way Vick could not have been aware that dog fighting was going on even if he did not personally breed or fight them. At the very least, he is guilty of complicity.
#26
> Whats really more cruel–humans playing professional football,…
That’s a silly argument.
A: Playing football is incredibly fun.
B: You have a choice (assuming you are talented enough)
C: You will get paid millions of dollars.
AFAIK, dogs get none of the above from fighting.
#28
> If it comes down to free choice-
> – – I could NOT GET my pit-bull mix to not fight other dogs==he loved it.
You are mistaking inbreed instinct with choice. Much like racing greyhounds will bolt after rabbits long after their career is over so to will an animal bred to fight. Professional athletes have a choice. Instead of football they could have decided to play baseball, soccer or any number of other sports. Yes, they did have a choice.
bobbo’s point that whether you feel that dog fighting is utterly reprehensible is a separate issue from whether you feel it should be illegal is a valid one. I have to say that on reflection I find it hard to disagree with him. I will say that criminal law (as opposed to Constitutional law) is about changing behavior and that behavior is dictated by society. Thus, clearly society has stated that they do not want to allow dog fighting and want to curb that behavior. Still, at the end of the day, this sort of activity is not hurting other citizens so whether it should be illegal is good question.
>>A: Playing football is incredibly fun.
Playing touch football with the other soccer dads may be incredibly fun, but professional football is more like a highly-paid bloodbath. What’s the career expectancy of an NFL player these days? And how much fun is it to be drooling away your life in a nursing home from the age of 35 on, once the brain damage finally lays you low?
>>Ok, we all dissapprove of dog fighting, but do
>>you also draw the line that it should be illegal
>>as opposed to disreputable?
Yep. There are gray areas, slippery slopes, and difficult dilemmas to deal with in many aspects of life, but this is not one of them.
How about tying down dogs and cats and cutting them open in public, charging “interested parties” admission to watch them die in conscious agony? Should that be legal? Cutting the feet off of horses and watching them stumble around on their bloody stumps until they die?
Dog fighting is not a “sport”, it’s not “fun”, it’s a perverted sadist’s wet dream.
41–I don’t know why but the horses walking on stumps got me going. Lets see, is there a difference in type as opposed to degree in cruelty for its own sake, versus a sporting event?
A sport is whatever anyone wants to call it and a non-sport is any activity someone doesn’t like, so thats not very analytical.
So–dog fights to an established winner as opposed to the death could be seperated from “cruelty alone.”
So, it is an interesting subject of “self awareness” – – how to seperate fast evisceration in a factory for the purposes of eating, versus the same evisceration for the pleasure of the public?? How many would actually pay for that? Whats the difference it the public would pay?
Any further ideas on when anyone’s values and preferences should be forced on others thru operation of law? I think I would vote for laws against cruelty for its own sake alone===so, I’m learning. Just need those good words from you’all with such sensibilities- – – the anti-FREEDOM crowd. ((Do you recognize that when you enforce your “values?”))
Bobbo – Well, they could cut the feet off of several horses, and bet on which one would stumble to its death first. That would make it a “sport” right? Competition, betting, all the key elements.
Face it, dude. There are some things that are vague, ambiguous, and difficult to determine. Whether or not dog fighting is despicable is NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS.
As to who would pay for the experience of seeing live animals eviscerated, I suppose it would be the same folks who “enjoy” going to dog fights. Not a lot, but there’s a profit to be made just about anywhere.
43—We have all agreed FROM THE START that such activities were despicable. Question is where, when, why do you make such value judgments that don’t involve humans, illegal?
Bobbo – Are you REALLY in favor of dog fighting, or is your job actually so much more boring than mine that you need to argue in favor of dog fighting?
Bobbo, the location of the exact line you draw may be subject to debate.
The fact that dogfighting is a sick, depraved “sport”, enjoyed by sadistic freaks who would probably rather be watching HUMANS do the same thing (fight to the death) is beyond dispute. Its SO FAR OVER THE LINE, I don’t even know why we’re having this discussion.
As an ambiguous libertarian, would you suggest legalizing betting on horses walking around on bloody stumps to see which one dies first? How about fighting to the death among the mentally retarded? Bet they could get some good action for the bookies with that “sport”.
45—I’m against dog fighting, cock fighting, transfat and preservatives in food, rodeo’s, animals confined to too small spaces, inhumane slaughtering and processing, unneeded animal experimentation, people with genetic defects breeding,child abuse, inadequate education, excessive drinking or drug useage, physician monopolization of medicine or even for profit medicine for that matter, excessive CEO compensation, to name a few that come immediately to mind. Which of the above should be illegal or just morally condemned and how we draw the line is of interest to me. And with enough urging, good folks like yourself and Mr Mustard will provide a line or two that I don’t come up with on my own. I find pleasure in that.
46—Debate, or more so discussion, is exactly what I’m after and you aren’t providing it beyond an ongoing outrage that assumes that unidentified line. I think the maiming of animals is cruelty and should be outlawed ((for various reasons not on point.)) But horses race all the time with shin splints and so forth so any of man’s involvement with animals beyond eating them raises cruelty issues to various degrees. But I don’t / cant force you into a discussion if all you want to do is assume its all depraved and argue the extremes when the discussion gains value only near the relevant.
PS–I like that ambiguous libertarian. We should all be more ambiguous and know why and be able to state the reasons when we are not?
#47 – Debate
If all I want to do is masturbate, I can look at porn. I like the debate too, but I often feel like your point of view is for the sake of it and not so much what you believe…
48–Yes, easy to feel cheated when someone responds they were only kidding or whatever===but I have never done that. And since you have mentioned it several times now, I can ony repeat I do believe what I post, but I post it “tongue in cheek” knowing I have a minority view. How that could lead you to think I don’t think what I post, is beyond me.
I would hope (but don’t really know) that you simply aren’t reading what I post closely enough ((beyond my typos)). Take this thread. Its not about cruelty to animals, its about what should be legal and illegal==I’m not taking a position, I’m asking a series of questions. “Liberals” get upset when conservatives tell them (us?) they can’t have abortions, but then turn right around and tell other people they cant fight dogs. So==can’t talk to a born again about their religious convictions, just trying to get eloquent liberals to discuss the same issue in a different setting. I don’t get any further. Funny how that happens?
What a racist idiot I am. Before I saw this article and its pic I ASSUMED this guy was white. Shows what I know!
I think Michael Vick should be allowed to play football this year. It will be fitting to see an animal loving defensive tackle end his career with a paralyzing hit to the spine.
Aw come on, Boboli. You’re just busting my balls right now.
I already agreed that somewhere, there’s a line, and the exact location of that line may be subject to debate.
However, there are some things that are so clearly waaaaaay off to one side or the other of the line that there’s no squabbling.
Betting on horses stumbling on bloody stumps, cutting open conscious dogs and cats to watch them die for fun and pleasure, and dogfighting are three such examples.
If you know a lot of horse owners who “race” their horses “all the time with shin splints”, I hope you’re not a betting man when it comes to the ponies. Nothing like a crippled nag to put a dent in your winnings.
#52, Mister Mustard,
However, there are some things that are so clearly waaaaaay off to one side or the other of the line that there’s no squabbling.
Because I have heard that argument used before to argue in favor of crap, it irritates me. Remember when pornography was banned? One Supreme Court Justice said something to the effect that’ I can’t define pornography, but I know it when I see it”. Or what about George Carlin’s seven words? When does speaking against the government become unpatriotic or traitorous?
I think bobbo is challenging the same thought process. So why is two dogs or cocks fighting wrong but putting so many chickens in a cage they can’t turn around and then clipping off the tips of their beaks so they can’t fight OK?
I find the very concept of dog or cock fighting revolting. If we are going to make fighting illegal though, shouldn’t we also look at how dogs, chickens, and other animals are treated in other ways.
On 38, since you asked. I’ll just go with…
“Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose,
Nothing don’t mean nothing honey if it ain’t free”-Janis Joplin
I don’t think this covers dogfighting. Actually, it’s Friday after five and I’m not even sure what Janis Joplin means by this. On the other hand, even on Fridays after five, thugs coercing dogs to kill each other seems to me to be a concrete straight forward qualifier for a seat on the board the League of Exceptional Bungholes.
Scythe Man, I never said that putting chickens in a cage and cutting off their beaks was OK. I eat free-range chickens.
What I SAID (try to focus on that, not what you’d like me to have said) is that there are some things that are so far beyond the pale that there’s no disputing that they’re evil. Dog fighting (and yes, cock fighting) are in that category.
If I wanted to have a wide-ranging general debate on ethics and where to draw “the line”, I would go back to college and take a class. Or write a letter to “The Ethicist” in the NYT Sunday Magazine.
I don’t.
So focus. Dog fighting is a federal felony. It SHOULD be a federal felony. It is evil. If this guy is guilty, he should get the rough end of the pineapple. There are a million things that are close to, on, or over “the line”. This is not one of them.
#53 – I think bobbo is challenging the same thought process. So why is two dogs or cocks fighting wrong but putting so many chickens in a cage they can’t turn around and then clipping off the tips of their beaks so they can’t fight OK?
I don’t know the answer. I don’t care. They may both be wrong. I am certain dog fighting is wrong only because the quality of our stewardship over our planet and the living things that dwell on the planet is the yardstick by which he measure the quality of our humanity.
By that, I think the chickens in the cage is wrong too… but the rich football guy wasn’t charged with raising chickens and I don’t think it is prudent to give a pass on dog fighting just because chickens are in a cage.
Those things aren’t related and one of them isn’t at issue. We are talking about dog fighting. If Bobbo wants to have a navel gazing deconstruction of human morality, complete with sidebars on semantics, he should have one… But this thread is about dog fighting.
And dog fighting is wrong.
#54 – I don’t think this covers dogfighting. Actually, it’s Friday after five and I’m not even sure what Janis Joplin means by this.
She didn’t mean anything by it, she just sang it.
Kris Kristopherson wrote it.
I don’t see a front page news problem here..
Waitress! I’ll have the stir-fry
OhFor, I should have remembered that. I like his lyrics, it has always surprised me that he cranked out so much good work in a short time, and then stopped. To keep this on topic, dogfighting still sucks.
56–On that subject, I am omphaloskeptic.
I missed the semantic argument. Took a while to guess – – do you mean everyone on the thread agrees dog fighting is wrong and I’m asking why should that make it illegal?
Thats not a semantic discussion at all, but discussing it further would be.