I'm sorry,
 

"Your fragment is exactly that, a fragment. Please complete the fragment so that I can understand it properly."

Help me out . . . what the he11 are you talking about?

Thanks,

Certainly. My apologies for deleting a word in my haste. For those who couldn't figure it out, I left out the word "is" before hyperbole. I'm sorry if that interfered with anyone's ability to understand.

What? And What?

Please make a little bit of sense with your posts, please. Put down the bong for a while and be coherent.

The point was that both activities are totally unacceptable, other than to the people who engage in them, of course.

It's a good thing my wife wasn't the sentencing judge, or Vick would have gotten Life without the possibility of parole. We have argued this already, and of course, I lost.:)

And the sentence would have been overturned for cruel and usual punishment. That is not the penalty for the crime. And he was a person that did not have a criminal record. Hey, I guess we all can dream. :)

Peace

Thank you for assuming that my wife and I are not intelligent enough to know this.

I really didn't think I had to say something like, "after we change the law, then we could sentence..."

Yes, of course that isn't the penalty for the crime. In my wife's opinion it should be. The only cruel and unusual is what Vick is.

The fact that Vick did not have a criminal record may have had a little to do with the extremely light sentence. It was more like he is a celebrity, which probably contributed to knocking more off the sentence than the fact that he was a first-time offender.

For the record, Vick had a similar sentence that the other people he was charged with. And the other defendants had criminal records. Now those individuals were not celebrities of any kind. And Vick's sentence was typical of what others in that situation got. He did not get off easy and he lost a lot more than most defendants do.

I did not call you unintelligent, but when you do not know all the facts of the case and you assume that he got off easy, I have to question that my original thought. ;)

Peace

I'm a VT grad, but I don't defend Mike or any of his stupid crap, especially since it taints my school. But let me just clarify one thing:

Mike Vick certainly didn't "learn" his "culture" of dogfighting in the redneck back woods of Virginia. He/I went to school in the back woods of Virginia, mind, but .... :) Not to say that doesn't happen in those back woods, but Mike didn't learn it there.

Anything he learned/got into was from the mean streets of Newport News, Virginia. Not much in the way of woods around there - at least not where he lived.

Unless your domestic partner has ever been referred to as "dog ugly". ;)

I'm not assuming that he got off easy, I'm frigging telling you that he got off easy.

He did not receive the maximum penalty of 5 years because his attorney finally convinced him to cop a plea. Vick had wanted to go to trial and showed absolutely no remorse for his heinous crimes. He actually believed that he did nothing wrong.

The others cut deals to reduce their sentences for rolling over on Vick. I know the damn facts of the case, and he still got off easy and will be back playing in the NFL soon enough. He is suffering major financial losses, which is all his fault. He has nobody to blame but himself.

Underperforming animals were shot, drowned, hanged, electrocuted or killed by being slammed to the ground. If you don't find this to be cruel, I have to wonder about your values.

Plus, if he is convicted on state charges for his crimes next April, he could receive a maximum sentence of 10 years, and would not get out of jail until he is 39 years old. Wouldn't that be special.

Geeze SDS, sounds like you are in Mike Vick's head. Perhaps you will be an expert witness...

yawn.

I did not realize you actually had a conversation with Vick to know what he though. And if you would leave your state, you might realize that everyone does not look at this as a major societal concern. Secondly the maximum sentence for most crimes almost never happens for a first or even second time offender. He also plea bargained which is what both sides usually want. The prosecution gets a conviction and the defense gets a much lesser sentence if they were normally convicted by a trial. And even if someone is convicted during a trial, people do not always get the maximum sentences. Not unless you are a convicted of the mandatory minimums that are associated with many drug crimes.

I agree with most of that.

Steve, I recently had my mother's dog run away from my house when I was dog sitting. My Mom’s dog was not registered in my area and I had to play a pretty big amount of money for her being gone less than 24 hours. If I did not even contact animal control, they would have put my mother's dog to sleep. I do not know about you, but that sounds pretty cruel to me. And that is a practice that so-called dog lovers like you seems to accept. Now if you do not like my values that is your problem. I am a Christian, but I do not question the values of other Christian faiths because they are not like my own.

And to take it back to what this was all about, I do not put every act on the same plane with other acts. I personally do not care about whether someone took a substance that was not illegal to take in a sport and I do not care about dog fighting on the scale I do as other crimes that take place on a larger scale. If you beat your wife and children or get a DUI you might not spend anytime in jail. And do not kill someone like Leonard Little and you might not see 6 months in jail. Then again, you have better values.

Peace

Well, for one thing Mitchell's report named people, by verifiable evidence, who used steroids.

McCarthy named people who he said were communists without any verifiable proof.

That is not entirely true. There were people at that time that sided or belonged to the communist party and were pointed out by McCarthy. The problem is that communism or a belief in communism did not automatically mean you were against this country or that you wanted to overthrow the government. Just like taking steroids does not mean that you did so to gain an advantage that the fact that you took them you gained some competitive advantage. If what Andy Petite says is true, I do not see that as a major violation. There were no rules against it and he had a right to explore treatments to get him back onto the field.

Peace