# Why the fuss about Michael Vick? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 22, 2009, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262 "2009-05-22T02:04:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/81 "2009-05-26T14:01:49Z")
> [@Darth\_Sensitive](#): > > So Vick got a lighter sentence than other people who run dogfighting operations? Not what I said – I said weak laws. The penalties for dogfighting should be much harsher, not to mention dog-killing and other ills associated with Vick’s operation. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/82 "2009-05-26T14:08:09Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > Except, he’s not a “star QB”. His stats are decidedly average and he hasn’t taken a snap in two years. > > Michael Vick would not be the “missing piece” on any team that signed him. That’s why controversial players like Terrell Owens and Randy Moss get 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances. Vick is an average player at a position that is overloaded with average players. Teams would be much better served signing a player not guaranteed to cause a fan riot. > > [http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=pass&season=2&year=2006](http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=pass&season=2&year=2006) It’s misleading to look at only passing stats in the case of Vick. In that same year in which his passing numbers were so mediocre, he also rushed for over 1,000 yards. [Mike Vick Career Stats - NFL - ESPN](http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=2549) IIRC despite Vick’s historically mediocre passing numbers, Atlanta took a big hit when he was out of the lineup. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/83 "2009-05-26T14:11:09Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > [Pit bull - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull#Legal_issues_in_the_United_States) > > [http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/18553/why\_are\_some\_pit\_bulls\_naturally\_mean\_pg2.html?cat=9](http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/18553/why_are_some_pit_bulls_naturally_mean_pg2.html?cat=9) > > Then i guess being naturally aggressive to the point that you can’t be insured against it is just a sweeping generalization and an indictment on the owners and not the pets? If I go out and buy a nile croc and keep them in my backyard and I get chomped to bits, it’s my fault because i couldn’t naturally socialize the croc? It’s been established over and over again that pit bulls are NOT naturally vicious. Search pit bull threads on this board; there’ve been at least three of them in recent memory. Pit bulls are LESS likely to attack a human being than many other breeds – they’ve been ruthlessly selected for submissiveness and human-friendliness. Pit bull breeding operations (mentioning them here is not granting them approval; a puppy mill is a puppy mill) keep other, guarding breeds of dogs on the premises because the pit bulls are too friendly to strangers and will get into anybody’s car. The insurance issue is part of the thoroughly-discussed public hysteria. No one needed pit bull insurance riders for the first two hundred years the American Pit Bull Terrier was one of the country’s most popular breeds. The reason you need it now is because people will use the hysteria to sue, not because there’s any objective danger. It’s just like black people used to get charged more for homeowners’ insurance. That wasn’t based on fact either, but on prejudice. Just because an insurance company executive has worried about something doesn’t make it fact. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/84 "2009-05-26T14:38:11Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > People care more about dogs than they do about people. The urge to be cruel to animals is useless in football. Humans play only against other humans. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/85 "2009-05-26T15:34:38Z")
deleted. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/86 "2009-05-26T18:24:55Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > Michael Vick looked at his dogs as useless for companions. He viewed them as battle bots and used them as such. > > right, and pitbulls are just naturally designed to be vicious and mean. Greyhounds just happen to be insanely fast. Mankind and dogs were ordained by nature to be together. > > no, we bred dogs from the beginning. First we bred docile dogs with docile dogs to foster domesticality. Then we branched out from there. hunting dogs, herding dogs, toy dogs, racing dogs, fighting dogs, etc. There’s nothing symbiotic about it. A dog would be a lot worse off without people than people would be without dogs. > [@](#): > > [Pit bull - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull#Legal_issues_in_the_United_States) Did you even READ the links you posted? > [@](#): > > Legal issues in the United States > > The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published a study concerning deaths from canine attacks in 2000.[34] According to the report, “studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through 1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996.” [35] > \*\* > Despite this, the CDC supports the position that irresponsible owners, not breed, are the chief cause of dog bites. They have done studies that indicate that the most “dangerous breed” of dog changes with popularity and reputation. Furthermore, “pit bull-type” dogs encompasses several registered breeds and crossbreeds. Therefore, statistics that claim “Pit bulls” are responsible for some percentage of attacks are lumping many separate breeds together, rather than comparing that to other dogs that are counted as individual breeds.\*\* > > A followup to the study published in 2000 by Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association suggested that “generic non–breed-specific, dangerous dog laws can be enacted that place primary responsibility for a dog’s behavior on the owner, regardless of the dog’s breed. In particular, targeting chronically irresponsible dog owners may be effective.”[36] :rolleyes: And: > [@](#): > > [http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/18553/why\_are\_some\_pit\_bulls\_naturally\_mean\_pg2.html?cat=9](http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/18553/why_are_some_pit_bulls_naturally_mean_pg2.html?cat=9) > [@](#): > > Several municipalities in New Jersey and New York have even banned pit bulls by law. However if they are raised by a responsible loving family they can make great pets. They have a very playful side to their personality like any other pet has. They do not shed much and are easily groomed. And of course they are great watch dogs. So although some dogs are born more aggressive than others they are not really born mean. How a dog behaves when it gets older depends on how it is raised. Just like how a child behaves when they become teenagers depends on how they are raised as babies. If you’re trying to prove that pitbulls have been “bred to mean”, you’re not doing a very good job. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/87 "2009-05-26T19:58:58Z")
> [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](#): > > I find it very appropriate that Michael Vick was released in the midst of the thoroughbred racing Triple Crown, the most prestigious events of a “sport” where men enslave horses, sit on them, and beat the crap out of them to make them run faster (while others gamble on them). If you really believe that they “beat the crap” out of thoroughbred racing horses, you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. Do you seriously think that thoroughbred horses run only if they are beaten? After 300 years of being thouroughly bred just for running? Watch the Kentucky Derby – the jockey doesn’t even touch the winner Mine That Bird with his crop anytime in the last 1/8 mile of the race, which is where he runs the fastest and pulls away from the rest of the horses. And look at the pictures of him in the Winners Circle – you don’t see any whip marks on him, do you? ---
**Author:** ![Enright3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/enright3/32/2897_2.png) [@Enright3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enright3)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2009, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/88 "2009-05-27T19:25:36Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Why not? I’m as sickened by dog fighting as anybody, but if the man served his time, let’s give him his job back and the benefit of the doubt that he’s turned over a new leaf. I don’t see anything positive coming from holding grudges against everyone who has ever committed a crime. The same goes for every one else who isn’t a mass murderer. It isn’t like he’s going back to his job at the humane society. Amen Brother (or Sister). I live in the Atlanta area. Used to be a Michael Vick fan. I can’t stand him now. What he did was reprehensible in my opinion. HOWEVER, he HAS served his time. He’s been punished. Let him continue to work. If he were a ditch digger, no one would be saying he should no longer be allowed to dig ditches. For some reason people want him to be punished his entire life. I hate that he’s probably going to be making millions again… but he’s done his time, he should be allowed to work at the job he’s skilled enough to do; especially when it’s not directly related to his previous crime (IOW, you don’t let a pedophile keep running his summer camp for kids). ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/89 "2009-05-27T20:48:16Z")
> [@Enright3](#): > > If he were a ditch digger, no one would be saying he should no longer be allowed to dig ditches. For some reason people want him to be punished his entire life. I think the uproar is that ditch digging is not a particularly glamorous or highly paid job, while QB for an NFL team is. I doubt that most people want Vick punished for life, but they, like me, have a problem that we think: 1. The punishment was too light 2. He will return to a job that will get him fame and fortune If he were a ditch digger and served 19 months, I wouldnt be opposed to him returning to ditch digging. Its a crappy job and pays little and I’d be sanctimoniously smirking that he’s being punished. I cant do that if he goes on to make millions more in the NFL. Most of us, I think, want him to do menial and low paying jobs for the rest of his life in exchange for our perception that his sentence was light. He’ll have his freedom, but without all the goodies he had before ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2009, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/90 "2009-05-27T21:44:57Z")
Hell, there’s an idea – let him go be a ditch digger. ---
**Author:** ![HoboStew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f17d59/32.png) [@HoboStew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoboStew)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/91 "2009-05-28T00:25:49Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I think the uproar is that ditch digging is not a particularly glamorous or highly paid job, while QB for an NFL team is. I doubt that most people want Vick punished for life, but they, like me, have a problem that we think: > > 1. The punishment was too light > 2. He will return to a job that will get him fame and fortune If people, like you, think his punishment was too light, that is between you/them and the judicial system. He obeyed the rules, served his duly allotted time, and will soon be released to the world to do whatever it is he is capable of doing. If he subsequently gains fame and fortune after that, than bully for him. Put me in the camp of let the market decide. If it was truly such an abhorrent crime, he simply won’t gain employment. Barry Bonds taught us that bad choices and bad character WILL trump skills if they are extreme enough. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/92 "2009-05-28T01:16:08Z")
> [@HoboStew](#): > > If people, like you, think his punishment was too light, that is between you/them and the judicial system. He obeyed the rules, served his duly allotted time, and will soon be released to the world to do whatever it is he is capable of doing. If he subsequently gains fame and fortune after that, than bully for him. > > Put me in the camp of let the market decide. If it was truly such an abhorrent crime, he simply won’t gain employment. Barry Bonds taught us that bad choices and bad character WILL trump skills if they are extreme enough. Its much easier to complain about a guy and the NFL than to get the system changed 😃 ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/93 "2009-05-28T01:24:24Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Plus, we’ll have to kill people to stop the genocide in Darfur, which makes it icky. If there’s a lesson we can take from history, it’s not icky if you kill the “right” people. Take that as sarcasm, take it as personal observation, hell, take it as despair, but in a weird way it seems to be true. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/94 "2009-05-28T01:30:44Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Hell, there’s an idea – let him go be a ditch digger. Let him be whatever the hell he wants. I’m sure he will be sitting on hi pile of money crying about how tough his life is, and how we just don’t understand, and waaaaaaaahhhhhh. Forget him. I don’t give a damn if he wins the Superbowl or works as a dishwasher. But he isn’t special, he isn’t ruined for life, and he sure as hell isn’t some sort of martyr. To hell with him. I think he’s trash. I feel no need to feel bad for him, or for anything that will or won’t happen to him. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/95 "2009-05-28T02:34:44Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > It’s been established over and over again that pit bulls are NOT naturally vicious. Search pit bull threads on this board; there’ve been at least three of them in recent memory. Pit bulls are LESS likely to attack a human being than many other breeds – they’ve been ruthlessly selected for submissiveness and human-friendliness. Pit bull breeding operations (mentioning them here is not granting them approval; a puppy mill is a puppy mill) keep other, guarding breeds of dogs on the premises because the pit bulls are too friendly to strangers and will get into anybody’s car. > > The insurance issue is part of the thoroughly-discussed public hysteria. No one needed pit bull insurance riders for the first two hundred years the American Pit Bull Terrier was one of the country’s most popular breeds. The reason you need it now is because people will use the hysteria to sue, not because there’s any objective danger. It’s just like black people used to get charged more for homeowners’ insurance. That wasn’t based on fact either, but on prejudice. Just because an insurance company executive has worried about something doesn’t make it fact. It has actually been shown endlessly that pits are far more dangerous than other dogs. They bite in a huge ratio compared to other dogs. That does not mean the next pit you see is going to try to kill you. But, you would be a fool not to be wary, if you one across one on the loose. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/96 "2009-05-28T02:59:59Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > It’s been established over and over again that pit bulls are NOT naturally vicious. Search pit bull threads on this board; there’ve been at least three of them in recent memory. Pit bulls are LESS likely to attack a human being than many other breeds – they’ve been ruthlessly selected for submissiveness and human-friendliness. Pit bull breeding operations (mentioning them here is not granting them approval; a puppy mill is a puppy mill) keep other, guarding breeds of dogs on the premises because the pit bulls are too friendly to strangers and will get into anybody’s car. > > The insurance issue is part of the thoroughly-discussed public hysteria. No one needed pit bull insurance riders for the first two hundred years the American Pit Bull Terrier was one of the country’s most popular breeds. The reason you need it now is because people will use the hysteria to sue, not because there’s any objective danger. It’s just like black people used to get charged more for homeowners’ insurance. That wasn’t based on fact either, but on prejudice. Just because an insurance company executive has worried about something doesn’t make it fact. The ONLY dogs I have ever seen (twice) lunge to attack other (non-pitbill) dogs in public _while being walked by their owners_ are pitbulls. And the really weird thing is that this was done with almost no warning, growling, posturing etc. One moment walking along, then instantly they were at the other dog in full throat biting mode. They did not want to dominate the other dog, they wanted to kill it. Pitbulls may be loving and cuddly when happy and on their best behavior, but don’t tell me that behaviorally they are just like other dogs, they are not. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/97 "2009-05-28T03:30:02Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > It has actually been shown endlessly that pits are far more dangerous than other dogs. They bite in a huge ratio compared to other dogs. Cite? > [@astro](#): > > The ONLY dogs I have ever seen (twice) lunge to attack other (non-pitbill) dogs in public _while being walked by their owners_ are pitbulls. And the really weird thing is that this was done with almost no warning, growling, posturing etc. One moment walking along, then instantly they were at the other dog in full throat biting mode. They did not want to dominate the other dog, they wanted to kill it. > > Pitbulls may be loving and cuddly when happy and on their best behavior, but don’t tell me that behaviorally they are just like other dogs, they are not. You know what we say around here about anecotes and data, right? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Miltonyz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Miltonyz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miltonyz)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/98 "2009-05-28T03:57:15Z")
Why are we debating about the characteristics of pitbulls in this thread. There was a pretty recent thread in Cecil’s Columns and huge one in the pit a month or so ago and a huge one in general questions about 2-3 months ago. It doesn’t matter if it was chickens, tigers, pitbulls, or evil imps from Hell making two living creatures fight to the death is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2009, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/99 "2009-05-28T23:48:50Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Compassion for animals exists for a relatively select cadre of animals and some are definitely more equal than other in terms of where we focus our outrage at their mistreatment. Duh. It would be stupid to treat all animals the same. Why? Because they aren’t all the same. Some are more intelligent than others. Some are big and majestic. Some are pests. A couple in particular have a particularly close association with human beings, why wouldn’t we treat them differently then some other random animal. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262/100 "2009-05-29T14:13:33Z")
> [@astro](#): > > The ONLY dogs I have ever seen (twice) lunge to attack other (non-pitbill) dogs in public _while being walked by their owners_ are pitbulls. So how come this is your answer to my assertion that “Pit bulls are LESS likely to attack a human being than many other breeds?” You countered that you saw them attack _dogs._ Someone’s beagle will savage and kill my pet rabbit or someone’s backyard squirrel in a heartbeat. Does that make beagles vicious? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-fuss-about-michael-vick/497262.md?page=6)