http://spectrum.buffalo.edu/article.php?id=37410
They are just dogs
MATT WEBER - Staff Writer
Can anyone tell me why ex-Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick is still in prison? It has been a year since his sentencing, so allow me to quickly remind all of you how he got there in the first place: he killed eight dogs by means of drowning, electrocution or beating while also gambling on the dog fights.
For those killings, he was sentenced to 16 months in jail (14 if he shows good behavior) and he was up to lose almost $120 million in salary and endorsements. He eventually got his endorsements back, but still lost around $20 million in pay.
All of that happened to him for killing eight dogs.
Really?
Why does society put dogs on such a higher level than any other animals? We consider them human when they should be considered what they are: the property of the owner. When a dog does its business on another person's lawn, the person doesn't yell at the dog, they yell at the owner. An owner gets to decide what they do with their property and if Vick chooses to fight his dogs, then so be it.
Personally, I would never choose to fight my dog and it is not like Vick is taking my dog and using it to fight without my consent. Vick's dog fighting organization, Bad News Kennelz, only fought dogs that were chosen by their owners to fight. They weren't fighting dogs against the owner's will. If that were the case, then I would totally understand there being a problem.
Because "man's best friend" is put on such a pedestal, it clearly didn't matter what dogs were being tossed into fights. The fact that there were cute little dogs fighting each other made people turn against Vick.
Comedian Daniel Tosh adds a very humorous opinion to Vick's dilemma.
"I've wanted to kill a human today; I've never wanted to hurt your dog. Vick could have killed six thousand cats and people would have been like, 'You know they're overpopulated, right?' " he said.
Speaking of overpopulation, I guess deer can be killed off left and right and everyone is OK with that. When the Vick trial first started, I asked several people why they thought deer hunting was alright while Vick's dog dilemma was such a catastrophe.
The majority of the answers included the words "because deer were overpopulated." Clearly, the only humane way to decrease the deer population is by shooting Bambi in the face. Tranquilizers won't do the trick, you need the deer to feel it, make him know what hit him.
Another response after my rebuttal was, "some people eat the deer meat after they kill them." So basically, if Vick had eaten the dogs after they were killed, it would make everything ethical, right? If it is all right to chow down on deer, it is only right that dogs can be used as sustenance, too.
I always like to consider this event as an indirect action considering this affects no one on a personal level. Let's be honest, I guarantee the first thing the jury thought when they heard what the case was about was, "Aw, poor dogs."
That's the problem: our culture sympathizes with dogs more than it does humans. Vick lost almost two years of his life and money I could only wish to make because of the lives of eight dogs. Think about it.
Two years. $20 million. Eight dogs.
Ridiculous.
At the end of the day, Vick is a really hard guy to defend because the rest of society is against him. No one cares about how small of a deal this really is.
When you step back and look at the big picture they are just dogs.
It's as simple as that.
