Michael Vick
Reading my latest Sports Illustrated, I see that Mr. Vick is eligible to play in the NFL. The article I read includes several opinions that, for the most part, say “Let him play because he’s been punished enough.” My opinion as to whether he should be allowed to play focuses on why football teams would sign him at all. This man is an abuser of innocent animals. Granted, the following quotes are from a Google search: “consulted [with a 'colleague'] about the losing dog’s condition, then executed it by wetting it with water and electrocuting it”; “the star athlete and his co-defendants used as the ‘main staging area for housing and training the pit bulls involved in the dog fighting venture and hosting dog fights.’”
Caroline Bishop (again, per Google) says “Michael Vick has openly admitted to the fighting, torture, and murder of many pitbulls on his land in Virginia. These dogs were not only fought but murdered in some of the most brutal ways-beating, drowning, hanging, and even electrocution. ” Google search notwithstanding, Vick does say that “I take full responsibility for my actions” and “dogfighting is a terrible thing.”
Filed under: Uncategorized
I am angered by his misconduct. Being so athletic is worthless if you have a bad character. Who would want to watch a murderer (in both Heatley and Vick’s case) or abuser of anything play? Even though I am a football fan, if (one of my favorite football players) Tom Brady killed an animal, I would not want to see him play again.
I really think that those sports involving “gore” (bullfighting, wrestling, boxing) should be considered as faded sports event in sports history. I can’t believe people like to watch people beat each other up.
(I am beginning to wonder if dogfighting and Vick’s skill are related.)