keggerz Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 there were people that actually were just booing a representative from the Humane Society Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The Falcons are 0-3.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 there were people that actually were just booing a representative from the Humane Society Was Poindexter booing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I'm not sure half of these people in the crowd are literate anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCharger Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 (edited) I'm not sure half of these people in the crowd are literate anyway. Most of that crowd would not be there if Vick were White. In fact the show wouldn't have ever existed if Vick were White. Edited September 25, 2007 by SuperCharger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turf Boy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Most of that crowd would not be there if Vick were White. In fact the show wouldn't have ever existed if Vick were White. Very very sad.....but, true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) When asked to applaud for whether they thought dog fighting should/shouldn't be a crime it was about the same for both. Sad. Someone from the audience asked about Bellichek's punishment versus Vick's. When a panelist (who is African American) defended the commish, he was booed. I also thought it interesting when the NAACP rep said when Vick commited the crime dog fighting was not a felony, so he shouldn't be charged with one. A humane society rep was behind him and immediately said that dog fighting has been a felony for decades...he was booed too. Edited September 26, 2007 by kcmast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Wow! I really didn't think people would watch crap like this. I guess it's sorta like driving past a car wreck... you know you shouldn't pay attention to it, but you can't help yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardinalEmpire.com Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I flipped just in time to see some panelist get booed for criticizing Vick. Then they panned to show the audience and that's all I needed to flip to something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I also thought it interesting when the NAACP rep said when Vick commited the crime dog fighting was not a felony, so he shouldn't be charged with one. A humane society rep was behind him and immediately said that dog fighting has been a felony for decades...he was booed too. Not quite telling the whole story here are we kcmast? The humane society rep explained that it had been a Felony for decades at the State Level in VA, but was indeed a Misdemeanor at the Federal level, when the crimes that Vick committed occurred. Yet despite this time-line ambiguity, the Feds indeed pursued the charges as Felony charges & were able to do so under the auspices of Conspiracy charges. Unfortunately when the NAACP Atlanta President asked his question, he didn't really understand the Fed's Conspiracy charges (or maybe he did & just wanted to stir things up) & the majority of the peanut gallery certainly didn't understand the humane society rep's clarification...or they just didn't want to hear / acknowledge it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'canes2004 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Did anyone expect any different kind of reaction from the audience? Ha, that's funny. They cheered when OJ was found not guilty as well. Nothing new here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 26, 2007 Author Share Posted September 26, 2007 Wow! I really didn't think people would watch crap like this. I guess it's sorta like driving past a car wreck... you know you shouldn't pay attention to it, but you can't help yourself. i sit down, i turn on the TV, I put it on ESPN, it was on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 When asked to applaud for whether they thought dog fighting should/shouldn't be a crime it was about the same for both. Sad. Someone from the audience asked about Bellichek's punishment versus Vick's. When a panelist (who is African American) defended the commish, he was booed. I also thought it interesting when the NAACP rep said when Vick commited the crime dog fighting was not a felony, so he shouldn't be charged with one. A humane society rep was behind him and immediately said that dog fighting has been a felony for decades...he was booed too. I will just say this. Any activity that questions the integrity of the game should get much more punishment from the commish than the actions of players who break laws and for the most part tarnish the image of the league. While both are serious matters...no doubt...I think a person has a valid point to question whether or not Bellichek punishment was too lite. I would concur that it was....it brings into question the integrity of the basic rules of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjpro11 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 im not racist, but i call it as it is.. and its OJ all over again. african americans vs the predominantly white justice system. there are plenty of african americans who have sense and know vick deserves to be punished. but those most vocal are the ones wanting vick to go free just because of his color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 im not racist, but i call it as it is.. and its OJ all over again. african americans vs the predominantly white justice system. there are plenty of african americans who have sense and know vick deserves to be punished. but those most vocal are the ones wanting vick to go free just because of his color. Comeon...you honestly believe that black people condone the murding of innocent people? Do you honestly believe that black people condone Vick's actions just in general. I don't think that is correct. In regards to OJ, the prosecution severely F'd up that case and the jury had every reason to acquit. However, let me take exception with you on the notion of those most vocal. Remember seeing the people outside the courthouse...a few with signs that read "Castrate Vick". Those were MOSTLY White People shown on the television with those signs. Now do I think most white people want Vick castrated...NO. Ask yourself why anyone is the most vocal about anything....to be the center of attention. Now ask yourself why the most vocal ones get press time....cause it SELLS. You will buy it. Why.....cause it is like a train wreck as mentioned earlier....you have almost no choice but to peak. Get a grip. Stereotypes are not a real time saver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCharger Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I will just say this. Any activity that questions the integrity of the game should get much more punishment from the commish than the actions of players who break laws and for the most part tarnish the image of the league. While both are serious matters...no doubt...I think a person has a valid point to question whether or not Bellichek punishment was too lite. I would concur that it was....it brings into question the integrity of the basic rules of the game. I agree to an extent, but I also believe convicted felons should be barred from playing in the league. Ask any non-celebrity convicted felon just how easy it is to find a job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjpro11 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Comeon...you honestly believe that black people condone the murding of innocent people? Do you honestly believe that black people condone Vick's actions just in general. I don't think that is correct. In regards to OJ, the prosecution severely F'd up that case and the jury had every reason to acquit. However, let me take exception with you on the notion of those most vocal. Remember seeing the people outside the courthouse...a few with signs that read "Castrate Vick". Those were MOSTLY White People shown on the television with those signs. Now do I think most white people want Vick castrated...NO. Ask yourself why anyone is the most vocal about anything....to be the center of attention. Now ask yourself why the most vocal ones get press time....cause it SELLS. You will buy it. Why.....cause it is like a train wreck as mentioned earlier....you have almost no choice but to peak. Get a grip. Stereotypes are not a real time saver. no, i didnt say black people condone murdering or animal cruelty, dont put words in my mouth. the people that primarily are supporting vick and who rooted for OJ are african americans. its just a fact. do you honestly believe that there would be large crowds supporting peyton manning if he was accused of what vick has done? other than obsessed colts fans, no.. and why the hell would they? the man admitted he is guilty, yet he still gets support. you've got to be kidding me. this is a step worse than OJ because vick admitted he is guilty. so maybe people that are supporting vick do condone dog fighting, killing and the other disgusting crap he has done. i can't think of any other reason, other than race as to why anyone would support the man and boo the people from the humane society. heres a quote from wikipedia about the OJ trial. i know its wikipedia, but take it for what its worth. "Discussion of the racial component of the case continued long after the trial. Some polls and some commentators have concluded that many blacks, while having their doubts as to Simpson's innocence, were nonetheless more inclined to be suspicious of the credibility and fairness of the police and the courts, and thus less likely to question the outcome. However, an NBC poll taken in 2004 reported that, although 77% of 1,186 people sampled thought Simpson was guilty, only 27% of blacks in the sample believed so, compared to 87% of whites. Whatever the exact nature of the "racial divide," the Simpson case continues to be examined through the lens of race." the poll http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5139346/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 no, i didnt say black people condone murdering or animal cruelty, dont put words in my mouth. the people that primarily are supporting vick and who rooted for OJ are african americans. its just a fact. do you honestly believe that there would be large crowds supporting peyton manning if he was accused of what vick has done?I honestly believe that if it were Peyton Manning we would have heard nothing about this...call me cynical. other than obsessed colts fans, no.. and why the hell would they? the man admitted he is guilty, yet he still gets support. you've got to be kidding me. this is a step worse than OJ because vick admitted he is guilty.Arguably so did OJ when he wrote the book "If I had done it!!! so maybe people that are supporting vick do condone dog fighting, killing and the other disgusting crap he has done.Or maybe they have put it in perspective of the myriad of other things that is completely messed up in our Country. i can't think of any other reason, other than race as to why anyone would support the man and boo the people from the humane society.I didn't see the show...and I don't get why anyone would boo someone from the humane society either...unless they were acting real PETA"ish"heres a quote from wikipedia about the OJ trial. i know its wikipedia, but take it for what its worth. "Discussion of the racial component of the case continued long after the trial. Some polls and some commentators have concluded that many blacks, while having their doubts as to Simpson's innocence, were nonetheless more inclined to be suspicious of the credibility and fairness of the police and the courts, and thus less likely to question the outcome. However, an NBC poll taken in 2004 reported that, although 77% of 1,186 people sampled thought Simpson was guilty, only 27% of blacks in the sample believed so, compared to 87% of whites. Whatever the exact nature of the "racial divide," the Simpson case continues to be examined through the lens of race."You look at the numbers and base you perception on the fact that 87% of whites are more correct than the 27% of blacks. Could one also conclude from the very same poll that whites generall don't like it when blacks are involved with killing whites...especially women who are white. If you would like, I could go and find the study that was the impotus of the Supreme Court case McKlesky V Kemp in which it shows that the death penalty in this country is more widely used for black assaillants who commit violent crimes versus their white counterparts. It also shows that when a white guy kills a black guy the death penalty is sought less times than when a black kills a white. Now all this is anecdotal and means nothing toward the OJ trial. But to simply say that OJ was guilty is one thing. But the police and prosecution totally F'd up the evidence and the case. Dershawitz(sp) is a smart individual...he wrote a book detailing how they f'd up....it is a decent read. So, look at the poll from the perspective of the anecdotal evidence used in McKlesky V kemp.....couldn't it be that white society had no tolerance for the mere possibility that a black guy killed a white woman and a white man....even if there is not enough evidence to convict him they believe a conviction should happen anyway. I dunno, but it is another side to the poll.the poll http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5139346/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I agree to an extent, but I also believe convicted felons should be barred from playing in the league. Ask any non-celebrity convicted felon just how easy it is to find a job. I agree....but it is easy to get a job if your felony is not violent or involved any kind of stealing or what not....and quite possible drugs. But my guess is that the NFL should be like any other employer.....let the individual teams decide...they after all formed the league...it is their collective league. Why is Goodell deciding who can play and who can't. Shouldn't the owners police this themselves and hire whom they want....this is a free market system is it not. My point...and not to be argumentative....not trying to be that....is that it is not the job of the commissioner to make sure the owners make money and the image of the NFL is pristine. The owner(s) will get the picture when fans don't show up to watch their teams. That should straighten them up....free markets tend to correct inadequacies of business owners...the NFL is no different....their teams are the product....and each owner should want the best product...and if they don't and the market will tolerate it...then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I switched to ESPN2 and watched sportscenter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.