Cross-posted at Marry in Massachusetts.
A startling percentage of us seem to demand perpetual punishment for him, as we do for most convicted criminals. Surely if the vengeance crowd had compassion, they lost it. If they learned the concepts of paying the price, rehabilitation and second chances, they lost those.
This allegedly is a nation of second chances, despite F. Scott Fitzgerald’s melodramatic statement that “There are no second acts in American lives.” Yet in the past few decades we have turned on those who need another shot the most. Our laws pretend to be reasonable and rational.
The theory is that if you are caught and convicted of (or plead guilty to) a serious crime, you pay in prison time or fines or both. Then you are supposed to live lawfully and contribute to society in taxes and otherwise.
In the large part, we are not very good at rehab. Felons don’t come out of prison with new licit skills, rather with bitterness and knowledge of other criminal activities. Yet even with our warehousing mentality ? and the highest percentage of our citizens in jail of any first-world country ? some convicts emerge chastened and legit.
What we are seeing and doing now though shows widespread eagerness to provide non-stop and permanent punishment. Imagine if the public stocks from the Puritan times were perpetual. You are humiliated daily and forever for your sins against society. That would elevate punishment to Promethean levels, with that bird of prey eating your liver and returning to do the same with the regenerated one.
How is it that we decided that there is no way to pay a debt to society with prison time?
An understandable wedge that may have contributed is child molesters and other sexual predators. We have sex-offender registries, laws and regulations on where they can live and travel, electronic anklets, and other tools to help assure the public that we are always watching them. Of course, this accepts that these people are crazy and incurable and presumes that such crazies will not act if they think the police are watching. We have many re-offender examples to disprove the latter.
The case of sex offenders illustrates the conundrum clearly, the issue that pertains to most convicted felons. The ideal is that being sent to prison is not for additional punishment, rather is the punishment, the loss of freedom, which allegedly is the great American driving force. The other part of that is while incarcerated, the prisoners get their heads on straight, receive therapeutic counseling and if they are there long enough, additional education to ensure that they emerge stable and productive. In those situations, the revitalized and wiser former criminal pays the social debt and returns to join us. We of course show compassion and welcome these citizens.
Back to sex offenders, we can’t seem to re-pattern them. They go into prison with uncontrollable illegal lusts and come out with the same. We then look at various options:
- Change the laws to permit keeping them in jail or psychiatric hospitalization forever, and do so.
- Expect them to re-offend, monitor them until they slip up, and in effect do the first option. Repeat as necessary.
- Dog them day and night, protest in front of their homes, demand that they be tossed from their jobs and living arrangements, and make them suffer until they end up back in prison or kill themselves violently or with drugs.
- Devote many millions to researching behavioral or pharmaceutical cures, which is likely expensive and years away, and may even be impossible in some cases.
None of those is a great choice. Only the last one approaches the ideal of the justice system at all.
I am a baby boomer and I grew up with the ideals that our WWII parents preached. One of those ideals that recurred frequently in literature, TV and movies was paying your debt to society. In the story, there often were small-minded and unfair folk who wanted to harry the ex-con just trying to make his way. Usually a hero found support in the majority of citizens with the message of that debt has been paid.
There are other, older tales in which taking the allegedly reserved authority of a God for vengeance continues. I think of Les Misérables, even though Jean Valjean only sort of paid his debt. Five years for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family and 14 years for escapes, he violated parole by not carrying his yellow ex-con ticket and telling everyone who he was. Even after a decade of exemplary life, Valjean remained the target of a relentless Inspector Javert. Author Victor Hugo makes his political statement and has his jest at justice with the ending. After Valjean saves Javert among others, the inspector kills himself when he realizes he can’t stand to take Valjean in again. The vengeance monster must be fed!
How did we get to a point as nation that so many of us in the public and media can say that all former prisons deserve non-stop punishment? How did so many of us come to excuse contributing to others’ suffering as a virtue and necessity?
Far too many of us seem to relish the Code of Hammurabi and the fearful vengeance of the Old Testament God. We also want to control the forces of retribution.
In a very real sense, that kind of blood lust and viciousness are far too similar to Michael Vick’s crimes. A major difference is that those who cannot permit reentry into society demand continuous and continual punishment, a painful life and a long discomfort leading to a slow death.
As a good example, the leadership of the Atlanta NAACP is much more New Testament about the Vick situation. In an AP story, they agree that his deeds deserve punishment and that he has to pay his debt. However, Chapter President R.L. White said, “As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football.”
There’s a balance that we can all strike. Whether it’s stealing, hurting someone, or cruelly using dogs for fatal sport and profit, there are penalties for those caught and convicted. When we do not honor that, we presume to take the authority of the lawmakers, police, judges and even any God we might follow.
Who are we to do that?
A felon like Vick needs prison time. In this case, he is certain to lose more than nearly any of us could ever acquire, in reputation, money, status, relationships and almost anything else we can catalog. As with other convicted criminals, he needs a fair shake when he leaves prison.
I don’t know that we have the will and compassion to pursue real rehabilitation for prisoners. We certainly should find better ways to reduce the number and percentage of Americans sent to jail. What we are doing doesn’t work before, during or after prison.
Meanwhile, we have a justice system in place with penalties for offenses. The public stocks are literally gone from our towns’ commons. Let us not figuratively restore them.
While I agree with much of what you’re saying, I can’t help remembering the legions of people all torn up that Paris Hilton was going to jail, and the movement to have her pardoned. Same with Martha Stewart. I think things may be a little more complex here.
Yes, there are many cases in all corners of this room. The celebrities from wealthy families who go in for short terms with no expectation of rehabilitation are in one, but there are damned few of those. The Martha sorts are not convicted of crimes that would make people at all fearful of them or otherwise ostracize them.
<
p>
Those without marketable skills or family resources, and those for whom societal disapproval can mean a permanent and severe disadvantage are many.
<
p>
This post came after seeing increasing calls in many places for punishment after the criminals allegedly paid their debt. I all for giving ’em a break and setting the expectation that society will not pig pile on them if they behave.
I don’t think Michael Vick honestly believes what he did was wrong. I think in his heart he thinks he is above all us. Then he tries to get through an airport with weed in a water bottle?
<
p>
That’s my huge gripe, as I’ve said over at RMG. Even the NAACP, which you’ve quoted, seems to be blind to the ferocity of his crimes.
<
p>
Rehabilitation requires the criminal to be aware and remorseful of his crime. I don’t think Michael Vick has displayed either of these characteristics.
Right, and that should affect the process. The judge is supposed to take his attitude into consideration, weighing his or her sense of regret as you have. Then the prison term is supposedly a period that includes reflection and resetting. That may or may not happen.
There is still the question of whether or not he should return to the NFL. I would say that his behavior and attitude, along with the impact of having a person of such despicable character return after serving jail time for the aformentioned crime is a severe, and he should receive a lifetime ban.
That’s one take. Consider instead Dan Wetzel’s column on this, including: The NFL employs players who have been convicted of spouse abuse, involuntary manslaughter due to drunken driving and obstruction of justice in a homicide investigation, to name a few. It’s not called the National Felon League for nothing.
<
p>
He adds, At this point, as reality has smacked him soundly in the face, as the dread of extended time in prison hits, as the endorsements, his good name and his nine-figure contract disappear, he’ll spend time wondering, like the rest of us, how it all went so horribly wrong.
<
p>
We should wait to see what Vick does and says when the price of his cruel and stupid decisions confront him and the sudden reality of an uncertain future present themselves. Continuing to kick him on top of prison, fines and what he has lost does nothing useful.
But then again I’m biased because I would never drive drunk or hit my wife.
since, as mentioned above, they do employ all sorts of other felons, people who have committed violence against other people no less.
<
p>
That said, I wouldn’t want Vick QBing my team. Not worth the negative press, the protesters, etc.
<
p>
Having said that, Vick’s loss of future earnings has no bearing on what I think his punishment should be. NFL QB or part timer at Wal*Mart, the crime is the same. You might even make the case that Vick should be punished more, since there was clearly no necessary financial incentive for Vick to commit the crime, whereas someone struggling to make ends meet might turn to crime [like this] to make some extra money.
I disagree with your premise here –
<
p>
<
p>
In reality, I think that the monitoring is not so much to inhibit potential reoffenders as it is to warn people of where they may be. That will remain necessary until we accept the fact that there ARE people who will always reoffend, and who DO need to be seperated from society.
<
p>
A different analogy than Jean Valjean is DSS in MA. When they take a child into protective custody, the legal imperative is reunification. At all costs. No matter how screwed up the parents are, no matter what the foreseeable danger may be. Unless DSS can convince a court to terminate parental rights – and talk to any social worker about THAT process – a loving foster family must prepare to return a happy child to a hellish biological home. And the pattern of reoffense continues.
<
p>
BTW – Vick will still be a multimillionaire and able to move on when he leaves prison – he just won’t be a NFL quarterback. To me, it’s sad that only dogs merit that sort of outrage.
among other things, this is a case of extreeeeemley bad timing for Micheal Vick.
<
p>
There is a new commissioner of the NFL who is dropping the hammer on bad behavior in the league. In my mind, all past examples of NFL players doing bad things are irrelevent for comparison. They have just turned a very large page on that story.
<
p>
I think the new commissioner, a guy by the name of Roger Goddell, shares the outrage that so many people in the NFL have done bad things, but are allowed to continue with very little effective punishment. But he’s now in a position to change that on a going forward basis. And boy is he.
<
p>
Already players have been suspended for parts of or the entire NFL season for crimes much less than DUI involving death or spousal abuse.
<
p>
Google: Tank Johnson, Pacman Jones, Odell Thurman, Chris Henry.
I need to read this more thorougly later, but I don’t think Vick is a good example. The guy killed dogs. I agree with Peter P. it would be nice if violence to humans provoked such outrage, but then again if they were humans he killed we wouldn’t be talking about his return to the NFL.
<
p>
It’s not additional punishment if an athlete loses his livelihood, it’s the same punishment any felon gets. The fact that the athlete has more to lose should affect his behavior (keep him from killing, in other words), but obviously that doesn’t always work.
This is an interesting diary, but I think it needs to be a bit more on point. I see two issues: American schadenfreude and the prison system.
<
p>
– Vick was toast the minute this story broke. We’re against killing animals in this country, period. Like I and others said, it would be nice if other issues got the same attention, but there it is.
<
p>
– I disagree with sabatai. I think there was enormous schadenfreude, to the point of ugliness, when Paris Hilton went to jail. However, she got a sympathy bump when people began to realize she spent more time in jail than Scooter Libby.
<
p>
– Prison is a whole other issue. We tend to say “Look at all these repeat offenders, we need to keep them in prison longer.” That might be true, but another way to look at it is that prison isn’t working. It might keep Criminal A off the streets, but if he meets Criminal B in the joint and they get along, it’s not long before you’ve got a gang. Maybe the high rate of recidivism is a sign that prisons don’t deter future crimes. I agree with R.L. White, let’s talk more about rehab, and not just for Michael Vick.
<
p>
sabutai, not sabatai. Sorry about that.
I disagree with the Paris Hilton part, but I agree with the complexity part.
Just so about prisons. I think back to my interviews with prison reformer Bill Leeke. He made huge improvements in Arkansas and South Carolina prisons. In both cases, he brought them from the nation’s worst to just bad before the states said they’d had enough reform.
<
p>
Among the things he told me that has stuck is as the post alludes to, we should send people to prison as punishment, not for punishment. He did not understand why some people think prisoners should be deprived of books, exercise, human contact and such when they were already deprived of liberty.
<
p>
As a penologist, he also was convinced that a few years in a state prison turned some criminal around. Beyond that, long sentences simply hardened them and was in the end detrimental to society.
<
p>
He lamented that many prisoners came from violent and crime-ridden families and neighborhoods. They knew no other behaviors and the prisons were not equipped with psychological counseling and activities to teach alternate behaviors.
<
p>
You’re right that prisons as is don’t work. To me, pretending that if we were tougher on incarcerated prisoners or held them longer we’d be better off is delusional and harmful to society.
First, I will admit a certain amount of gut-level schadenfraude with Vick, Hilton, Stewart, et al. It’s actually interesting/alarming to see that habitual vindictiveness arise, and actually take the time to see where that reaction comes from: anger and fear.
<
p>
We had a similar case of animal abuse here in Lowell recently — a guy mutilated a pit bull he was raising for dog-fighting — and the public outcry was similar. And this was not a case of “the bigger they come, the harder they fall” as perhaps is the case with celebrities.
<
p>
I am no “penologist” — doesn’t that sound dirty? — but it doesn’t take much to have an intuitive sense that retributive “justice” is much less effective than rehabilitative justice.
<
p>
My sister recently moved down to Philadelphia, not too far from the Eastern State Penitentiary — notable for being the one-time home of Al Capone. One thing that I thought was interesting is that the prison was constructed based on the idea that periods of solitary confinement and deep reflection would effectively rehabilitate criminals and enable them to become productive members of society. In some ways this is not too far off from monastic practice!
<
p>
This is interesting because, to me, it raises questions about the role of prison ministry in rehabilitating criminals. To me any lasting change in criminal mindset in only likely to come about through a genuine “change of heart” rather than any external factors. Sometimes this change of heart comes about through prison garden projects, dog grooming, training dogs for the seeing- or hearing-impaired, etc. Sometimes this comes about through “finding God” — other some other sort of spiritual practice such as meditation.
<
p>
A number of denominations are actively involved in prison ministry, and one can certainly argue that the effects are mixed: ministers who preach religious extremism of one sort or another are probably not turning out productive members of society; however, it seems to me that criminals who are able to turn their lives around by “finding God” or some other sort of inner peace — finding dog? — are more likely to be successfully rehabilitated.
<
p>
I guess I’m most familiar with the work of Buddhist prison ministry, such as the Buddhist Peace Fellowship’s Prison Project. Locally, a group of inmates that meets regularly for meditation at the Federal Medical Center in Devens under the guidance of a Theravada Buddhist monk.
<
p>
The view that rehabilitation comes more effectively through compassion than through punishment is one that is particularly strong in the Buddhist tradition, going back to the story of Angulimala, a notorious mass-murderer of the Buddha’s time who reformed and became a monk.
<
p>
Clearly there are some individuals who must remain incarcerated so long as they continue to pose a threat to themselves and/or society at large. However, it seems self-evident that we all benefit looking to rehabilitate offenders rather than seek perpetual punishment; this, of course, requires that each of us let go our knee-jerk reaction for vengeance and punishment.
According to USAToday, about seven million dogs and cats are killed each year at shelters. Hundreds of millions of animals are killed for food. Maybe what you meant was, “We’re against torturing animals for fun,” in which case I’d agree with you. Interestingly, this is a relatively recent development in the case of dog fighting.
We’re against torturing animals for fun. Even when NFL quarterbacks do it.
…recall bullfighting? Cockfighting, too.
<
p>
Those activities aren’t new.
<
p>
Shameful, but not new.
<
p>
And people have been torturing other people for fun, too.
<
p>
Welcome to Slaughterhouse Six.
…dressing up tiny dogs in little sweaters.
…booties on the dogs’ feet over here in Germany. It’s a laugh riot.
<
p>
But, in the middle of winter, if a doggy doesn’t want to go outside to do its “business,” what are the “owners” supposed to do? Cats have their kitty litter alternatives, which dogs don’t want to use.
Using the term relatively recent in this way qualifies other events…
<
p>
Opposition to slavery
Allowing women to vote
Railroads
and, one of my favorites…
<
p>
A man, a plan, a canal, Panama!
It’s the attitude. If he demonstrates remorse and tries to make good, society will allow him to go on his merry way and make a living. If he pretends to be a victim and scoff at any suggestion he did wrong, he will be an ongoing target.
<
p>
Can’t play QB in the NFL? Who’s fault is that? He should’ve waited until he was retired to commit his felonies. Playing in the NFL is a privelage, not a right.
<
p>
Yes, for the rest of his life, he’s going to be known as a liar, a gambler and a torturer of innocent animals. But that’s becuase, well, he lied, gambled and tortured innocent animals. When he does other things he can be known for that, too.
<
p>
LET’S NOT IGNORE THE FACT THAT MICHEAL VICK WAS SURELY AWARE THAT WHAT HE WAS DOING REPEADETLY AND OVER AN EXTEDNED PERIOD OF TIME WAS AGAINST THE LAW. HIS GUILTY PLEA IS A WAY FOR HIM TO GET AWAY WITH AS LITTLE PUNISHMENT AS POSSIBLE, NOT HIS ATTEMPT TO CLEANSE HIS SOUL.
<
p>
So again, with the attitudes…him first.
One, I had never heard of Michael Vick or what he is alleged to have done before coming to BMG. If Vick is convicted and spends jail time or has to pay a fine, so be it. If he does spend some jail time and after he is released, he would be free to seek employment from any team that he will take him, and endorsements from any company that will give him such.
<
p>
If he could not find any team that will take him, or company that will give him an endorsement, that’s unfortunate for him, but that’s the private sector talking. He’s part of the entertainment industry and the companies might not want to be associated with him. That is similar to what got Dr Laura’s TV show off the air and her radio program considerably reduced: John Aravosis persuaded the advertisers that they should did not want to be associated with her, and many of them agreed. That’s the market in the entertainment industry.
<
p>
Two, that is considerably different than the sex offender issues. (Actually, there are multiple issues in that regard–child, rape, male rape–but I won’t go into detail.) The sex offender issue is the government, not the market, mandating certain actions by the convicted sex offender after his or her statutory sentence has been served. As I understand it, the primary controversy is that the “certain actions” were not part of the sentence that was authorized by statute at the crime was committed, and is basically an ex post facto sentence imposed by government that was not authorized by statute.
<
p>
That has rather severe constitutional problems. But it has nothing to do with Vick’s situation.
<
p>
Note to noternie: there is no need to yell. All-caps is difficult to read.
The point of the post as I take it, is about the incredibly harsh and uncompassionate view /climate here in the USA towards people who committ a crime.
<
p>
Each person seems to have their own view of who is worse- the dog killers, the drug do-ers, the gangs, child rapists….etc.
<
p>
So we end up talking about a general situation by talking about individual cases, which sucks. I can pull out some horrid case that would make anyone weep and say ‘this person deserves whatever most awful thing we can do to them, now and forever’.
<
p>
But what we are talking about here is a system, a set of values we as a society have, and policies. I would hope also that when we are talking about policies, we would remember that they will be administered by cops of varying levels of integrity and ability, by courts and lawyers also of varying levels of integrity and ability, and finally by whatever beaurocracy the criminal comes under. The system is badly buggy and will always be that way. Some percent will always be innocent. Many will be over or under punished according to the rules we have in place.
<
p>
America right now has 5% of the world’s population and 25% of the world’s prison population. think aboutt hat for a minute when you talk about our country.
<
p>
Do you ever fear going being arrested? If you are male, you should. Something like 50% of adult males will have an arrest or warrent issued, although many of these don’t end up with any sort of prosecution.
<
p>
We in America hate. We punish. We destroy. We fear all the time, everyone. That may be the driver. But the raw hate comes out all over the place, and is pretty scary stuff, to me at least.
<
p>
We put everyone in jail and still have crime, so it is a stupid, broken system. I am not advocating getting rid of prisons in entirety, but I could STRONGLY wish we would take a far more intellectual and scientific and maybe even nurturing approach to crime, and put far higher values of rehabilitation and prevention.
Good comment meganwf, but I have to mention your fuzzy math. Yes, we put too many people in prison, but we also use 30% of the world’s energy. Moreover, about 50% of the world (that may be dated) doesn’t have a telephone. So it’s a bit selective to count our prison population that way.
<
p>
As for the 50% arrest or warrant number — wow. Never heard that one. That’s amazing.
I’m not sure I see how not having a telephone equates to not putting people in prison, although there is probably a good case to be made that they can’t afford it. But I do know on a per capita basis we leave everyone else behind (40% higher than number 2 on the list).
<
p>
As to the 50% number, I admit to dredging it up from memory, so it can be viewed as suspect. It was unfortunately far too long ago for me to find anything to cite you.
<
p>
This article talks about the prison issue specifically in terms of race however:http://bostonreview…. and gives a lot of background.
US numbers, compared to the rest of the world, are always disproportionate.
<
p>
Thanks for the link; I’ll check it out when I can.
<
p>
The last time I was legitimately afraid it was over my accounting grade.
Ok a little over the top with the drama, but it sounded good!
<
p>
And I wish I knew your secret for lack of fear. I don’t share it, at least not to that extent!
<
p>
And I look around, and I see a lot of fear all around me….in the chances people don’t take, in the blame they put on themselves….on the crap we all put up with…
…assume we DO have 25% of the world’s (?) prison population.
<
p>
Is that because we do not behead them immediately, as is justice in so many corners of our world? We bother to PUT them in prison?
in the response to JimC. The 25% comes from that article.
Your point being we are so tolerant we end up putting the criminals in jail that everyone else kills?
<
p>
Wait until I stop laughing before I can reply here….
<
p>
I suppose if by the ‘rest of the world’ you exlude Europe, Russia, Australia, Canada, and all the countries you might consider ‘2nd world’, you would be able to make that argument.
<
p>
To offer a counter argument however means getting specific, and all points are debatable in their own right. But:
<
p>
1) We are the only 1st world country carrying on the drug wars to the extent that we are. Europe has largely stopped enforcing drug laws; Canada is following suit. Not sure about Australia.
<
p>
2) Many people take note that our drug enforcement heavily targets black men, and may well at its core be fundamentally racist. If you follow the older argument against ‘red lining’, where any policy that is its effect racist (regardless of its intention) must be held to be racists, then the drug policy clearly IS recist.
<
p>
3) For other reasons not understood, we are fundamentally more violent here in the USA than just about everywhere else. What did Moore say in ‘Bowling for Columbine’? 26000 killed by guns in the USA, some hundreds in country number 2? He explored the issue pretty thoroughly, but also offered only limited ideas about cause. He does point to fear journalism as being exceptional here as well as gun violence.
<
p>
We do know that crime drops when prosperity rises. If large groups of people are shut out of economic success, that could be one of the causes, although I would not suggest all.
….that is, a view of the world where Europe and even North America are magnified to enhance their actual size.
<
p>
China alone dwarfs the entire ‘Second world’ as you term it – ever looked at THEIR criminal justice system?
<
p>
MOST of the world does not have a checks and balances based justice system. Look at Sh’ari law – not much imprisonment there, either.
…but not from a Mercator projection*.
<
p>
If the US was to execute its prisoners, that would reduce the number of prisoners that would be warehoused in its private prisons. That would be bad for the prison-industrial-governmental combination. Fewer prisoners to be warehoused, fewer cells, and less money to the prison industry. It quite frankly is a simple as that.
<
p>
Regarding *, I’m sure that you know that the Mercator projection was designed for shipping navigation. I don’t recall the details–I’d have to get out my general relativity book–but it has to do with maintaining angles across shipping lanes.
We in America hate. We punish. We destroy…
<
p>
If a private entity, like a football team or an potential endorser doesn’t want to have anything to do with Michael Vick, what are you going to do? Require them to?
<
p>
If so, how are you going to do it?
Do we, Americans, have an inordinate amount of people who are essentially sociopathic?
<
p>
What is the percentage folks who are rehabilitable?
<
p>
What do we do with those who are not?
<
p>
Do we have many criminal laws that are essentially civil offenses or just plain annoyances.
<
p>
Do we as Americans have a propensity to regulate other folks behavior when it is essentially none of our business.
<
p>
What kind of behavior deserves draconian punishment and why won’t we use it.
<
p>
Why does it appear that our murder rate has increased significantly?
<
p>
Why do some people have scores of arrests without any apparent punishment?
<
p>
Is the house of cards coming down?
<
p>
As a personal observation: I see no difference between the mind set and character of Michael Vick and Josef Mengele. Barbaric twisted minds who derive gratification from torture and maiming. Michael Vick and his ilk need a very, very long vacation from humanity. Perhaps five years in Pelican Bay would allow Mr. Vick sufficient time to reflect back on his misdeeds.The alleged economic sanction is nonsense.
<
p>
I have a friend who had a small problem re a controlled substance in India. The Indian Court advised him he had two choices. Three years in an Indian slammer, or three years working with Mother Theresa in the hovels and sewers of Calcutta. After his three years was up Mother Theresa considered him the son she never had and the penal servitude cooled his jets a lot. He is still a crazy man and off on another adventure in the world, but he has a serenity about him that only could have been the result of his experience in India.
<
p>
But what do I know?
But what do I know?
<
p>
Vick and Mengele were entirely different, but I would not expect you to know that. Vick was (apparently) doing dog fights for money, Why he, with a multi-million dollar NFL contract would believe it necessary to pursue low-rent dog fights strains credulity.
<
p>
Mengele was actually pursuing pseudo-legitimate tests to find out the tolerance of humans in various hazardous environments. (Lest I be flamed, I will tell you that my spouse’s grandfather was a subject of those tests at the Dachau concentration camp. I am not unfamiliar with them.) Indeed, Mengele’s research, controversial as the tests were and their results are, should not be dismissed out of hand: it was done, the data taken, the data may be umstritten (controversial) but not by the way it was take. What is past is past, and you can’t undo the past.
<
p>
Let’s put it bit together succinctly. What research was Vick doing with his dog fights? None. And therein lies the difference.
<
p>
BTW, I won’t leave you hanging. The grandfather had been sentenced to an execution at Dachau, but the concentration camp was liberated by the Allies before the sentence could be carried out. Dachau was the first concentration camp established by the Nazies after they came “an der Macht” in 1933. I’ve bicycled up to Stadt Dachau (the city) (it’s less than 20 minutes from here) and it is a shame that the Nazis ruined the reputation of a very nice small city.
is on the list of the 14 characteristics of fascism.
n/t
http://www.oldameric…
Prison isn’t all Marion. Most Federal time for non-violent offenders is like the Boston Jail and the House of correction. Clean, air conditioned, telephone rights, large screen TV. Various classes, library. If any punishment is given, it will be because of lost athletic opportunities. Though, I doubt that the NFL wants to lose money any more than MLB did on the doping scandals. Anyway, Mr. Vick could do the talk show circuit and whatever else his agent can get him. He’ll always do well.
<
p>
Anyone who would indulge his aberrant, bestial nature through the torture and humiliation of powerless, sentient creatures is not only a fetid savage, but a coward, as well.
<
p>