Oh, Red - You are gonna LOVE this!!!

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:06 am

I am FURIOUS!!!

Vick's Prison Sentence May Be Shortened

Posted Jan 5th 2008 5:15PM by JJ Cooper

Filed under: Falcons, Atlanta, NFL Police Blotter, Featured Stories

Michael Vick might be back sooner than we think.

Humane Society and PETA picketers better keep those posters ready, as there's a chance Michael Vick could be back on the field for the 2009 season.

Yahoo! Sports is reporting that the Falcons quarterback could end up serving as few as 12 months of his 23 month sentence thanks to his entry into a drug rehab program in prison. By connecting the dots, the story speculates that Vick could be back in the NFL for the 2009 season, as he would likely wrap up his sentence early next year.

Apparently the drug treatment program, which is only in place at the Leavenworth, Kan., federal penitentiary, allows inmates to wipe off up to a year of their sentence if they complete the drug treatment program. Vick has tested positive for marijuana, which ended up likely adding time to his prison sentence. But now that same drug test might end up helping him cut time from his current sentence.

Vick has to be in the program for a year, which apparently hasn't begun, so he's likely looking at a February or March 2009 release.

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/01/ ... 0000000001

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:03 am

Boy LD, you saw me coming on this one, huh? You know what this boils down to?

"It was just a dog"

That's what people said from the beginning and that's the whole problem IMO.

If this no account had molested somebody's kid or even killed someone, things would be completely different but as long as people feel "It was just a dog" this is what will happen. It's not the pot clause that messed this up, it's the people. Here's a prime example of what's wrong with humans in this country.

I'm just as furious as you are, LD, but I thank you for posting this.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:31 pm

Gulp...

He still has to face federal charges though, right?

There's hope, right? For justice, right?

:-5

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 pm

valerie;754433 wrote: Gulp...

He still has to face federal charges though, right?

There's hope, right? For justice, right?

:-5

He is currently serving time on the Federal Charges. Supposedly, he is still facing State charges, but one wonders if we will ever see that happen.

suzycreamcheese · Post by **suzycreamcheese** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:05 pm

has he been banned from owning animals now?

I hope so

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:09 pm

suzycreamcheese;754521 wrote: has he been banned from owning animals now?

I hope so

I don't believe so. He can adopt a dog at the local shelter on his way home from jail if he likes.

He got more time for the dogfighting part of the crime then he did for physically killing any dogs. (Dog fighting is illegal not for the abuse of the dogs but more for the gambling that goes along with it.)

suzycreamcheese · Post by **suzycreamcheese** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:58 pm

LilacDragon;754522 wrote: I don't believe so. He can adopt a dog at the local shelter on his way home from jail if he likes.

He got more time for the dogfighting part of the crime then he did for physically killing any dogs. (Dog fighting is illegal not for the abuse of the dogs but more for the gambling that goes along with it.)

:mad::-2:(

I would have thought that would be just as, if not more important to ban him from keeping animals, as the punishment part of his sentance.

Wow. What a bastard

firebird · Post by **firebird** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 7:15 pm

First off, I am not saying dogfighting is right because I have a fondness for animals myself. But 23 months seems pretty long when there have been many other athletes who have committed crimes against humans, as bad if not worse than dogfighting, and gotten and served less time. Money and fame can by you out of almost anything!

WonderWendy3 · Post by **WonderWendy3** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 7:22 pm

firebird;754588 wrote: First off, I am not saying dogfighting is right because I have a fondness for animals myself. But 23 months seems pretty long when there have been many other athletes who have committed crimes against humans, as bad if not worse than dogfighting, and gotten and served less time. Money and fame can by you out of almost anything!

You've got a point there Firebird, look at OJ Simpson, he murdered 2 people and still walking the streets....:rolleyes:

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 7:40 pm

I don't believe so. He can adopt a dog at the local shelter on his way home from jail if he likes.

That is very wrong, he should not be allowed to have an animal.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:24 pm

firebird;754588 wrote: First off, I am not saying dogfighting is right because I have a fondness for animals myself. But 23 months seems pretty long when there have been many other athletes who have committed crimes against humans, as bad if not worse than dogfighting, and gotten and served less time. Money and fame can by you out of almost anything!

I see no difference. An animals's blood and pain is no less than that of a human.

firebird · Post by **firebird** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:35 pm

RedGlitter;754596 wrote: I see no difference. An animals's blood and pain is no less than that of a human.

That is a matter of opinion with which I do not agree. I happen to feel that humans deserve a little more importance - we are the top of the food chain!

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:49 pm

firebird;754598 wrote: That is a matter of opinion with which I do not agree. I happen to feel that humans deserve a little more importance - we are the top of the food chain!

It is opinion, and one I and many don't share. If Sheryl hasn't told you yet, I'm the resident animal defender or crackpot, take your choice and I just don't see any evidence for thinking an animal's pain is somehow less than the pain I would feel. We can disagree.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:52 pm

And I seriously doubt that in a lot of places on the planet we are on the

top of the food chain, anyway...

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm

firebird;754598 wrote: That is a matter of opinion with which I do not agree. I happen to feel that humans deserve a little more importance - we are the top of the food chain!

That is a healthy attitude to have.

At the rate tht humans are multiplying, killing off other species that are living in areas that humans feel the need to develop, and continue to view other creatures as less important and therefore expendable, in another hundred years or so, we may just be the only living beings on the planet.

That is, if we haven't become the bottom of the foodchain. Or just flat out killed each other.

firebird · Post by **firebird** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:13 pm

RedGlitter;754601 wrote: It is opinion, and one I and many don't share. If Sheryl hasn't told you yet, I'm the resident animal defender or crackpot, take your choice and I just don't see any evidence for thinking an animal's pain is somehow less than the pain I would feel. We can disagree.

I guess we can agree to disagree.

valerie;754603 wrote: And I seriously doubt that in a lot of places on the planet we are on the

top of the food chain, anyway...

We are animals in our own right. We are the most developed animals on the face of the earth. Hence - we are at the top of the foodchain. Properly prepared we as humans can take on anything.

LilacDragon;754608 wrote: That is a healthy attitude to have.

At the rate tht humans are multiplying, killing off other species that are living in areas that humans feel the need to develop, and continue to view other creatures as less important and therefore expendable, in another hundred years or so, we may just be the only living beings on the planet.

That is, if we haven't become the bottom of the foodchain. Or just flat out killed each other.

Even with the rate of population rapidly rising, the majority still inhabit a very small portion of the world. Yes at the rate of world hate rising - we could kill each other off with the slip of a finger attached to an idiot with too much power.

With that being said, I am offended that in just a few post that you all have decided that I do not like animals or think that the environment is very important.

All I did was state the simple fact that we are at the top of the proverbial food chain and that I happen to value humans over animals.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:04 pm

firebird;754613 wrote:

With that being said, I am offended that in just a few post that you all have decided that I do not like animals or think that the environment is very important.

All I did was state the simple fact that we are at the top of the proverbial food chain and that I happen to value humans over animals.

I'm not sure about us "all" but I haven't decided you don't like animals and I don't know your views on the environment so how did you come to that notion?

It's a proven fact that there are animals out there who possess incredible intelligence, crows and dolphins being among the top. I have never cared about who is at the top of the food chain and have never used that as an argument as to why I'm better than all other species that walk the earth. It just does nothing for me.

All I said was that I didn't feel an animal's pain was less than my own. I also don't feel that I am better than other species. I think that's a dangerous idea and is the prime reason the ecosystem is messed up. Well, that and greed. You certainly can value humans over animals, it's your option and I don't think anyone here would deny you that. But if we're going to talk about being offended, it should also be okay that I am offended that a dog killer gets less than a murderer of humans. Except I've had these arguments on here before ad nauseum so I don't bother getting offended anymore.

I'm glad we can agree to disagree.

suzycreamcheese · Post by **suzycreamcheese** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:48 am

I dont see the fact that some people get away with murder to have anything to do with whether it is wrong to breed dogs just to fight each other to death for other peoples enjoyment. Id even say that in some ways, a murder if its a crime of passion is more understandable than someone going out of their way and getting pleasure out of watching and facilitating the suffering of others, be that human or animal.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:43 pm

"We are animals in our own right. We are the most developed animals on the face of the earth. Hence - we are at the top of the foodchain. Properly prepared we as humans can take on anything"

I don't think we are at the top of the food chain as a species. Put

in situations with each being in its' "natural state" then no, we

won't make it against the larger predators. That is what a food chain

is to ME.

That we have developed language and tools to use against other animals

might get us farther, but it also only requires that we be responsible

with our position, and the vast majority of us certainly don't seem to be.

Be very wary of lumping me in with "you all." I didn't decide anything

about you not liking animals or thinking the environment wasn't important.

I was simply speaking to your statements about the food chain.