The Mike Vick case... am I a life nit?

gol4pro · #1 08-19-2007, 10:43 AM

I knew there was something about this that was bothering me and I just figured it out. I'll preface this by saying I hate the [censored] because I absolutely love dogs, but from a legal perspective, I'm not sure this makes sense to me.

Somehow or another, the law has established a different value for the lives of various animals. That is, if it was a human fighting ring (after all, humans are animals) he would obviously get life in prison, but if it was a mosquito or ant fighting ring (although you'd never do this), nobody would give a [censored].

While I must say that I agree with this system, is the law really written this way? If so, what is the "equilibrium" animal so to speak where people start caring and you could be charged with a crime?

I guess my real question is, where in the legislation does it suggest that if you have an insect fighting ring that's fine, but if you use dogs you're [censored]?

Like I said, I'm probably just a life nit.

amplify · #2 08-19-2007, 11:02 AM

For the same reason people get alarmed by the prospect of dolphin getting caught in tuna nets while not giving a damn about the tuna.

You don't understand why dogs are more valuable to us than insects?

gol4pro · #3 08-19-2007, 11:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
For the same reason people get alarmed by the prospect of dolphin getting caught in tuna nets while not giving a damn about the tuna.

You don't understand why dogs are more valuable to us than insects?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do and I agree with you if you read my OP clearly. But I want to know how this issue is addressed in legislation.

amplify · #4 08-19-2007, 11:14 AM

It is addressed in this kind of way for example: (about animal testing)

[ QUOTE ]
The act’s definition of “animal” makes the act applicable to any warmblooded animal used “for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet; but such term excludes (1) birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not used for research purposes, and (3) other farm animals....”

[/ QUOTE ]

They get very nitty about things, it's not just "don't hurt animals."

esad · #5 08-19-2007, 11:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I do and I agree with you if you read my OP clearly. But I want to know how this issue is addressed in legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

People assign value to things. A component of the value is how much some life gives to people. Obviously, many people receive a lot of joy or companionship from their pets, so they are valued more then a mosquito.

Not sure why this is so hard to understand? It's subjective of course, but pretty all of life is subjective. It sounds like you're looking for some completely objective quantification of everything.....Not going to happen.

Bicycles_Biatch · #6 08-19-2007, 11:29 AM

I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

Ray Lewis was involved in the murder of a HUMAN... the press, NFL, and general public got over it in about 12 months...

I honestly believe Vic will never play in the NFL again and I find it kind of ironic that Ray Lewis will be starting this season.

Bicycles_Biatch · #7 08-19-2007, 11:31 AM

PS... I hate Vic and his attitude... never thought he was a great QB... and I feel he is getting what he deserves... BUT, the flip side is that multiple drug / DUI offenders and guys who were associated with murder charges are still playing and getting paid millions in the NFL.

Assani Fisher · #8 08-20-2007, 05:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

Ray Lewis was involved in the murder of a HUMAN... the press, NFL, and general public got over it in about 12 months...

I honestly believe Vic will never play in the NFL again and I find it kind of ironic that Ray Lewis will be starting this season.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a Ravens fan, so take this FWIW, but with that said I know a lot about the situation....

The case against Ray Lewis was dropped before it even went to court because the prosecutors had such a lack of evidence. Do you realize how little evidence they must have for that to happen? Contrast that to the Vick case in which they had so much evidence that the defendant plea bargained.

Essentially this is what Ray Lewis did: He went to the Super Bowl with some friends. His friends killed a guy. He knew about it. The police questioned him, and in the heat of the moment he wasn't sure whether to tell the truth or to protect his friends so he basically said "no comment." A day or two later, he realized that this was wrong and he went and told the police the truth. Thats why he was charged with "obstruction of justice."

He has since gone to many rookie training camps and spoke to incoming rookies about the importance of watching the people you hang out with and making good decisions. He has also done a number of charitable things in the Baltimore community. Furthermore, hes been known as a fabulous team leader. Again contrast that to Vick who has a history of questionable behavior.

I do agree with you that taking the life of a human is obviously much more serious than taking a dog's life. But by all accounts, Vick was directly involved while Lewis was VERY MUCH indirectly involved.

WMB · #9 08-19-2007, 01:35 PM

People who intentionally hurt animals or enjoy watching animals hurt each other are sick, sick, sick and morally depraved. If Vick is guilty of accused acts, his mindset and behavior is a serious detriment to the human race. Lock him up.

PoppinFresh · #10 08-19-2007, 03:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
People who intentionally hurt animals or enjoy watching animals hurt each other are sick, sick, sick and morally depraved . If Vick is guilty of accused acts, his mindset and behavior is a serious detriment to the human race. Lock him up.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is complete BS, most people enjoy a good nature vid of two animals fighting.