Is dogfighting really that bad?

Question

Personally I could never watch or promote dogfighting, because I love dogs too much. On the other hand however, if those dogs wouldn't fight, they wouldn't even exist. Those dogs are bred for that purpose only by the people that enjoy watching it.
I know some of you might disagree, but I think it is not fair what the media is doing with Michael Vick right now. Even though everything might look like he is guilty, we should at least wait until he is convicted. Didn't we learn from the Duke Lacrosse case?
And like I said, even if he is convicted of that crime, it should not be made worse than crimes of other athletes (shooting, fighting, carrying guns, etc.)
I don't want to say they are just dogs, but would they even be alive if those people don't want to see them fight???

@psyduck
I don't mean Pitbulls in general, I'm talking about those individual dogs raised for that purpose.

Some of you are some dumb motherf...
Never did I say it was ok, or anything like that. I did not compare Duke with Vick. I said we should learn from that and not jump to conclussions. Learn how read you clowns.
And again, I was talking about those dogs that those folks bred just to fight.

Answer 1

PETA's gotta be loving this whole thing. It's one moment where they won't look like the radical crazies they usually come off as. Many people will be right on their side on this one.

I understand what you're gettin' at. It'd be nice if we didn't convinct people when negative stories come up, but that's how it goes in today's fast-paced, media-driven world. There's also a lot of alarming evidence in this case that will make most people consider him guilty until proven innocent. Which is perfectly fine because they're not trying the case, it's just their opinion.

Is dogfighting really that bad? Tough question to answer without offending some people. I think dogfighting and the torturing/exterminating of dogs are awful. However, I don't think it's worse than the torturing or exterminating of humans. Very close, but there's gotta be some kind of distinction between the two.

Answer 2

Dogs behave and act based a lot on how they are raised. Pit Bulls don't have to be fighting dogs, and to say they wouldn't exist were it not for having them fight is kind of stupid. Hell, my brother's Pit Bull is the biggest baby of a dog I've ever seen.

The information that's come out about this, though, goes beyond fighting. It's come to involve torture, violence, and some sick stuff. They say that kids who mutilate and torture animals are showing clinically dangerous signs. Why not grown adults?

Of course, you are right that we should wait for a conviction before damning the guy out of hand. Unfortunately, this country and the media we have in it often don't really let the whole "innocent till proven guilty" thing happen.

Answer 3

- first of all. Your comparison to the duke case is laughable. In that case we ZERO evidence and the words of a disgusting trashy WHORE. Combine that with a racially motivated prosecuter looking to win votes.

- There is plenty of evidence against Vick. But we will lets the courts decide.

- And as far as dog fighting, apparently you dont know what really happens. Those dogs suffer more then you could imagine. Can you think about being eatin to death by a dog? Well thats what they go through.

Answer 4

Who actually said that those dogs were bred for fighting??? And just because "they" say that, it doesn't make it right. It's cruel. I really cannot figure out how you can compare the Duke case to the Vick case. Where on earth do you get your logic?...

Answer 5

I am going to keep this simple two things.

1. Yes dog fighting is wrong

2. Yes the Duke jumped the gun on what they did but if you are a celebrity such as Michael Vick, in public opinion you are ALWAYS GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT

Answer 6

those dogs are not specifically bred to fight - they are used for that purpose but plenty of people own them as animal companions and they are not nasty. Your parents were able to breed and unfortunately they had an ignoramus like you for a child. In the old days, they may have just drowned you as you probably are not a productive member of our society. Then again, they could just feed you to Vick's hungry dogs. I hope PETA makes him miserable for the rest of his lousy days.

Answer 7

its a bad comparison, duke lacrosse and vick....the indictment states that he hung up dogs, doused them with water and electrocuted them because they didnt have enough "fight" in them. thats appauling, thats a cruel, coldblooded thug. fighting is a part of the game {{anyone with any competitive spirit knows that}} and that doesnt compare in any way with electrocuting dogs. i agree he should be allowed a fair trial, but the allegations alone should have him suspended without pay.

Answer 8

anybody that condones dog fighting is scum in my opinion but yes it isnt fair to push and assume he is guilty although its looking like it the media really pushes hard and makes things different and twist stuff. but i believe he is innocent until proven guilty he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Answer 9

i do agree that we should wait until vick is convicted, but it sounds to me like you are saying that it is ok to waste an animals life, i hate peta............. but even the bible talks about how we should only kill animals if we intend to use them for nourishment..........not entertainment!

Answer 10

yes it is