[suebee]

Originally Posted by Martina

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ingrid..._b_803194.html

This kind of thing bothers me more -- because it's us -- the government, people in meetings making heartless decisions.

It doesn't matter what we think of Vick. i mean it might matter to you personally. It would matter if you were on his jury. But your lack of confidence in his ability to change is irrelevant. And it doesn't, in my opinion, give you the right to harrass him.

Strengthen the laws. That's worth doing. Harrassing Vick? Why? For publicity, to feel better? i don't get it.

I'm not sure who you're referring to when you talk about harassing Vick. I seriously doubt he comes on this site to read this thread. I think that in order for people to comprehend the magnitude of the problem of animal abuse, and realize that the laws do not adequately address it, they have to know some of the details. As is stated in the article I posted, Vick pled not guilty to animal cruelty, and those charges were later dropped in a plea bargain. He was convicted of bankrolling a dogfighting conspiracy. For those who are fond of saying he did his time - he did NOT - not for animal cruelty. And from what I read there isn't much else he could have done do to those animals.