Bare with me here. I am a huge animal lover. I cry during those animal shelter commercials with Sarah McLachlan. I’m not even joking, though I desperately wish I was (it’s pretty embarrassing to have to switch channels when I hear “Angel” come on the TV). Michael Vick’s conviction of state and federal felony charges for being the “key figure” behind an illegal dogfighting operation should not be taken lightly. In December of 2007, Vick was sentenced to serve just under two years in federal prison and his three years of prison time for charges in the state of Virginia was suspended upon the condition of his good behavior. Vick was released from prison in May this year and was put under home arrest. To the best of my knowledge, I believe he’s out and about now. His old team, the Atlanta Falcons, released him in June of this year, after making many failed attempts to trade him. He is now a free agent, though the NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell, has not lifted his suspension from the league. Justice served?
Whether or not you think Michael Vick’s sentence was fair for his crime is one story. I am still not sure how I feel about this as I am no legal expert. However, looking at other professional football players and their crimes of the past and their chances to play in the league again, the NFL is being terribly inconsistent by suspending Vick. I’m not telling a team to pick Vick up if he was allowed to play, by any means, I’m just saying the NFL is making a pretty strong statement by saying a player who was convicted on federal dogfighting charges should be punished more severely than a played convicted on manslaughter and drunk driving charges. Yes, I’m talking about St. Louis Rams’ own, Leonard Little. If Leonard Little is allowed to play in the NFL after driving drunk and killing a mother (re: human), why can’t Michael Vick be allowed to play after being the mastermind of a dogfighting operation that involved cruel and traumatizing torture of the dogs and gambling? I understand Little killed one person and Vick’s operation affected a large number of dogs, but banning a person convicted of federal conspiracy charges that did not involve the death of a human being while allowing a player convicted of manslaughter to play in the league just kind of baffles my mind. I didn’t realize dogs were more important than humans.
For a recap, Leonard Little was convicted of involuntary manslaughter after driving drunk in October of 1998 and running his SUV into and killing Susan Gutweiler. When he was tested, his blood alcohol level measured to be at 0.19 percent, more than double the 0.08 legal limit in Missouri. He was sentenced to 90 days in prison, four years of probation and 1,000 hours of community service. And I don’t seem to remember him being suspended from the NFL. He also had the involuntary manslaughter charge wiped from his record just in time to be arrested in 2004 for driving drunk and speeding. Through some miraculous workings of the powers that be, Little was acquitted of driving while intoxicated and left with just the misdemeanor speeding charge. Oopsies!
Personally, I am not sure I feel that any professional athlete convicted of a felony should be allowed to participate in professional sports again. However, when the NFL sets a precedence like it did with Little and I’m sure countless numbers of other athletes convicted of lesser crimes, I have to say I’m relatively shocked Michael Vick is still being suspended from play in the National Football League. If your league believes in second chances for those committing crimes, albeit accidental, against humans, why not those committing crimes against other animals? I am missing the logic and/or I don’t understand NFL guidelines for suspensions. It just seems a little inconsistent to me. Along with inflated pay checks, million dollar endorsement deals and special treatment on the social scene, it’s become increasingly apparent that celebrities, professional athletes included, also reap the benefits of cupcake penalties when they break the law. Dog and human crimes included.
The big picture should be stated here. If the average person is convicted of a crime will his or her company take them back after the prison time is up? The odds are no. This once again shows tha double standard of justice afforded to those with money and celebrity status. I for one am sick of this double standard. Some people out their would say oh give the guy a second chance. To them I would ask for you to go to your 9 – 5 job human resources department and pose the question “If I were to do whay Michael Vick did or Leonard Little did would I still have my job?” I can guarantee you they would say no way. To many people look to these celebriteis as Gods and role models, they are not. There are far more better role models in the real day to day world than these people. The fact is they do not know you, are not your friend and could care less about you. Will they be there when you get into a bad situation and help you get out of a jam? I don’t think so.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Michael Vick’s crime is properly viewed as more severe by the NFL simply due to the fact that it was a pre-meditated crime, performed with purposeful violence and with no remorse. It was carried out over an extended period and when originally confronted with the allegations by the NFL, Vick lied and claimed his innocence. Little’s crimes clearly had a greater impact on humanity as a mother was prematurely taken from her family. However, Little clearly made a mistake (albeit a heinous one) and did not purposely kill anyone. To be clear, I am not justifying his crime or the sentence he received but it cannot be overlooked that his was a mistake that could be learned from (even if he didnt). It is much harder for Vick to make the same claim. Considering teh idol status and influence these athletes have on our children, a pre-meditated and vengeful crime must be dealt with more harshly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I have a lot of thoughts on this, as I’m sure you can imagine but great job here Annie.
If the NFL or any professional sports team chooses to forget and forget the sins of their employees, especially the sins that have directly impacted the lives of others, there should be a financial consequence. A high percentage of wages, after taxes, designated to charities that benefit the victims of their infractions. Then there is a weekly or monthly reminder that it’s not over and they can’t move on. It may not be ENOUGH. But it is something.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If they let Vick back I will never watch another football game for the rest of my life…I have no intention of having any interest or playing any part in furthering a sport that can “forgive and forget” animal cruelty in it’s most disgusting form. I cannot believe that the NFLn would even CONSIDER letting this animal back into the league. NEVER!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Little was suspended for 8 games during the 1999 season. If Goodell was commissioner then I’m sure it would’ve been more.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
He plays great football. Plain and simple. If I want to question my morals and feel guilty on Sundays I go to church. But I don’t so I watch football and am entertained. This news makes me happy. And while dog killing makes me sad, football wins out.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh J henry, what a great thinker……NOT. That is what is wrong with today’s society. It is only wrong if it affects me or interupts my entertainment!!! I once sat for 3 1/2 hours on an icy interstate while 7 people died and the emergency vehicles were working to remove them from the scene. On the CB radios ( that dates it) , all people could complain and curse about was having to sit and wait until it was all clear. No reverance for the dead–some of the victims were small children. Some comments were “just drag them off the side of the road, they are dead anyway”. No respect for life….be it a human or animal! I think Annie is right on with her comments. I also think that if the professional sports powers that be would send a strong message and clean up their act, possibly it would clean up some of the problems in society. If baseball forgives Steroid use then they need to apologize to Pete Rose and put him in the Hall of Fame. If penalties were stronger against using the drugs or commiting the crimes , then kids wouldn’t grow up thinking they could get by with it. If the athlete knew that they would be out the first time and never able to return, then they more than likely would not start. If you commit a crime against society, you cannot be a paid profesional athlete in any sport. That would be a good enough reason to stay clean.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Being a volunteer for an animal shelter, I’ve thought a lot about this. I’m also a football fan.
For starters, the NFL was much more concerned with the gambling aspect of the situation than the dog-fighting and killing aspect. That tells you a lot. But that’s what is in their rules. I think time will tell – will any team really want him? Will they want to endure the possible fan flight and public criticism for having such low standards for player morals? Both of those things can (probably will) contribute to lower ticket sales and lower revenues – and we all know it’s all about money.
On the other hand, we as a society talk a great deal about rehabilitating and giving second chances to criminals. Again time will tell if Vick was truly sincere in his new-found remorse. Note that he apologized to everybody but the dogs when he made his public statement. But, if we, as a society, can forgive other criminals, why not him?
Honestly, I’m not sure how I feel about this whole thing. I’m sure there’s a very special place in Hell for dog-fighters and animal abusers in general. My heart says it’s ridiculous for him to be able to make millions of dollars doing what he loves. My head says that we, as a society were willing to give his dogs a second chance (unprecedented!), perhaps we should give him a second chance, too. Of course, I also think that if he does get back in and make tons of money, he should have to make very large donations to the groups that helped to save his dogs and the groups that work to fight dog-fighting everyday.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I believe the suspension of players is determined by the current league commissioner. Goodell is new to the position and obviously is more conservative when his players commit crimes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The solution is simple. If everyone would just boycott the NFL, then we wouldn’t have to talk about this. Be a college football fan. If you don’t know who to cheer for, I can steer you in the right direction. College football is not perfect, but murderers, men convicted of voluntary manslaughter, cruelty to animals, shooting themselves in the leg, and hit and runs do NOT get to play. The college football atmosphere is way more fun anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Personally, I am not sure I feel that any professional athlete convicted of a felony should be allowed to participate in professional sports again. ”
What if the felony was something like copyright infringement, or breaking DRMs?
If it was VIOLENT crime or otherwise involves violence (to humans or animals), yes, otherwise, no. So yes, both _violent_ incidents should have led to banning. But “a felony” = “banning” seems too much because not all felonies involve violence. Would you ban this person:
http://cbs13.com/local/video.game.modifying.2.1113623.html
if they were some sort of professional athletes despite that the crime did not involve violence to either humans or dogs?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0