ColtsFan4Life

Canadian Speed

You know... It's funny how this story gets zero coverage, yet Mike Vick who killed dogs is in the front page... I'm sorry, but if you kill someone, I'd say that's worse then killing dogs... If Mike Vick can't come back this season, then Stallworth should be gone for good...

__________________
"All you read and wear or see and hear on tv is a product begging for your fatass dirty dollar... So shut up and buy..." Hooker With a Penis by Tool

JCD

I knew somebody would mention Vick.

Stallworth is gone, likely for at least this season. If not more. While I think the 30 day sentance is far too light for the crime, comparing this to Vick's crimes are apples and oranges. There are critical differences between them.
1) Stallworth immediately admitted guilt. Vick blatently lied and only conceded he was guilty after every other codefendant plead guilty and struck a deal to testify against him.
2) Stallworth was guilty of a state crime (DUI, manslaughter). Vick was guilty of a federal crime (racketeering) and a liteny of state crimes (animal abuse).
3) Stallworth's crimes were the result of a poor decision. He didn't wake up and decide he was going to kill someone that day. Vick's crimes were calculated and occured over year. He DID wake up MANY mornings and say "I am going to run a dog fighting ring that operates across state lines".

As for the coverage issue, Stallworth isn't a "name" player. Vick is/was. That Stallworth's story isn't making headlines is because his story doesn't "sell" as well as Vick's did. Simple as that.

__________________

BigdaddyQH

Also remember that Stallworth agreedto maqke restitution, and that the person he hit was also in the act of committing a traffic violation,that of walking on the street on the bridge, instead of where he should have been. There are other facts that the public does not know about this case.

Vick's actions were intentional, and had no mitigating cricunstances. He lied about his involvment, and tried to deceive everyone about his involvment. Vicks punishment should be much more severe.

__________________
Winning is the Only Accpetable Result

dmoney408

well manslaughter is WAYYY worse then killing dogs there's no coming back to the NFL after that in my opinion

FSUViking

It's not "waaaaaay" worse at all. Manslaughter, despite the word looking scary on paper, is actually accidental. There's no pre-meditated intent behind manslaughter. Vick, on the other hand, did his vile, disgusting acts for SIX YEARS.

Stallworth didn't get into is car with the intent of running somebody over and killing them.

__________________

Irish

Stallworth did get into his car saying I'm going drinking, then said I'm not giving my keys to anyone, which set up his poor judgement. So he fully intended on driving home whether he intended to kill a human or not. If I got out an shoot a dog and then its owner but they can only bring me up on one charge, it should be the human. Stallworth killed a human, Vick killed dogs....I think the human's life means more.

__________________

Gzus

Vick never killed dogs himself. He was charged of bankrolling the operation that contributed to it.... So it's not accidental but it's not personally premeditated... It's premeditated for someone else to do it..... Kinda like it's premeditated for us to send someone else out to kill the cow for us, did we kill it ourselves? I think killing a person is worse than killing a dog regardless of intent. It's my personal opinion I could give a rat's a** about the legal interpretation of it.

__________________

2007 & 2008FBB.com Fantasy Football League Champion, 2009 Runner-Up

Irish

I haven't ever wanted to debate legal interpretation because what they think the greater good for the greatest amount of people means "Whoever whines the most influences my opinion". In the real world, not the legal world, killing a human is worse than killing a dog.

__________________

LooseChange25

Nobody is arguing the fact that a human's life is far more meaningful than the lives of all the dogs Vick killed combined. The fact of the matter is, Vick's act was premeditated. He killed dogs over a span of multiple years, across multiple states, thus making it a federal offense.

Stallworth on the other hand, did not have the premeditated thought to take a human's life. Yes, poor judgment was involved, and Stallworth will be the first to tell you. Vick lied to everyone until he absolutely had to tell the truth, for his sake. Stallworth was remorseful, and knew he did wrong. Vick has only shown sympathy because he knows its his only shot back in the NFL.

Point is, the law is the law and Vick committed a federal offense. I'm not saying Stallworth did no wrong, because he absolutely did. I also agree that he got off with a light penalty. Stallworth has been suspended for at least a year. Who's to say that it won't be carried into next year? Leonard Little was in a similar situation and he was not banned from the NFL. To say that Stallworth should be banned for life is ludacris and to compare the Vick case to the Stallworth case simply cannot be done.

__________________
All Day

FSUViking

Nobody is saying it wasn't poor judgment. But it was also poor judgment for Mr. Reyes to run out into the street in front of Stallworths car too.

I really don't get your analogy. Your making extreme "what if's" to argue Stallworth vs Vick.

He absolutely did kill dogs. Did you watch him on 60 Minutes? He said he he did. There's legal documentation of him telling authorities he drowned and electrocuted dogs.

These analogies are killing me. Stop making extreme examples in some ridiculous effort to make one reality worse than another.

No ****, Matlock. But this isn't so simple to say "humans vs dogs....humans win." Which is why this whole Vick vs Stallworth debate is ****ing stupid to begin with.

__________________

JCD

But the place where that happens is in Imaginationland. Here in reality, we would charge them for both crimes.

And who has said anything different?

__________________

JCD

This is wrong. Vick did kill dogs himself and admitted as such. He was involved in all aspects of the organization: from bankrolling, to killing the dogs who didn't show enough aggression to running the fights.
And who has said a dog's life is worth more?

__________________

Irish

This arguement is going on simply because someone is getting charged more for killing dogs than killing a human....that's who said a dogs life is worth more....

__________________

JCD

That is incorrect.

What you are citing is the differences between Federal and State charges. It has nothing to do with valuing the life of a dog over a human.

This has been explained to you several times now. You are simply being obstinate or willfully ignorant.

__________________