Michael Vick hit with 23 month prison sentence

Status
Not open for further replies.

TONX

Distinguished Air Superiority
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Michael Vick was sentenced to 23 months in prison Monday for his role in a dogfighting conspiracy that involved gambling and killing pit bulls.

The suspended Atlanta Falcons quarterback could have been sentenced up to five years by District Judge Henry E. Hudson. Vick was dressed in a black-and-white striped prison suit and apologized to the court and his family.

The rest here:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7544302?MSNHPHCP&GT1=10734
 
Wow... I didn't think he was going to get hit that bad.

Oh well.
 
This is pretty awesome, really. Watching guys on ESPN read announcements off Blackberry's and what not.

I have no opinion on it, he probably shouldn't have done it but if the two years are for dogfighting then that's a bit stiff considering manslaughter can get you less.
 
RubxQub said:
Wow... I didn't think he was going to get hit that bad.

Oh well.
Why not? He plead last and his buddies got 18 and 21 months. 23 months is totally within reason since the people that cut the first deals get the lighter sentences.
 
Can he get released in less time? Like 11.5 for good behavior? 23 months is a pretty long term if served in full. I hope he brought some good books.
 
Thats it?!?!?!??!?!?!

I hate our fucking legal system... That ignorant scumbag should go to jail for at least 5 years.

Asshole that he is....
 
Triumph said:
Why not? He plead last and his buddies got 18 and 21 months. 23 months is totally within reason since the people that cut the first deals get the lighter sentences.
I suppose, but I figured his status as a QB for an NFL team would have played into the equation at some point.

Perhaps it still will while he's servinig.
 
BigGreenMat said:
Can he get released in less time? Like 11.5 for good behavior? 23 months is a pretty long term if served in full. I hope he brought some good books.
Nope. He plead to the Feds- he has to serve 85% of his sentence.
 
BenjaminBirdie said:
As long as he's forced to fight other inmates regularly and violently, that's fine.

At the risk of sounding racist, it'd be a sort of poetic justice if he were picked out to be hung for losing those fights.
 
Triumph said:
Why not? He plead last and his buddies got 18 and 21 months. 23 months is totally within reason since the people that cut the first deals get the lighter sentences.

Not only that, he got caught w/weed in his system.
 
aparisi2274 said:
Thats it?!?!?!??!?!?!

I hate our fucking legal system... That ignorant scumbag should go to jail for at least 5 years.

Asshole that he is....

I dunno, I'd think that's a long sentence for tax evasion on gambling profits.
 
My reply from the NFL thread:

I wasn't here during the whole debacle, I'll just say people and their overly affectuous feelings for animals sort of sicken me. Maybe my (complete) family is different but an animal is just that to us... an animal. The idea of loving one enough to dress it, kiss it, and mourn over the loss of one is completely mind boggling to me. I definitely don't condone Vick's actions, but for people to be equally angered by the murdering of an animals (And in many cases more angered) then the murdering of a human is idiotic IMO. It's definitely a barbaric act and one he should be punished heavily for, but peoples emotions towards the situation is just a tad to much.

I also can't help but wonder how little of a story this might have been if the actions were to an animal that people do typically not relate with, an example being cock fighting. I bet the whole debacle would have flown over quite quickly...

I'd just like to add that I am perfectly fine with the sentencing, the barbaric act deserved strict punishment. I just hate the fact that a person who commits manslaughter, rape, etc can potentially be given a lighter sentence to someone who killed animals. The court system needs a serious overhaul.
 
Futureman said:
No one does that. You're delusional.

Yes, because some Animal Activist have not committed terrorist acts and murder in animals defense.

I am basing my statements on observations I have made over the years. I see friends that are mourning to the point of depression over the loss of a dog, they are honestly as sad and depressed as I would potentially be for the loss of a close (human) family member. The fact that a dog fighting case saw more attention then the dozens of killings, rapes, and molestation s that probably happened through the course of this whole debacle says a whole lot about our country.

Big-E said:
If you had a pet that was with you for 12 years and you don't morn its loss then I am sorry but you have issues.

I had a dog that died after 9 years, and it was definitely a sad occurrence. But there is no way in hell that I am going to mourn to the point of depression over it.
 
harSon said:
My reply from the NFL thread:



I'd just like to add that I am perfectly fine with the sentencing, the barbaric act deserved strict punishment. I just hate the fact that a person who commits manslaughter, rape, etc can potentially be given a lighter sentence to someone who killed animals. The court system needs a serious overhaul.
Yeah, I don't think anyone here is saying that. Now, your stance of "an animal is just an animal" I don't agree with. My dog is my companion and friend- no I don't dress him up or kiss him, but you can bet your ass I'll mourn his passing.

I think there's a fundamental difference in how Black America (not saying your black, I don't know you from the next guy just an observation) and White America look at pets. Black people are more likely to view dogs as guard animals and not as part of the family, and white people the opposite. I'm not passing judgment or saying one way is the right way, but I think that cultural difference is a big part of the reason the divide on this is such a black/white thing.

Also, there are the crazy Libertopians like JayDubya who think pets are pieces of property with no rights and it doesn't matter if you beat your dog every day of it's life, because it would be just like beating a couch or dresser or something. lolbertarians.

hArson said:
Yes, because some Animal Activist have not committed terrorist acts and murder in animals defense.

I am basing my statements on observations I have made over the years. I see friends that are mourning to the point of depression over the loss of a dog, they are honestly as sad and depressed as I would potentially be for the loss of a close (human) family member. The fact that a dog fighting case saw more attention then the dozens of killings, rapes, and molestation s that probably happened through the course of this whole debacle says a whole lot about our country.
Oh come on, if it was some random fucker that did this no one would care. This was a big deal because of WHO did it, not what was done.
 
Triumph said:
Yeah, I don't think anyone here is saying that. Now, your stance of "an animal is just an animal" I don't agree with. My dog is my companion and friend- no I don't dress him up or kiss him, but you can bet your ass I'll mourn his passing.

I think there's a fundamental difference in how Black America (not saying your black, I don't know you from the next guy just an observation) and White America look at pets. Black people are more likely to view dogs as guard animals and not as part of the family, and white people the opposite. I'm not passing judgment or saying one way is the right way, but I think that cultural difference is a big part of the reason the divide on this is such a black/white thing.

Also, there are the crazy Libertopians like JayDubya who think pets are pieces of property with no rights and it doesn't matter if you beat your dog every day of it's life, because it would be just like beating a couch or dresser or something. lolbertarians.

I'm half black :P Although I was pretty much raised 'black' if that makes any sense at all.

starchild excalibur said:
And this describes exactly how many people in society?

It was in response to his statement that "No one does that."
 
Karakand said:
PETA hailed the sentence as a victory for humanity while hundreds of Americans went hungry and were without homes.

Everybody has a difference fight. Their fight is animals.
 
Triumph said:
Also, there are the crazy Libertopians like JayDubya who think pets are pieces of property with no rights and it doesn't matter if you beat your dog every day of it's life, because it would be just like beating a couch or dresser or something. lolbertarians.

Same principle as flag burning. Is it YOUR flag?
 
JayDubya said:
Same principle as flag burning.

Is it YOUR flag?
Is MY flag breathing? Does it whimper when I pour gasoline on it? Does it cry and flop around trying to put the fire out after I light it?

I mean, fucking DUH.
 
Triumph said:
Is MY flag breathing? Does it whimper when I pour gasoline on it? Does it cry and flop around trying to put the fire out after I light it?

I mean, fucking DUH.

There is no practical, logical difference. Just emotional rhetoric.
 
Triumph said:
I think there's a fundamental difference in how Black America (not saying your black, I don't know you from the next guy just an observation) and White America look at pets. Black people are more likely to view dogs as guard animals and not as part of the family, and white people the opposite. I'm not passing judgment or saying one way is the right way, but I think that cultural difference is a big part of the reason the divide on this is such a black/white thing..


I disagree with this statement. The correct statement would be, "the black people that white america talks about and shows on TV view dogs as guard animals."

There's plenty of white people that fight dogs too, but the white media isn't going to say to much about that (except CNN of course).

And there's plenty of black people that view their dogs as true pets and not guard dogs.
 
Futureman said:
You actually condone that? That if someone owns a dog, it's THEIR dog and they can beat if it they want?

Let it go. He will always believe his way is the right way and nothing is going to change that. Its best to let it go or you will just get yourself upset.
 
Futureman said:
You actually condone that? That if someone owns a dog, it's THEIR dog and they can beat if it they want?

Would I think they were an asshole? Sure. Same way I'd think someone was an asshole for disrespecting the flag by setting it on fire.

A domestic animal is property in every legal sense.
 
JayDubya said:
There is no practical, logical difference. Just emotional rhetoric.
The fact that the dog is a living animal that I have taken the responsibility of caring for and the flag is something that I bought at Family Dollar and is made of cheap fabric = no practical difference?

I hope that you don't own pets and don't reproduce.
 
Triumph said:
The fact that the dog is a living animal that I have taken the responsibility of caring for and the flag is something that I bought at Family Dollar and is made of cheap fabric = no practical difference?

I hope that you don't own pets and don't reproduce.

I think he is a Constituionalist.
 
Triumph said:
I hope that you don't own pets

Actually I love animals and I'm great with them. Doesn't mean they have rights.

... and don't reproduce.

Too late, sorry. Thank goodness she has rights, though.

* * *

Any particular reason you felt like picking a fight with me this morning, Triumph? Just PM me or something.

Vick broke laws, he belongs in jail, end of story. Some of those laws shouldn't exist, yeah (gambling should never be illegal, animals are property) but he should have known better and he no doubt didn't pay taxes on his illegal source of income.
 
mckmas8808 said:
I think he is a Constituionalist.
He's a Libertarian.

JayDubya said:
Too late, sorry. Thank goodness she has rights, though.

* * *

Any particular reason you felt like picking a fight with me this morning, Triumph? Just PM me or something.
...the right to play with lead painted toys?

I'm fucking with you, old fella.
 
JayDubya said:
Actually I love animals and I'm great with them. Doesn't mean they have rights.

I don't think it has anything to do with animal rights. I think anyone with that propensity for cruelty against another living thing should be locked away for a long fucking time.
 
JayDubya said:
There is no practical, logical difference. Just emotional rhetoric.

Sure there is a practical, logical difference, especially if you look at it from the perspective that our rights are inherent in our status as living beings. Every living being has a basic right to existence (so long as that existence isn't threatening another being and of course with the usual disclaimers about hunting for survival or population control). Dogs, being living beings certainly have fewer rights than US citizens in our society but Vick cannot unilaterally decide that the dogs deserve to die for no other reason than that they're not as good at fighting. The principle that the dogs deserve an assumption of life trumps the claim that the dogs were Vick and his associates property.
 
BenjaminBirdie said:
I don't think it has anything to do with animal rights. I think anyone with that propensity for cruelty against another living thing should be locked away for a long fucking time.

Well that tends to be one argument, that people willing to do that to a dog are sociopaths and would inevitably do that to other people.
 
Fuck this.

I believe in animal rights and I believe in harsh sentences for those acting against those that cannot protect themselves but I'm disturbed at how people who molest children get off with lighter sentences.
 
aparisi2274 said:
Thats it?!?!?!??!?!?!

I hate our fucking legal system... That ignorant scumbag should go to jail for at least 5 years.

Asshole that he is....

Seriously, they should've thrown the fucking book at him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom