Michael Vick Seeks Bankruptcy Protection After Dogfighting Ring Conviction

Judged:

1

1

1

Anbreen wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, given that Vick has never served a day for dogfighting, I would say that he has been treated MORE than fairly, by the legal system.
What is your position on the racketeering?
I hope your chart documentation is better than your posts.
I (and other here) am not sure WHAT your point is, other that you seem to be arguing against prosecution of a felony for which Vick has not been convicted.
You are also, unsuccessfully, trying to draw a negative correlation between felonies against humans and against animals. You have never put forth a rationale, however.

Judged:

2

2

2

Fresh Look wrote:

<quoted text> I present Rose, as "Exhibit A" on the pu ss ification of America. In 70% of the world,'dog' is what's for dinner. Have you ever been outside of the USA? I bet not. Travel a little and your views on animals will be ridiculed, as they should. America's dog fetish is just an example of what happens when you let women vote, emotional laws not rational laws. Fresh Look

Judged:

1

1

1

Lanie wrote:

<quoted text>
OMG as much as I hate to admit it... I understand VF's point. Why is the fine higher for a person pouring acid on a dog than a person killing children? Now if I was honestly seeking the answer to that question would I, 1.) Go to topix and ask the people on there posting in support of dogs? Or 2.) Write the lawmakers and get an honest answer to my question?
Are you writing letters? Are you calling anyone?

Judged:

1

1

1

Rose wrote:

<quoted text>
You are a disgusting POS and obviously a woman hater with your foul language. I notice you did not address the issues I raised in my post such as TORTURING to death helpless animals for that freak's personal pleasure. And as for your statement referring to "damn dogs", it certainly proves that you have nothing but hatred for animals and are a cold and callous creature. You are pathetic as well as a stupid moronic idiot and I pity you.

Judged:

1

1

1

Lanie wrote:

<quoted text>
OMG as much as I hate to admit it... I understand VF's point. Why is the fine higher for a person pouring acid on a dog than a person killing children? Now if I was honestly seeking the answer to that question would I, 1.) Go to topix and ask the people on there posting in support of dogs? Or 2.) Write the lawmakers and get an honest answer to my question?
Are you writing letters? Are you calling anyone?

Judged:

1

1

1

JenniferInSC wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh Rose, don't let that idiot get you riled. He's just a "damned idiot", who can't comprehend the difference in legal activities and those that are illegal. Something tells me if he hasn't already been there, this guy will end up in a prison cell just like MV, and he'll blame whitey when he is.
Bet if somebody starved him and tortured him he would be screaming for justice. Oh but he's human he says? Ah, that's definitely debatable. Considering his stance that dogs are here so people such as MV can torture and mutilate them, he actually deserves to be treated as one of MV's dogs. I'd pay to see it. According to whether he's a couch potato or fit, I might even support him by placing my bets on him in the first fight he is sent into. If he loses, and I lose my money, then I hope his handlers string him up and gut him. Don't let it be said that I am a *ussy!! I would love to see the scenario above played out, no emotional *ussy here!!!

Judged:

1

1

1

vick fan wrote:

<quoted text>Sorry Lanie, it was a typo, the reward for the murders is only $10,000 dollars more than the animal abusers reward, I just think it should be much more. What is the quickest way to reach the people responsible for setting the reward figure?

Judged:

2

2

1

Rose wrote:

<quoted text>
You are a disgusting POS and obviously a woman hater with your foul language. I notice you did not address the issues I raised in my post such as TORTURING to death helpless animals for that freak's personal pleasure. And as for your statement referring to "damn dogs", it certainly proves that you have nothing but hatred for animals and are a cold and callous creature. You are pathetic as well as a stupid moronic idiot and I pity you.

Judged:

2

2

1

Lanie wrote:

<quoted text>
OMG as much as I hate to admit it... I understand VF's point. Why is the fine higher for a person pouring acid on a dog than a person killing children? Now if I was honestly seeking the answer to that question would I, 1.) Go to topix and ask the people on there posting in support of dogs? Or 2.) Write the lawmakers and get an honest answer to my question?
Are you writing letters? Are you calling anyone?

Judged:

2

1

1

vick fan wrote:

<quoted text>Ok, Mrs critical thinker 2008, I really wasn't even talking about VICK, OK, let memake it easy for the "critical thinker"----(POINT BEGINNING)--- there should be more of a reward for the capture of human killers than there is for dog killers ---(POINT ENDING)---, and here in OK,(today) the difference is only $10,000, which I have already explained. In my opinion it should be more!!! I WASN'T ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT VICK AND WHAT HE HAS DONE OR WHAT HE HAS NOT !!!!!, I WAS REFERRING TO SOME DIFFERENCES THAT I HAVE SEEN (HERE) WHERE I LIVE. THATS IT NOTHING MORE, YOUR CRITICAL-THINKING SKILLS ARE WORKING OVER-TIME! If you don't understand now.......WELL......your an idiot!

Judged:

2

2

2

Anbreen wrote:

<quoted text>
Email them, or call them. Write legislature. Circulate a petition. Like the rest of us do. Publish letter to the editor in major metros.
On the other hand, you can set up a reward. yourself.
This while saying, "I'm in school." Someday, I'll save lives."
Amazing how much you expect OTHERS to contribute to these various soil problems, isn't it?

Judged:

3

2

2

Fresh Look wrote:

<quoted text> Rose I am sorry you find the need to hurl personal insults just because we disagree. I taught my 3 children to respect opposing points of view because dialog is important in a civilized society.

Judged:

1

1

1

vick fan wrote:

anbreen,there was once a time when you hadnt sent or e-mailed anything to anyone. you had to start sometime.

Judged:

1

1

1

vick fan wrote:

<quoted text>Ambreen your a complete idiot, a disgrace to your cause, all you do is ridicule and talk down to anyone whos thoughts are different than yours. I do not expect anything from anyone! your the kind of person who makes it hard for anyone to side with you on any issue. It is people like you that "think" they are smarter than everyone around you. yes, i am in school so what! does that mean your better than me because thats what it sounds like.

Judged:

1

1

1

vick fan wrote:

<quoted text>Sorry Lanie, it was a typo, the reward for the murders is only $10,000 dollars more than the animal abusers reward, I just think it should be much more. What is the quickest way to reach the people responsible for setting the reward figure?

USA ROCKS wrote:

<quoted text>
Who's offering the rewards? Where is the money coming from? My guess is that the reward money for the indictment and prosection of the murderers is coming from a local law enforcement organization or perhaps even a local business or interest group. I would also guess that the reward for the animal abuse prosecutions are coming from a public source funded by public donations. You may be "upset" over the difference in amounts but you have to have the capacity to "understand" the reason for the difference.
You fail to understand why a public organization that is supported by public donations is willing to offer a reward to capture animal abusers that is only 10K less that the reward offered to capture and prosecute murderers because you obviously have no understanding of the dynamic between the two different sources of funding.
Do you really believe that localities have the same resources and personnel dedicated to prosecute animal abusers as they do murderers? Have you given any thought as to why someone would be more willing to donate money to prosecute an animal abuser than they would to prosecute a murderer? Obviously not. You have numerous law enforcement agencies within any one area dedicated "solely" to the capture and prosecution of murderers and the solving of unknown murders while at the same time you are "lucky" if there is perhaps "one" publicly supported agency to provide for the entire spectrum of animal welfare.
I'm probably not much different from your average joe blow who if he or she was going to make a donation to the prosecution of murderers or the prosecution of animal abusers then that donation is going to those who fight animal abuse, i.e. those who are most in need of it.
And the reason for all of this is simple. People take murder much more seriously than animal abuse and as such the resources and personnel to apprehend murderers is exponentially higher than that to prosecute animals abusers.
You are "upset" over the cover of the book but you haven't taken the time to actually read it. Look a little deeper and perhaps you will understand the reason for what "you think" are obvious inconsistencies.