i have 2 questions ..

[Siouxsie 1]

[ and if you are, i'm sure you love your animal(s) (all animals) dearly .. and respect life in general ]

 

and

two: would you boycott home depot ?

 

 

* note: home depot and the atlanta falcons are owned by arthur blank *

 

 

and please note if you are an atlanta falcons fan

(yes, i am .. along with the miami dolphins and washington redskins)

or a michael vick fan

or have michael vick on your fantasy football team

 

 

i mean hanging or electrocuting a poor defenseless dog for the crime of not being a fierce enough fighter ?

 

 

i'm sick ! i truly am !

 

[pimptastic69 0]

Blank doesn't own Home Depot, but I still boycott it because it sucks.

[RLLD 4,215]

I like to let my dog crap on the curmudgeon's patio underneath my deck...

[davebg 0]

If I recall correctly, there was a NY Jets RB (LeShon Johnson) who was arrested twice and admitted involvement in dog fighting. Does that mean that you are going to boycott all Johnson & Johnson products?

 

Nate Newton was arrested at a dog fight in the early 90's. The Dallas Cowboys are still considered "America's Team".

 

The idea that you are going to hold a company responsible for the private actions taken by an employee...especially an employee of another company that just happens to be owned by the same person as the organization that they work for...is just asinine.

[davebg 0]

I like to let my dog crap on the curmudgeon's patio underneath my deck...

Little does that stoopid b|tch know, but I just enrolled in the Ron Mexico Dog Trainer Seminar.

 

Something tells me that their methods of stopping a dog from pooping where it shoudn't go a little beyond getting in the dog's face and going

 

Just a hunch.

[hoytdwow 202]

If I recall correctly, there was a NY Jets RB (LeShon Johnson) who was arrested twice and admitted involvement in dog fighting. Does that mean that you are going to boycott all Johnson & Johnson products?

 

Congratulations! This is the stupidest analogy ever!

 

Nate Newton was arrested at a dog fight in the early 90's. The Dallas Cowboys are still considered "America's Team".

 

I thought the Braves were America's Team

 

The idea that you are going to hold a company responsible for the private actions taken by an employee...especially an employee of another company that just happens to be owned by the same person as the organization that they work for...is just asinine.

 

I think the reasoning is that you boycott the company to protest the owner's inaction regarding the employee, or that the owner doesn't go far enough in firing the employee, etc.

[Siouxsie 1]

Congratulations! This is the stupidest analogy ever!

 

I think the reasoning is that you boycott the company to protest the owner's inaction regarding the employee, or that the owner doesn't go far enough in firing the employee, etc.

 

 

thankx, hoyt

i would have explained it

but i thought daveberg was just seeking attention

[davebg 0]

Congratulations! This is the stupidest analogy ever!

How do you figure? They both involve a NFL player being active in dog fighting. Bother team owners also own/have major shares in completely unrelated national businesses. I don't know the specifics of Johnson's invovlement in dog fighting, Vick is a much higher profile player and Johnson's stuff went down under a much more relaxed personal conduct policy/commish, but I think there are plenty of similarities.

 

I think the reasoning is that you boycott the company to protest the owner's inaction regarding the employee, or that the owner doesn't go far enough in firing the employee, etc.

Ummm...maybe we can give Blank a chance to wait until Vick is actually arrested for a crime before comdemning him for not taking action.

[TheNewGirl 1,480]

Yes, I am a pet owner.

No, I don't boycott. I don't think it solves anything. Me, ONE person out of the eleventy billion that shop there, won't make a difference.

[RLLD 4,215]

Ummm...maybe we can give Blank a chance to wait until Vick is actually arrested for a crime before comdemning him for not taking action.

 

I agree with this.

 

I would support the temporary removal of a teacher accused of sodomy, or even the police officer accused of battery until such time as those accusations can be mediated.

 

I think Blank is taking the appropriate stance to wait until such time as the man has been proven guilty before punishing him. Now, that being said, he must also look at how this entire situation affects his team. if he deems that Vick is a disruption due to these circumstances then I think he shoudl take action to protect the organization.

 

Perhaps as important is to offer Vick the time and support he needs during this time. In the end, Blank can come away from this with greater standing for supporting his player until the guy is proven guilty. I honestly think that is the moral thing to do, right now.

 

If he is convicted they should give the guy the max penalty IMHO.

[Siouxsie 1]

Yes, I am a pet owner.

No, I don't boycott. I don't think it solves anything. Me, ONE person out of the eleventy billion that shop there, won't make a difference.

 

 

 

you don't vote, do you ?

[hoytdwow 202]

How do you figure? They both involve a NFL player being active in dog fighting. Bother team owners also own/have major shares in completely unrelated national busnesses. I don't know the specifics of Johnson's invovlement in dog fighting, Vick is a much higher profile player and Johnson's stuff went down under a much more relaxed personal conduct policy/commish, but I think there are plenty of similarities.

 

LeShon Johnson owns Johnson and Johnson?

 

 

Ummm...maybe we can give Blank a chance to wait until Vick is actually arrested for a crime before comdemning him for not taking action.

 

Do you think?

Let's burn them at the stake today

 

 

also, starting your posts with "ummm" makes you sound like a retarded valley girl.

thatsatip

[davebg 0]

LeShon Johnson owns Johnson and Johnson?

Woody Johnson owns the NY Jets and owns/has controlling stake(?) in Johnson & Johnson.

 

LeShon played for the NY Jets. Hence, my analogy of holding J&J responsible for the actions of an employee of another organization owned by Woody.

[TheNewGirl 1,480]

you don't vote, do you ?

 

 

Not that it matters, but no, I do not vote.

[davebg 0]

also, starting your posts with "ummm" makes you sound like a retarded valley girl.

thatsatip

Look at the people I was responding to. I thought it would increase my chances of them understanding.

[hoytdwow 202]

Woody Johnson owns the NY Jets and owns/has controlling stake(?) in Johnson & Johnson.

 

LeShon played for the NY Jets. Hence, my analogy of holding J&J responsible for the actions of an employee of another organization owned by Woody.

 

Oh. In that case, it's a fine analogy.

Was LeShon convicted? What did the Jets do to him?

[hoytdwow 202]

Look at the people I was responding to. I thought it would increase my chances of them understanding.

 

You were responding to me, assface.

 

[Siouxsie 1]

Not that it matters, but no, I do not vote.

 

 

 

'nuff said

[Vince44 205]

I am a dog lover but I have never been inside a Home Depot.

[davebg 0]

Oh. In that case, it's a fine analogy.

Was LeShon convicted? What did the Jets do to him?

I know he was charged w/crimes related to dog fighting, but I don't know if he was convicted.

 

I believe the Jets released him, but that was likely more b/c he sucked than b/c of the dog fighting stuff.

[Brown Eyed Girl 1]

Not that it matters, but no, I do not vote.

 

[TheNewGirl 1,480]

'nuff said

 

 

What the ###### does owning pets and boycotting home depot have to do with not voting?

[SigEp316 0]

Ummm...maybe we can give Blank a chance to wait until Vick is actually arrested for a crime before comdemning him for not taking action.

 

 

This indictment carries a 95% conviction rate. I don't think Blank or the NFL should wait for conviction and I don't think they'll be able to. Between the Humane Society and PETA putting pressure on the NFL and their partnerships and sponsors, something will be done sooner. As far as I'm concernced he's guilty, even if they didnt' have witnesses that placed him at dogfights. Evidently they've now got proof of Vick purchasing a lot of the dogfighting "equiptment".

 

If RLLD comes over to my house and falls down the stairs and is severly injured, I'm at fault. If there is criminal activity happening at one of my properties, I should also be liable.....it's my responsibility to manage my properties and know who and what is going on there.

[phillybear 366]

Dog meat is quite tasty. I prefer the slow roasting method over a charcoal grill.

[davebg 0]

This indictment carries a 95% conviction rate. I don't think Blank or the NFL should wait for conviction and I don't think they'll be able to. Between the Humane Society and PETA putting pressure on the NFL and their partnerships and sponsors, something will be done sooner. As far as I'm concernced he's guilty, even if they didnt' have witnesses that placed him at dogfights. Evidently they've now got proof of Vick purchasing a lot of the dogfighting "equiptment".

 

If RLLD comes over to my house and falls down the stairs and is severly injured, I'm at fault. If there is criminal activity happening at one of my properties, I should also be liable.....it's my responsibility to manage my properties and know who and what is going on there.

I 100% agree w/you in the sense that I think he's guilty. As for the conviction rate, I'm not sure about that. I know that I've read that it's hard to get a conviction in these cases, but maybe that was more in reference to dog fighting investigations, rather than trials. It might very well be that many such investigations don't result in arrests/trials b/c it is hard to prove, but if there is enough evidence to indict then such cases do result in such a high conviction rate.

 

However, I didn't say that Blank, the NFL or anyone should have to wait until he was convicted of a crime...I just think it's a bit premature to take Blank to task considering Vick hasn't even been arrested or had an arraignment yet.

[SigEp316 0]

However, I didn't say that Blank, the NFL or anyone should have to wait until he was convicted of a crime...I just think it's a bit premature to take Blank to task considering Vick hasn't even been arrested or had an arraignment yet.

 

 

do you think we'll see something done when he's arraigned?

 

I just think the NFL and Blank are going to get so much pressure from outside sources, that they'll be forced to act soon. Either way, I hope he gets the book thrown at him.

[davebg 0]

do you think we'll see something done when he's arraigned?

 

I just think the NFL and Blank are going to get so much pressure from outside sources, that they'll be forced to act soon. Either way, I hope he gets the book thrown at him.

Honestly, you want to know what I think will happen? I think they intend to let him play at first, but if the pressure gets too great what they will do is give Vick a paid leave of absence to "deal w/his issues".

 

The problem is that he's a first time offender in the NFL and the union will likely have to defend Vick...even if they don't want to. Of course, how Vick and ATL do in the first month fo the season could also play a factor.

[hoytdwow 202]

I just think it's a bit premature to take Blank to task considering Vick hasn't even been arrested or had an arraignment yet.

 

 

Why? If he's smart he won't wait to be arrested, but will surrender himself. And, he's been indicted, so he's going to be arraigned. It's just a matter of when.

The stuff happened at his house. He's guilty of that at least.

[davebg 0]

Why? If he's smart he won't wait to be arrested, but will surrender himself. And, he's been indicted, so he's going to be arraigned. It's just a matter of when.

The stuff happened at his house. He's guilty of that at least.

Look, as I've said, I think he's guilty, but considering he hasn't been arrested or arraigned yet (let alone convicted) he's not guilty of anything yet.

 

How is what you're doing now in reagrd to Vick any different than those no talent assclowns at Duke who focked over the lacrosse guys? Those guys were accused of a heinous crime...a crime that our criminal justice system considers to be MUCH more serious than what Vick is accused of. They were found guilty in the court of public opinion (at least down at Duke) and the same mob mentality that you are applying to the Vick drama is what convicted them in the public eye...even though, as it turned out, not only were they found not guilty by the authorities, but they were flat out exonerated when the authorities went as far to declare them completely innocent of the charges.

[hoytdwow 202]

Look, as I've said, I think he's guilty, but considering he hasn't been arrested or arraigned yet (let alone convicted) he's not guilty of anything yet.

 

How is what you're doing now in reagrd to Vick any different than those no talent assclowns at Duke who focked over the lacrosse guys? Those guys were accused of a heinous crime...a crime that our criminal justice system considers to be MUCH more serious than what Vick is accused of. They were found guilty in the court of public opinion (at least down at Duke) and the same mob mentality that you are applying to the Vick drama is what convicted them in the public eye...even though, as it turned out, not only were they found not guilty by the authorities, but they were flat out exonerated when the authorities went as far to declare them completely innocent of the charges.

 

It's already been discussed that the Duke analogy is weak. The Vick case is the result of an extensive investigation by Federal authorities that led to an indictment. These types of indictments are virtual slam dunks, as has also been posted.

 

The Duke case came from a one night event and was prosecuted by a dipshit DA who was totally discredited and disbarred. The indictments in that case were based on his idiocy, not on any serious investigation.

 

Also, Vick's not going to be arrested. He will turn himself in. If he doesn't turn himself in, he will be arrested. As soon as either one happens, he will be arraigned on the charges.

 

My other point is that since it happened on his property, he's guilty of that fact alone. My belief that he should be suspended proceeds outward from that.

[davebg 0]

It's already been discussed that the Duke analogy is weak. The Vick case is the result of an extensive investigation by Federal authorities that led to an indictment. These types of indictments are virtual slam dunks, as has also been posted.

 

The Duke case came from a one night event and was prosecuted by a dipshit DA who was totally discredited and disbarred. The indictments in that case were based on his idiocy, not on any serious investigation.

 

Also, Vick's not going to be arrested. He will turn himself in. If he doesn't turn himself in, he will be arrested. As soon as either one happens, he will be arraigned on the charges.

 

My other point is that since it happened on his property, he's guilty of that fact alone. My belief that he should be suspended proceeds outward from that.

I totally agree w/your assessment of the Duke case...in hindsight. However, at the time, we didn't really know that they had been railroaded by a DA who was only looking out for his politicial advancement.

 

My point is that our legal system is predicated on the presumation of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. If you want to paint him as guilty in the court of public opinion I'm with you, but unlike the NFL and Blank we don't have a CBA and a contract w/an employee to deal with.

 

As for him being guilty b/c it happened on his property...I'm not sure of the legality of that. I think someone gave the example of someone hurting themselves on your property, but that's not a criminal matter. It's a civil matter, which has a completely different set of laws and standard of proof applied to it. I don't know whether or not there are some crimes where the landlord/home owner can be held criminally responsibvle for the actions of others...particularly if the owner doesn't reside on the property.