Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (217130)	8/26/2007 6:18:33 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793912

If Vicks ate the dogs he killed, would you feel better about it? They eat a lot of dog around the world, don't they?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (217130)	8/26/2007 6:34:46 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793912

If Vicks ate the dogs he killed, would you feel better about it? No, I wouldn't, Nadine. In observing behaviors within their sociological contest, I have a hard time claiming that dog fighting in any way equates with a desperate life-survival alternative. This may be an interesting example of a sliding morality, but to place any living creature in the contest of its value to survival, is far different from the blood sport that is dog-fighting.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (217130)	8/26/2007 7:42:42 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793912

Remember the stories we've all heard and seen in the papers, about kids and grownups who first kill with violence, dogs, cats, and other animals. Then they follow that up with rape and murder of humans. I think Vicks and his followers of dog violent murders are criminals. They weren't hunting the dogs for food. They were raising and brutalizing them to kill, or be killed for the "sport" of it. Next, I suppose they would go to kids and women. If Vicks and his group needed food, then I guess I would be OK with that. However, he didn't unless the NFL hasn't been paying the millions we know they have.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (217130)	8/26/2007 9:42:32 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 793912

They are still dogs. I can understand banning dog fighting as cruel, but people are talking about this story as if Vicks was torturing children. He killed underperforming dogs! The horror! As far as I know, a dog is an animal and it's legal to kill a dog. People should keep a sense of proportion. I have met many people that deserve less respect than man's best friend. I see a lot of these people in the news too. My sense of proportion tells me your average dog has more value than an evil human. One good dog would be equivalent to about 20 pedophiles on this scale.