Why the fuss about Michael Vick?

Great Debates
101

No it has NOT.

The oft-cited CDC study, when viewed IN CONTEXT on the CDC site, is defined by the CDC itself as bad science – they expressly say the study does NOT reflect on the tendency of any breed to bite because the unscientific, uncontrolled data was gathered anecdotally and in a haphazard fashion. They further assert that it is probably not possible to determine that any given breed is more or less represented in bite statistics. This is for several reasons, including the politics of bite statistics and the laziness of authorities in making clear determinations of what happened in a given bite incident.

Such other “studies” as exist are usually collections of scary newspaper stories, as scientific as the Weekly World News batboy sightings.

Science, and serious dog experts, agree – we have not, and can not, currently, say ANYTHING with confidence about breed representation in bite statistics.

What can be said with certainty by scientists is that SIZE determines a dog’s danger, and pit bulls are MEDIUM-sized dogs only.

What can be said with certainty by dog experts is that pit bulls have a history of submissiveness and friendliness toward humans which was universally understood in the dog world for over 200 years until recent news accounts began to muddy the public perception.

102

This was thoroughly covered in the pit bull debate. It would be off OP to get into that here. But there must be some reason Vick and other dog fighters use pit bulls. I do not think it is their gentle nature.
People who get amusement out of watching dogs fight to the death , I believe are irredeemable. I do not think Vick will be a better person after jail. He was involved in a horrible and disgusting business. He just got caught. I am sure he will not do it again(while in the public eye) but after his career is over he may sneak back into it.

103

Again, you seem to confuse a pit bull’s attitude toward people with his or her attitude toward dogs. Should I expect a beagle to maul me to death like he would a rabbit? A Jack Russell or rat terrier to maul me to death like he would a rat? A retriever to carefully carry me in his mouth like he would a duck? An wolfhound to maul me to death like he would a wolf? A cat to maul me to death like he would a mouse? A foxhound to maul me to death like he would a fox?

There’s a reason rabbit-killers use beagles. There’s a reason foxhunters use foxhounds. There’s a reason people with mice use cats. I do not think it is the gentle nature of these man-killing animals.

104

Not to mention public perception. When “everybody knows” pit bulls are the most ferocious, tenacious fighter in the dog world; when pit bulls have a reputation as THE dog to get when you need to scare off intruders and look bad ass in front of all your friends; when a large percentage of the population is scared shitless upon seeing a pit bull – what breed do you think people will buy to train as fighters? What dog will be the first choice among assholes who want to train their dog to sic people on command and make it “tough as nails”?

Rottweilers and Dobermans also have this pop culture association with danger, but not to the same extent as pit bulls. You could probably train a Golden Retriever to eat children, but that doesn’t mean the entire breed is dangerous.

That’s not much different from prohibiting blacks from learning, pointing out how dumb they are and then using that as an excuse for not teaching them. Well no shit, Sherlock! When the only people who get pit bulls are those who want scary fighting dogs, then pit bulls will be predominantly scary fighters. That’s just culture, not biology.

105

In case you are missing it, the charges that are giving Vick the most trouble WRT returning to the NFL are the interstate gambling charges. The NFL goes to great lengths to distance themselves from any type of wagering (publicly), even though they ship info out the back door every week to the Vegas linesmakers to help set competitive lines.

It’s a dirty little game the NFL plays…condemning gambling and coming down hard on any player or coach who runs afoul of the gambling laws even slightly, while requiring teams to make accurate injury reports weekly so the sportsbooks can set accurate lines. The NFL also just passed a motion to allow teams to liscense their logos to states’ lotteries for scratch off games, and in the same week filed suit in Delaware to stop Delaware’s plans to allow sports betting.

So, the NFL says:
"Gambling is bad. Any association with organized gambling is bad. Micheal Vick organized a dogfighting ring and a gambling ring. This is very bad. The NFL strives dilligently to make sure the product on the field is not tainted in any way by any gambling influence. Ok, our next order of business is to release the injury reports this week with the % chance that teams starting players will play so that bookies in Las Vegas can set accurate lines, for all the betting and gambling that goes on that we don’t want to be associated with.

Also, states shouldn’t be allowing any form of sports book wagering or gambling. We are going to file suit in Delaware to fight their legislation that was passed to allow the state to begin collecting revenue from gambling on NFL games. Oh, also this week, we passed a motion in the owners meeting to allow states to issue lottery tickets tied to local teams logos, history, etc. So state run gambling is bad and evil, unless the NFL is getting a cut of it, and then its ok and we encourage it."
Vick’s biggest problem getting back in is the fact that he was hanging around with people betting 10s of thousands of dollars on fights that last a few minutes. The NFL will do anything in its power to prevent a situation where a player owes Jimmy “Knuckles” Forlani $100 grand in gambling debts, and Jimmy suggests to the player that maybe his team could win next week but do just enough and not quite cover the spread.
Anyone remember the Steelers/Chargers game in the regular season last year? Pittsburgh was a 4 1/2 pt underdog. The score was 12-10 Chargers leading. Over the course of the game, San Diego was called for 3 penalties to Pittsburgs 13. Willie Parker of the Steelers broke off a 25 or so yard TD run with around 2 minutes left to put Pitt. ahead 17-12 assuming the PAT, and covering the spread…but wait…a phantom flag came in late for holding, erasing the TD. Pitt. kicked a FG to take a 13-12 lead. On the final play, SD began to lateral wildly, and eventually, a Pitt. defender scooped up a loose lateral and ran it in for a TD and a 19-12 win (and again, covering the spread). The officials huddled for several minutes, fuddles through some bizarre interpretation of a rule that did not fit what was just seen on TV, and disallowed the TD. The NFL immediately said that the TD should have counted. Most analysts couldn’t understand how the officials even came to the conclusion that they should have disallowed the TD…but at any rate, the NFL had officials overturning TDs twice in the final 90 seconds of a game that meant the winning team would have covered the spread, making a phantom penalty one of the calls, and the other call just blatantly wrong.

The NFL is going to do anything in it’s power to distance itself from organized gambling publicly, and Vick is going to bear the brunt of that punishment.

106

Right there is an owner who shouldn’t have a pitbull. If a person isn’t alert enough to prevent their dog from attacking another dog while holding it on a leash, they shouldn’t have a dog.

107

Ask Pete Rose about how gambling charges stick.

108

Pits are more likely to attack and the attacks are worse than most other dogs. Stats prove it over and over.
But this is about Vick. I am surprised to hear some teams are in contact with him. He will be poison to a lot of Americans. The protests will get TV coverage at games and practices. It will be ugly. The team will try to paint him as a changed man who has served his time. He served his time but a changed man, I doubt it. He just got caught.

109

If Vick got himself involved in some sort of pit-bull rescue scheme, and showed it was for more than appearance’s sake, I’d be far more willing to cut him some slack.

He could still try and influence the type of person who enjoys dog-fighting as entertainment, and try to convince them that their behaviour is an anachronism, and has no place in the 21st century.

110

There are stats on beagles attacking rabbits? Because actual scientists have said there are NO – that’s none, zero, “not any” – useful stats that say anything about breed tendencies in dog attacks on humans. So I assume you are saying “pits are more likely to attack dogs than beagles are to attack rabbits,” and you have stats showing that – many stats, to support “over and over?”

I would love to see those stats on attacks against animals. Don’t bother to bring any “stats” about human attacks, unless you’ve overthrown the Center for Disease Control scientists in a coup or something.

111

This is about Vick. I understand pit fans love to pretend that pits are safe in spite of the fact that statistics disproves it over and over. But, I believe Vick was fighting with pits not beagles. For some reason they are the dog of choice, not beagles.
We will find out soon that some team will sign Vick. Then the fun begins. Should protesters be allowed to cut his career? Does he deserve a chance? I doubt going into jail has changed him. Should he have a clean slate?

112

So let’s seem those stats.

My Westie has been known to bite. Does that mean all Westies are dangerous?

113

Now you’re being deliberately obtuse. I specifically differentiated – as do dog experts, as do pit bulls themselves, as do all dogs – between aggression against humans and aggression against animals a dog has been bred to attack. You responded, again, by trying to blur that distinction.

I can play your game. “For some reason they are the dog of choice” – finish that sentence. The dog of choice for what?

They are quite clearly not the dog of choice for police work. Not for schutzhund, not for training to attack people, not for guard duty, not for war. Not, in fact, for any role that involves attacking humans.

They were SO passive that Michael Vick was able to kill them with his bare hands – without getting his million-dollar arm mauled, no less. The legal record stipulates that Vick and compatriots slammed pit bulls into the ground physically, over and over, to kill them – yet emerged unbitten. Is Vick superpowered, is that your argument? Why then did these dogs, famous among knowledgeable dog people for submission and nonaggression toward their human handlers, die without fighting back? Think on it…the answer is somewhere near…perhaps even in the sentence itself. See if you can find it.

“For some reason they are the dog of choice” – finish that sentence. The dog of choice for what? What was Vick using them for? To fight what? And he was confident – confident! – that he could handle them roughly even when they were in the excitement of fighting to the death, yet not be mauled himself, because he knew they would not hurt him, MAKING them the dog of choice for…what?

114

I want the stats too. I had a pit named Fred, and he was as mellow as can be. He just wanted to eat, play a little, and sleep in a warm spot (usually with the other dog and a few cats piled on top of him sleeping too). He even ignored strays that came into “his” yard.

As for massive damage, I believe Rottweilers have a much stronger bite.

115

I could well believe it. Rottie’s jaws look like a killer whale’s when they are open! :slight_smile:

116

ESPN did a story on Vick. Will a team take a chance on the hatred and picketing of animal rights groups to take a risk that he could help their team? They thing there are about 3 teams that might take a flyer.