Phurfur 70 Posted June 18, 2009 Get what? I understand how the law worked in each case. I understand 'why' each case ended the way they did. I just don't accept it. And I will tell you why. There is a statue in almost every courtroom in America. It is called 'Lady Justice'. She is blindfolded to represent that the law/punishment should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, power (money), or weakness. These two cases represent how (on each end of the spectrum) this objectivity is utter bullshit. The media and public sentiment swayed the prosecution to go after Michael Vick as hard as they did in regards to punishment. They made an example out of him because of his identity. That was wrong. And the side inwhich fame actually worked against a defendent in a case. Stallworth was let off easy because of favor and power. This was also wrong. And the side inwhich fame actually worked for a defendent in case. The courtroom and criminal prosecution should NOT be swayed by public sentiment or the media. That flies in the face of the the whole judicial system and what the statue of Lady Justice implies. But it doesn't and the sheeple like you just accept it and say: "It is what it is". Oh, I get it alright. But I choose to think for myself as opposed to just accepting it and thinking what the media tells me to think. You don't get it because 1. Intent is the important word here. 2. Vick actually got off easy, my god it was a plea bargain. There is a kid in Florida who faces up to 158 years in jail for killing 19 cats and that is with no gambling or racketeering charges. http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/vi...c.php?p=3452359 I am saying they both got off easy. You are correct that there is not equal justice for all in the country; the rich have always had an advantage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 You don't get it because 1. Intent is the important word here. 2. Vick actually got off easy, my god it was a plea bargain. There is a kid in Florida who faces up to 158 years in jail for killing 19 cats and that is with no gambling or racketeering charges. http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/vi...c.php?p=3452359 I am saying they both got off easy. You are correct that there is not equal justice for all in the country; the rich have always had an advantage. Vick got off easy? It cost him every penny he had and 2 years of his life. Please. Also, I doubt that kid ends up serving more time than Vick did. Just a hunch but I doubt they are going to give him 158 years in prison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted June 18, 2009 Babble.... Babble..... Babble. Bottom Line: One innocent human life > A thousand dogs You lose. I win. Case Closed. you really couldn't be more off base on this if you fockin tried. It's not a comparison. Yes, we all agree that the life of one average person is greater than the life of an animal, or maybe even several animals. That's not the issue. The issue is that Stallworth killed a guy in an accident. Tragic? Yes. Avoidable? Possibly. Culpable? Certainly. But the bottom line is that it was still an accident. Vick fought dogs to the death and killed, with his own hands, dogs that didn't fight up to standards. He knowingly and intentionally took the life of a living creature for his own sick pleasure and justification AND ran an illegal gambling ring for it. The victim in Stallworth case might be > than in Vicks...but the crime in Vicks >>> Stallworths stupid accident. HTH. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted June 18, 2009 you really couldn't be more off base on this if you fockin tried. It's not a comparison. Yes, we all agree that the life of one average person is greater than the life of an animal, or maybe even several animals. That's not the issue. The issue is that Stallworth killed a guy in an accident. Tragic? Yes. Avoidable? Possibly. Culpable? Certainly. But the bottom line is that it was still an accident. Vick fought dogs to the death and killed, with his own hands, dogs that didn't fight up to standards. He knowingly and intentionally took the life of a living creature for his own sick pleasure and justification AND ran an illegal gambling ring for it. The victim in Stallworth case might be > than in Vicks...but the crime in Vicks >>> Stallworths stupid accident. HTH. So it was an accident that Stallworth drank alchohol, grabbed his keys, and got behind the wheel. That was an accident? That is called negligence, and due to said negligence (which is illegal) a PERSON is dead. Spin it. Minimize it. Do what you like. I perefer common sense. But thanks for the try. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 you really couldn't be more off base on this if you fockin tried. It's not a comparison. Yes, we all agree that the life of one average person is greater than the life of an animal, or maybe even several animals. That's not the issue. The issue is that Stallworth killed a guy in an accident. Tragic? Yes. Avoidable? Possibly. Culpable? Certainly. But the bottom line is that it was still an accident. Vick fought dogs to the death and killed, with his own hands, dogs that didn't fight up to standards. He knowingly and intentionally took the life of a living creature for his own sick pleasure and justification AND ran an illegal gambling ring for it. The victim in Stallworth case might be > than in Vicks...but the crime in Vicks >>> Stallworths stupid accident. HTH. Pushing out a wet fart is an accident. Drinking all night long and deciding to drive is not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phurfur 70 Posted June 18, 2009 you really couldn't be more off base on this if you fockin tried. It's not a comparison. Yes, we all agree that the life of one average person is greater than the life of an animal, or maybe even several animals. That's not the issue. The issue is that Stallworth killed a guy in an accident. Tragic? Yes. Avoidable? Possibly. Culpable? Certainly. But the bottom line is that it was still an accident. Vick fought dogs to the death and killed, with his own hands, dogs that didn't fight up to standards. He knowingly and intentionally took the life of a living creature for his own sick pleasure and justification AND ran an illegal gambling ring for it. The victim in Stallworth case might be > than in Vicks...but the crime in Vicks >>> Stallworths stupid accident. HTH. It doesn't get any clearer than this and some people still don't get it. It is all about INTENT! Vick calculated his crimes and carried them out for years while Stallworth never intended to hurt anyone but needs to be punished for breaking the law and taking a human life. Vick is a moral pervert and society is better off without people like him. I will repeat, both guys got off easy but that privilege comes with having money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted June 18, 2009 So it was an accident that Stallworth drank alchohol, grabbed his keys, and got behind the wheel. That was an accident? That is called negligence, and due to said negligence (which is illegal) a PERSON is dead. Spin it. Minimize it. Do what you like. I perefer common sense. But thanks for the try. Pushing out a wet fart is an accident. Drinking all night long and deciding to drive is not. I'm not defending the guy. I don't think a manslaughter conviction, under any circumstances, is a 30 day jail time thing. However, let he among you here that is without sin be the first to cast a stone. EVERYONE OF YOU FOCKERS HAS DRIVEN HOME AT SOME POINT OVER THE "LEGAL" LIMIT AND JUSTIFIED IT BY SAYING "Oh, I'm just a little buzzed" OR SOME CRAP LIKE THAT. YOU WERE JUST LUCKY NOT TO BE IN HIS SITUATION, THAT'S ALL!!! Stallworth drank alcohol, chilled out for a few hours and drove home after he believed there was enough gone by. On average it takes a guy weighing 200 lbs about 3-4 drinks to get legally drunk, depending on how fast he drinks them (technically depending on how much time has gone by since he started drinking). All of us have been there, is just that some of us aren't hypocrites about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 It doesn't get any clearer than this and some people still don't get it. It is all about INTENT! Vick calculated his crimes and carried them out for years while Stallworth never intended to hurt anyone but needs to be punished for breaking the law and taking a human life. Vick is a moral pervert and society is better off without people like him. I will repeat, both guys got off easy but that privilege comes with having money. No, Stallworth's INTENT was to drink and drive. The result was killing a man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted June 18, 2009 All of us have been there, is just that some of us aren't hypocrites about it. Exactly how am I being a hypocrite? If I was drunk, drove, and killed somebody I would expect to be prosecuted. I would expect it because I broke the law, made the decsion to break the law, and a PERSON is now dead. You're funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phurfur 70 Posted June 18, 2009 No, Stallworth's INTENT was to drink and drive. The result was killing a man. Actually his intent was not to drive drunk, that is why he waited until 7AM to drive. He just didn't wait long enough. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 Stallworth drank alcohol, chilled out for a few hours and drove home after he believed there was enough gone by. How the in the world do you know this happened? The man was driving home at SEVEN AM after partying all night. Were you riding shotgun or something? All of us have been there, is just that some of us aren't hypocrites about it. Hypocrites? This isn't Leonard Little you're talking to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 Actually his intent was not to drive drunk, that is why he waited until 7AM to drive. He just didn't wait long enough. How do you know this? Is that what Stallworth said? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted June 18, 2009 Have any of you ever been to Miami? The clubs don't close. People party till the sun comes up. I don't know exactly what time Stallworth last drank, nor does it really matter. But to assume since it was 7am so he must have stopped drinking hours ago is just specualtion. And if Stallworth said that doesn't make it so. I would say the same thing to try and cover my ass. Either way it doesn't matter. He was well above the limit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phurfur 70 Posted June 18, 2009 How do you know this? Is that what Stallworth said? Yes, this was repported but this might help. Intent: 1 a: the act or fact of intending : purpose ; especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act <admitted wounding him with intent> b: the state of mind with which an act is done : volition 2: a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : aim <the director's intent> Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted June 18, 2009 Yes, this was repported but this might help. Intent: 1 a: the act or fact of intending : purpose ; especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act <admitted wounding him with intent> b: the state of mind with which an act is done : volition 2: a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : aim <the director's intent> Absolutely no Drunk Driver intends on going out and killing somebody. Doesn't mean they are without guilt. Does't mean it is legal. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be prosecuted as such. It's called negligent homicide. Why is this hard to understand? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 Yes, this was repported but this might help. Intent: 1 a: the act or fact of intending : purpose ; especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act <admitted wounding him with intent> b: the state of mind with which an act is done : volition 2: a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : aim <the director's intent> Yeah, let's just take Stallworth's word for it. Why would he ever lie? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted June 18, 2009 Exactly how am I being a hypocrite? If I was drunk, drove, and killed somebody I would expect to be prosecuted. I would expect it because I broke the law, made the decsion to break the law, and a PERSON is now dead. You're funny. Right. And he is being prosecuted. And now he's on house arrest for 2 years, can't drive for life* and owes millions to the family of the deceased. I'll tell you a story. I've lost two good friends to drinking and driving. One who's fault it was, the other who was a victim. I stood in the road as a junior in high school and watched as a good friend lie dying in the road because he chose to get on a motorcycle after he'd been drinking. He wasn't speeding or driving recklessly or doing anything else wrong. Anyway, another friend of mine pulled out from the parking lot where a bunch of us were hanging out and didn't see the motorcycle coming. My buddy hit the back of her car doing about 40 mph. His arm was torn off we stood/held him and put our shirts on his shoulder while he asked "where is my arm?" and we waited for the ambulance. He died in the hospital a few hours later from blood loss. He was my friend but I acknowledge that his recklessness, disregard and stupidity likely cost him his life. On the flip side I had another friend who was doing everything right. He was out with friends at 21 years old and was the designated driver. He took that role seriously and drank nothing but water the whole night. Anyway, driving his 2 drunk friends home, a focking DUI driver going the wrong way on the wrong side of a divided highway hit them head on. My friend, the designated driver and only sober person out of 5 in the accident, was the only one who died. I have lived with both of those events in my life for 20 and 17 years respectively. I don't take lightly what Stallworth did and can honestly say that many more millions than Stallworth is going to pay would not adequately compensate the families of my friends. My friend on the motorcycle made the mistake once and paid for it with his live. My other friend NEVER made the mistake and paid anyway. Back to Stallworth vs Vick. Stallworth committed one crime, one time. By all accounts his BAC of .126 was significantly over the legal limit of .08. What's that translate to in real life? About 2 more drinks than a person who would have blown a .08 or less. Vick was tried and found guilty of MULTIPLE counts of one crime (animal cruelty) plus illegal gambling and racketeering. Stallworth's crime was one night...Vick's went on over months/years. Stallworth didn't mean to hurt anyone, Vick most certainly did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 Right. And he is being prosecuted. And now he's on house arrest for 2 years, can't drive for life* and owes millions to the family of the deceased. x What does house arrest mean to a professional football player? Do you think he's going to be able to work and travel still? The answer is YES. Also, his license is revoked in FL, not the rest of the US. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted June 18, 2009 Stallworth didn't mean to hurt anyone, Vick most certainly did. So who did Vick hurt? What was their names? Did they have a Family? Oh that's right; Vick didn't hurt a person. It was animals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted June 18, 2009 x What does house arrest mean to a professional football player? Do you think he's going to be able to work and travel still? The answer is YES. Also, his license is revoked in FL, not the rest of the US. and I pointed out the same damned thing in another thread/post about this. and he can apply for hardship after 5 years for reinstatement of his driving privledges AND is eligible for reduced time on his house arrest AND blah blah blah...However, if you go to apply for a license in new state it is standard practice to not only see your existing license but to find out it's status in the previous state...so it's really not as easy as just getting license in another state...but that's neither here nor there. both guys committed a crime...and the consequences of those crimes were terrible on both fronts. However, most reasonable people would ascertain that Stallworth made a terrible error in judgment that contributed to an accident possibly "could" have been avoided. And those same people would find him guilty not only of the crime, but of the sheer stupidity that went with it as well. Vick on the other hand, most reasonable people will acknowledge not only the crime, as they do with Stallworth, but also see that this was a wanton disregard and intentional taking of LOTS of living creatures over the course of a long period of time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted June 18, 2009 Stallworth made a terrible error in judgment that contributed to an accident possibly "could" have been avoided. No need to go any further with you about this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phurfur 70 Posted June 18, 2009 Absolutely no Drunk Driver intends on going out and killing somebody. Doesn't mean they are without guilt. Does't mean it is legal. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be prosecuted as such. It's called negligent homicide. Why is this hard to understand? Because you were comparing negligent behavior to intentional behavoir. I say there is a difference. Why is this hard to understand? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted June 18, 2009 No need to go any further with you about this. yeah, cause I get it, and you don't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky's Swami 0 Posted June 18, 2009 So who did Vick hurt? What was their names? Did they have a Family? Oh that's right; Vick didn't hurt a person. It was animals. My dog's anal glands emissions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The value of your life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
