He's pled guilty, he'll be sentenced in December, and he's suspended indefinitely, certainly gone from the Falcons and very well from the NFL for good. But here's what I don't get:
I understand Vick was innocent until proven guilty. I understand that America is the land of second chances. I understand that dogfighting isn't as bad as certain other crimes that athletes and non-athletes have committed of late, starting with murder, beating of wives, drunken driving, etc. I understand that the criminal justice system is very often tilted against African-Americans, and I understand that there are other stories out there in the news right now that are much more worthy of our attention. And I understand that Vick has apologized and sounded sincere in doing so. I get all that.
But how does any of that absolve Vick of his crime? And how can anyone, in their right mind, decide to go down to the courthouse, carrying a pro-Vick sign, and cheering Vick on as he enters and exits his guilty plea hearing?
Even worse is the "Vick only killed dogs, what about the unborn babies?" crowd.
Posted by: Tainted Bill at August 28, 2007 07:20 PM"...isn't as bad as ... drunken driving,"
There are DEFINITELY some animal cruelty cases that are worse than some DUI's. Deliberate infliction of pain on an animal suggests someone's potentially inclined toward doing the same to people given the opportunity; at the exteme end, of course, it's the classic red flag for a future serial killer. Meanwhile, the typical dumbass who picks up their first and hopefully last DUI, while admittedly dangerous, isn't the kind of repeat or high-breath defendant actually likely to kill someone.
And of course I say that as someone who's tried plenty of DUI's and takes that crime VERY seriously.
Posted by: Dave J at August 28, 2007 10:46 PMWell, if Paris Hilton had people outside the courthouse supporting her...
Posted by: Emily at August 29, 2007 01:05 PM