Mike Vick petition
February 28th, 2009 by Cliffy
Okay people… the power of the pen… er, keystroke:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-NFL-from-reinstating-MichaelVick
The man will have served his debt to society - but let’s prevent him from trying to earn a living (ass-uming an NFL team will have him… and there will be at least one, as I’ve asserted all along).
I trust the folks signing this petition feel the same way about convicted child molesters, rapists, and murderers (of human beings, that is)… right?
February 28th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Oh, and one other thought… I must’ve missed the similar petition seeking to prevent Pacman Jones from earning a living in the NFL. Course Pacman Jones was involved in crimes against human beings, not dogs - so on second thought, why should that actually upset anyone? Yeah. My bad.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Well I haven’t followed Jones’ transgressions closely but as a general principle, I think Jones’ poor impulse control is much less disturbing than Vick’s willingness to organize the systemic torture and execution (by especially sadistic means) of animals. It is less about the species of the victim (though I would argue that humans have some responsibility for the well being of animals while the reverse doesn’t hold), and more about the grisly and pre-meditated nature of Vick’s crimes. Taking into account the sort of extenuating circumstances that may mitigate the seriousness of any of the general offenses you list I would be perfectly happy to sign a petition opposing NFL contracts for people guilty of them as well. Just because society has imposed a sentence, citizens are under no obligation to view the sentence as fair or sufficient.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:03 am
I don’t necessarily disagree with most of what you wrote… but I still don’t see the logic behind denying Vick the opportunity to re-enter the job market in his chosen field once he served his sentence (however unfair or insufficient some may view it). Now, if his job involved dogs somehow - and specifically involved him being responsible for one or more dogs? Sure… then I get it. I can see the direct correlation. However, to insist that he can’t play football cuz… well, he shoulda got more jail time? I don’t agree with that.
The one nit I will pick is describing Pacman’s actions as simply “poor impulse control”. Let me be clear: In no way do I agree with anything Michael Vick did with his dogs. I think it’s beyond disgusting, and certainly speaks to a major flaw in the man’s character, to say the least. However, I personally still value human life over canine life. Both are important… yes - but there is a hierarchy… sorry. Maybe it’s by a little, maybe it’s by a lot - but someone who’s involved in human suffering and/or death is worse (to me) than someone who’s involved in canine suffering and/or death. Both are bad - that’s an understatement… but if I were to rank them, causing harm to fellow human beings is worse (relatively speaking).
The burr in my craw is the lack of affect we seem to have as a society in most cases when human suffering and/or death is involved - yet when animal suffering and/or death is involved, there seems to be a great uproar and a call to arms. Perhaps I’m overgeneralizing… or perhaps I’m just dead wrong on that point - but that’s my perception. And it annoys me.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:09 am
I don’t think our society is indifferent to human suffering at all; in fact, I can’t think of any other country, or civilization, past or present, that has done more to ameliorate human suffering than our own. It’s much better to be poor, or handicapped, or otherwise vulnerable, in the US than anywhere else. In fact you’re much better off being poor in America than average among the half of humanity that lives in China or India. And our society in fact does more to ameliorate the suffering of those who don’t even live in our society, than any other. When the tsunami hit southeast Asia, who brought medicine and fresh water to people who needed it? Not the local governments; they don’t have the will, organization, or resources. Not the UN; they don’t have any ships or helicopters to actually move anything. The US Navy did more than the rest of the world combined (except arguably the Royal Australian Navy) to mitigate the suffering.
And while I don’t disagree that humans sit atop a heirarchy of Earth’s inhabitants (though try telling that to your average Greenpeace member), I don’t think its absolute. That is, sadistically slaughtering a domesticated animal is worse than, say, stepping on a human’s toes. The same factors that distinguish degrees of wickedness when the victim is human - degree of injury, degree of premeditation, relative innocence of the victim and so on - I think remain valid when the victim is not human. I would also argue that since humans are singularly endowed with reason (as well as opposable thumbs), that we therefore have some obligation to avoid inflicting gratuitous suffering on them. That doesn’t mean its OK to do so to humans, but the asymmetry is that humans have a much greater capacity to look out for themselves. I’m sure many if not most of Pac Man Jones’ associates deserve to be beaten up for *something.* The same can’t be said for the dogs with he misfortune to fall into Vick’s orbit.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:08 am
That’s all fine, well, and good. My simple desire would be at least similar (if not greater) outrage at the return of Pacman Jones than the (potential) return of Mike Vick. Instead, to my knowledge, there was no outrage (not even “lesser”, just “no”). If Mike Vick’s sentence didn’t fit the crime, then I fail to see how Pacman’s non-sentence fit his crime(s). Fair enough?
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:24 am
I know Jones got arrested a lot, but don’t really recall what for.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:00 am
I don’t recall all the details (although I believe some/many involved his posse and strip clubs, fwiw) - but I know the one in Vegas involved gun play and human suffering. I have no idea how extensive Pacman’s role was in *that* one, I concede… but my belabored point is Jones seems at least as worthy of public rebuke as Vick. Perhaps I’m in the minority on that position - if so, so be it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:55 am
Yeah, sorry, I can’t view bar brawls as nearly as serious as torturing dogs to death, either in terms of the magnitude of injury to the victim, or in what it says about the character of the criminal. Only one of those offenses is a correlate with serial murder (of humans). One guess which.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:39 am
We clearly have different viewpoints on this… which is fine. A simple bar fight does not correlate to ritualistic torture of dogs in my book, no. But what about the permanment paralyzing of a human being in said bar fight? Maybe that “equates”, maybe not. What about shots fired in that simple bar right which hit several innocent victims, including the bouncer now paralyzed for life?
Sorry - I don’t equate canine life with human life. If that makes me a horrible person, I accept that nomenclature. That said, I don’t know what level of human suffering does equate with the level of canine suffering to which Mike Vick contributed (as Pacman contributed to a level of human suffering).
We can agree to disagree on the “canine-to-human exchange rate of suffering” - as you have it 1:1, and have it differently. But my original point remains: If we’re so upset at Mike Vick for his contribution to canine suffering that we should petition to prevent him from returning to his chosen career once he’s served his criminal sentence… then why aren’t we (at least) equally upset (or even just a “little” upset) with Pacman Jones for his contribution to human suffering, such that we woulda/shoulda/coulda petitioned to prevent *hiim* from returning to his chosen career once he served his criminal sentence (oops… forgot - he didn’t serve any time… perhaps cuz he was smart enough to “only” cause human suffering rather than canine suffering).
March 5th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Keep him out!
(I say that only so I win my pounder bet with Cliffy)
March 5th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Yeah… I have to weigh in here. There is no doubt, I am a Michael Vick apologist. I still have and wear a #7 Va Tech jersey, and I wasn’t all that upset when he single handedly knocked the Packers out of the playoffs in 2003. That being said, I am completely on Cliffy’s side here. PacMan Jones didn’t just start a bar fight, he was arrested several times on varying degrees of violence and crimes. The latest was ordering a hit on someone. I would classify that as far worse than anything Vick ever did. And why is Vick singled out here. I think we need to be a little careful. Vick obviously was very much involved and guilty, but there are several active NFL players that have participated in dog-fighting. Vick paid his debt and should be allowed to resume his career if able. The reason there is such an outrage over this is because PETA exists. There is a very vocal segment of the population that overreacts to any crime against an animal, and when it involves a high-profile athlete…. all the better. That segment does not exist for many human crimes.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I don’t think I equated canine and human suffering; in point of fact I think I denied equivalence. But PETA is a straw man, as there are very sound reasons to be shocked by Dahmeresque behavior toward innocent creatures even if one accepts humanity’s dominion over the Earth.
If there are others participating in dog fighting, or cock fighting, or cat juggling, I’d be perfectly happy to see them sent to jail, and kicked out of the league as well. No special animus toward Vick other than the general fact that, like all other QBs who think they’re too talented to merely stay in the pocket and throw the damned ball, he is wildly overrated and it is an iron law of the universe that no team will ever win a Super Bowl with him (or any such QB).
As I mentioned earlier, I’m not familiar with Pac Man Jones’ rap sheet but based on the description above I think the NFL would be better off without him as well. There’s no reason for a high-profile employer to incur the sort of reputational risk involved in hiring people who can’t conform to some very minimal standards of civilized society.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Regarding Tank’s equating canine and human suffering, I was responding to the quote above, where Tank is comparing Pacman’s indiscretions with Vick’s indiscretions, “Only one of those offenses is a correlate with serial murder (of humans). One guess which. ” I’m picking nits - but that’s where I determined there was a point of equating the two. Again, I’m personally not in favor of canine suffering of any kind - but I just think human suffering happens to be worse, in comparison.
As to Tank’s last point, in the last comment, my only rebuttal would be: Why not let the individual franchises decide? Yes, I view the NFL as one entity - and the individual franchises as… well, franchises within that sole organization. However, if an organization wants to (at least try to) withstand the negative PR campaign sure to follow Vick to any/every NFL stadium, then why not give them the opportunity if they so choose?
It’s a moot point - but my point is… Pacman (and any NFL franchise) was given that opportunity. I don’t see why Vick (and any NFL franchise) should be denied the same opportunity (once Vick has served his criminal sentence, and whatever suspension that the NFL may hand down).