Michael Vick

[BIGIRISHMAN]

i'm sorry if this has already been done im new here, but i was wondering.. from a moral standpoint what are your thoughts on Vick? I believe he served his time and is on the right path but my friends tend to disagree, and also any thoughts on Goodells alleged nudging to the Eagles?

 

[GreatGolson]

this thread wouldve been packed 3 or 4 weeks ago. but its too close to the season now. but IMO i really dont care what he does as long as he puts up numbers for my fantasy team like he did last year

 

[BIGIRISHMAN]

Those thoughts reflect my own, but my a few of my friends or PETA type psychos you know the type, and then some of my die hard catholic friends believe he should be punished also, I believe he already was maybe im soft

 

[NDPhilly]

He's the man

 

[kmoose]

I think what he did was downright despicable. And I don't think he "deserved" another shot at the NFL. No one owed him anything. His "second chance" was not spending the rest of his life rotting in prison.

However, he appears to be remorseful for what he did, and seems to be getting his life in order. So I reserve final judgement on him, until I see if it lasts or if he gets tired of acting like he is a normal human being and goes back to his "gangster" ways.

 

[BIGIRISHMAN]

I don't think a relapse is out of the question, while he's a great talent i remember the"old" Michael Vick and i believe that persona may still lurk underneath this new one, but i also believe Andy Reid can keep him in check, only time will tell though

 

[kmoose]

but i also believe Andy Reid can keep him in check, only time will tell though

But the question was about Michael Vick. If Reid keeps him "in check", then that indicates that the guy is still a scumbag. He just has someone keeping him from acting on his scumbaggedness.

 

[greyhammer90]

I'm not a big punishment guy but...

He not only performed despicable acts on creatures that couldn't defend themselves, he did it over and over and over and over again. If he hadn't been caught he'd still be doing. Also, he wasn't doing it because of some mental issue or deep psychological disorder that he conducted with a secret shame. He did it for fun and profit with friends.
I know he's supposed to be a completely different person and if he is then good for him. But I'm not cheering for him, and I'm not impressed when someone sponsors him.

 

[The Polish Irishman]

I have more of a problem with Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth, and Ray Lewis playing in the league. All were involved in events that ended someone's life.

 

[irishfan]

I have more of a problem with Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth, and Ray Lewis playing in the league. All were involved in events that ended someone's life.

I've got no problem with Stallworth. He was an idiot for driving drunk, but he did stay at the scene after he hit the man, and pled guilty to manslaughter when his lawyers thought he could get off. He made one mistake, and immediately felt remorse and tried to make the situation better. It was a horrible thing, but it was honestly a mistake that could happen to a lot of people. He blew a .12 and was driving 50 mph in a 40. He hit a person who was not on a crosswalk. It was really a worst-case scenario thing.

Vick spent years with dogfighting. It was not a one-time thing, and he personally hanged or drowned multiple dogs who were not up to his fighting standards. I have way more of a problem with Vick.

I'm not trying to attack your opinion at all Polish as I've met dozens others who feel the same as you do, but I really find no comparison between hitting someone accidentally with your car, and hanging/drowning underachieving dogs, and financing a whole dogfighting team.

I also have two dogs so may be fairly baised lol.

 

[Carlyle Javar Holiday]

As long as he stays away from my dogs I could care less.

Dog fighting or not, he is a human being and served his time.

 

[UPMich_NDfan]

I've got no problem with Stallworth. He was an idiot for driving drunk, but he did stay at the scene after he hit the man, and pled guilty to manslaughter when his lawyers thought he could get off. He made one mistake, and immediately felt remorse and tried to make the situation better. It was a horrible thing, but it was honestly a mistake that could happen to a lot of people. He blew a .12 and was driving 50 mph in a 40. He hit a person who was not on a crosswalk. It was really a worst-case scenario thing.

Vick spent years with dogfighting. It was not a one-time thing, and he personally hanged or drowned multiple dogs who were not up to his fighting standards. I have way more of a problem with Vick.

I'm not trying to attack your opinion at all Polish as I've met dozens others who feel the same as you do, but I really find no comparison between hitting someone accidentally with your car, and hanging/drowning underachieving dogs, and financing a whole dogfighting team.

I also have two dogs so may be fairly baised lol.

^this, agree 100%. Reports said the guy basically committed suicide by walking out in traffic. Stallworth made the mistake of drinking and driving, anytime you do you run the risk of something bad occurring even if it's not your fault. But he did all the right things instead of making the situation totally worse by fleeing or spitting out excuses/pity party for himself.

Vick I have a hard time with, everything was just sickening...that being said if he stays clean I'm all for 2nd chances, but if he ever slips up I'd say the punishment be himself being tied up and tortured in the same manner, as should be the penalty for anyone convicted of this crime, that would put an end to it quickly!

Oh the fantasy temptation tho! I think I'm staying away...there is no way he can put up what Matthew Berry is calling for, is there?!

 

[ACamp1900]

My thoughts are that the "Free Mike Vick" crowd and the PETA crowd that wanted him to never play again are both ridiculous...

the guy committed multiple crimes... everyone gets up in arms about the dogs but if I understood the case his main charges were racketeering and otherwise...

the guy got what he deserved, plain and simple...

but, he also served his time and paid his debt in the eyes of the law... I don't like him nor do I feel he's a good guy... but I in no way think he should continue to be punished for something he already paid for.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I've got no problem with Stallworth. He was an idiot for driving drunk, but he did stay at the scene after he hit the man, and pled guilty to manslaughter when his lawyers thought he could get off. He made one mistake, and immediately felt remorse and tried to make the situation better. It was a horrible thing, but it was honestly a mistake that could happen to a lot of people. He blew a .12 and was driving 50 mph in a 40. He hit a person who was not on a crosswalk. It was really a worst-case scenario thing.

^this, agree 100%. Reports said the guy basically committed suicide by walking out in traffic. Stallworth made the mistake of drinking and driving, anytime you do you run the risk of something bad occurring even if it's not your fault. But he did all the right things instead of making the situation totally worse by fleeing or spitting out excuses/pity party for himself.

I know this was supposed to be about Vick (for the record, I have mixed feelings on Vick - he did something I can't understand, but I think he actually may have been over-punished), but I just wanted to chime in on Stallworth. Everything I have read about the guy aside from the accident seems to indicate he is a pretty intelligent, thoughtful guy.

There has been a lot of innuendo suggesting that he could have defended himself in a trial by showing that the man he hit was attempting to commit suicide, or at the very least equally culpable in his own death because he inexplicably stepped out in front of the vehicle. Stallworth decided to plea because he did not want the deceased's family to have to go through such a trial, feeling that they had been through enough.

The low-hanging fruit for media people and talk show caller-types was that he was let off the hook by the prosecutors because he was rich and famous athlete, but a minimal amount of digging would suggest that is a faulty assumption. In many ways, he has put the family of the deceased ahead of his own interests by not trying to defend himself, first in a court of law and later in the court of public opinion.

I'm not in any way trying to minimize the seriousness of drinking and driving, I just think in the particular instance of Stallworth there is a bit more to the story than is commonly acknowledged.

 

[GoldenDomer87]

You can disagree with Vick's punishment, but he did pay his debt to society. I don't like the guy, but I respect that he did his time.

I still think he sucks as a QB though.

 

[anarin]

I've got no problem with Stallworth. He was an idiot for driving drunk, but he did stay at the scene after he hit the man, and pled guilty to manslaughter when his lawyers thought he could get off. He made one mistake, and immediately felt remorse and tried to make the situation better. It was a horrible thing, but it was honestly a mistake that could happen to a lot of people. He blew a .12 and was driving 50 mph in a 40. He hit a person who was not on a crosswalk. It was really a worst-case scenario thing.

Vick spent years with dogfighting. It was not a one-time thing, and he personally hanged or drowned multiple dogs who were not up to his fighting standards. I have way more of a problem with Vick.

I'm not trying to attack your opinion at all Polish as I've met dozens others who feel the same as you do, but I really find no comparison between hitting someone accidentally with your car, and hanging/drowning underachieving dogs, and financing a whole dogfighting team.

I also have two dogs so may be fairly baised lol.

WOW! So dogfighting for money is worse then driving drunk and killing a person?

This shouldn't even be an argument, biased or not, your view is ridiculous

 

[greyhammer90]

WOW! So dogfighting for money is worse then driving drunk and killing a person?

This shouldn't even be an argument, biased or not, your view is ridiculous

I assume you will not be cheering for Michael Floyd this season. He was drunker than Stallworth and would have probably hit any person stepping recklessly into traffic had it happened to him.

If you think the two aren't the same because MF didn't accidentally run over a person then you are essentially hating Stallworth for being more unlucky than MF. Had Stallworth not been drunk he probably wouldn't have been at fault for the accident. IMO Stallworth's guilty of the same crime MF is, MF just got lucky.

 

[anarin]

You are going with what if's. Almost doesn't count unless it is with horse shoes, hand grenades.

Michael Floyd was hit with a DUI, not MANSLAUGHTER. I don't understand why this is even an argument?

 

[Rocket89]

Like an English teacher once told me, if you want to get people angry and emotional don't write about humans dying.

Write about dogs dying.

 

[GoldenDomer87]

What?

What?

I assume you will not be cheering for Michael Floyd this season. He was drunker than Stallworth and would have probably hit any person stepping recklessly into traffic had it happened to him.

If you think the two aren't the same because MF didn't accidentally run over a person then you are essentially hating Stallworth for being more unlucky than MF. Had Stallworth not been drunk he probably wouldn't have been at fault for the accident. IMO Stallworth's guilty of the same crime MF is, MF just got lucky.

There is no need for an opinion. It is a fact, they are two different crimes. Stallworth killed someone and Floyd did not. Luck had nothing to do with it; I don't think anything good came from these two incidents.

 

[Veer option]

.. from a moral standpoint what are your thoughts on Vick?

I wouldn't let him walk any of my dogs sure as S--T!

 

[greyhammer90]

There is no need for an opinion. It is a fact, they are two different crimes. Stallworth killed someone and Floyd did not. Luck had nothing to do with it; I don't think anything good came from these two incidents.

I understand that they are two different crimes. That's not the question. The question is how do you FEEL about this person. I have issues with Stallworth because he was drunk driving just like I have issues with MF. I don't really hate him for the accident because it's been shown that there was a likelihood that it would've happened regardless of his sobriety.

I understand why Stallworth would have to do more time in jail because he was drunk driving and if something happens while your in that state, your fault or not, you're responsible. <-I agree with this because in a court of law it's tough sh*t if it's not your fault because you shouldn't have been doing this to begin with.

However, when judging him morally I don't understand how someone could hate him and not hate MF (or any person that has driven drunk) because it is likely that they would have done the same thing. Basically IMO you're saying that someone who puts a gun to someone's head and plays russian roulette is a better person morally if the chamber is empty and is a worse person morally if it fires. I'm just saying they're both a**holes, one is just luckier.

But that's just me. Sorry for the rant.

 

[GDomer09]

How many of you had a couple of drinks & got behind the wheel(more than 50% of you)? Somone steps out in front of you & you're in the same situation as Stallworth.

How many of you have been involved with dog fighting &/or disposing of dogs in an unhumane mannor? How many of you would even attend a dog fighting match?

Point is one could/could have happen to more than 50% of us. The other no one would touch. Michael Vick is a sick freak wheather he paid the time our courts gave him or not.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I think what you're getting at there is intent. I tend to agree with you, but to some people obviously the end result is all they feel they need to know.

 

[GoldenDomer87]

I understand that they are two different crimes. That's not the question. The question is how do you FEEL about this person. I have issues with Stallworth because he was drunk driving just like I have issues with MF. I don't really hate him for the accident because it's been shown that there was a likelihood that it would've happened regardless of his sobriety.

I understand why Stallworth would have to do more time in jail because he was drunk driving and if something happens while your in that state, your fault or not, you're responsible. <-I agree with this because in a court of law it's tough sh*t if it's not your fault because you shouldn't have been doing this to begin with.

However, when judging him morally I don't understand how someone could hate him and not hate MF (or any person that has driven drunk) because it is likely that they would have done the same thing. Basically IMO you're saying that someone who puts a gun to someone's head and plays russian roulette is a better person morally if the chamber is empty and is a worse person morally if it fires. I'm just saying they're both a**holes, one is just luckier.

But that's just me. Sorry for the rant.

I understand that and agree you can look at it like that. In your first post, I must have read it wrong, it seemed that you said you thought they were guilty of the same thing. Which is why I gave my response.

Again, I don't think anyone in the Floyd family would consider themselves lucky after the incident. Probably thankful nothing worse happened, but not lucky.

 

[irishfan]

WOW! So dogfighting for money is worse then driving drunk and killing a person?

This shouldn't even be an argument, biased or not, your view is ridiculous

Lol. I find this funny, because I think that your view is ridiculous. I find Vick despicable because he personally strangled and drowned dogs because they were not good at fighting. (Think of that for a second. It takes a very, very sick person to do that.) I think Stallworth was an idiot that one night (and he probably drove drunk several times before then also to be fair) but he immediately tried to make the situation better. I've been in this argument dozens of times, so not blaming you. We'll just have to agree to disagree.


Oh, and Floyd was drunker than Stallworth by a good margin. Stallworth was just in a very unfortunate situation just like Floyd was very lucky in his.

 

[kmoose]

WOW! So dogfighting for money is worse then driving drunk and killing a person?

This shouldn't even be an argument, biased or not, your view is ridiculous

I don't want to put words in irishfan's mouth, but I don't think this is what he was saying, at all.

I think he was saying that Vick consciously chose to do what he did, over and over and over again. While Stallworth chose to drink and drive, which is wrong. But he didn't consciously choose to hit and kill a man. When it happened, he took responsibility, without even trying to hide from it (as is evidenced by his not fleeing the scene).

 

[irishfan]

I don't want to put words in irishfan's mouth, but I don't think this is what he was saying, at all.

I think he was saying that Vick consciously chose to do what he did, over and over and over again. While Stallworth chose to drink and drive, which is wrong. But he didn't consciously choose to hit and kill a man. When it happened, he took responsibility, without even trying to hide from it (as is evidenced by his not fleeing the scene).

Phrased it better than I could. Reps.

 

[Carlyle Javar Holiday]

And from a moral standpoint, Thomas Jefferson knowingly owned slaves and yet worded the Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal". Frank Sinatra was a known womanizer and yet most of the population loves him. There is a fine line between morality and intentions. Putting yourself in a dog fighters position, I don't think their intentions are to harm the dogs but rather to win, harm in the animals is just a byproduct of their intentions to win. Just as in horseracing, owners and trainers know that every time the horse will participate in a race there is a chance that the horse could die by over exertion or leg injury and put to sleep. The intention is to win and it so happens to be at the expense of an animals life.

 

[greyhammer90]

And from a moral standpoint, Thomas Jefferson knowingly owned slaves and yet worded the Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal". Frank Sinatra was a known womanizer and yet most of the population loves him. There is a fine line between morality and intentions. Putting yourself in a dog fighters position, I don't think their intentions are to harm the dogs but rather to win, harm in the animals is just a byproduct of their intentions to win. Just as in horseracing, owners and trainers know that every time the horse will participate in a race there is a chance that the horse could die by over exertion or leg injury and put to sleep. The intention is to win and it so happens to be at the expense of an animals life.