Once he serves his time, and pays his debt to society, is not our american tradition that an american citizen is welcomed back in the fold and given the opportunity to be a good productive citizen again? How can the same people who are so upset about dogs being abused push for a human being to be abused unreasonably? Lets assume he spends 18 months in jail, does the NFL really have a right to suspend him indefinitely after that? or even for an entire season after that...and basically blackball him from being able to earn a living? Where is the line between the rights of the business to try to keep its image clean and the right of the worker to be treated with fairness and justice?
2007-08-25
02:59:33
·
12 answers
·
asked by
ron j
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
is the ethical standards contract unconstitutional then?
2007-08-25
07:36:13 ·
update #1
so lunistan and others: no punishment is enough for cruelty to this level?
let me think about that for a sec. you are saying that there is no punishment great enough to the human being named Michael Vick for his cruelty to animals?
lol
Some people are such morons.
2007-08-25
17:43:04 ·
update #2
If I were Vick, I would serve my time, then apply for reinstatement the day I am released from jail. As soon as the commissioner says no, I would the next day have my attorneys file a 100 million dollar law suit against the NFL accusing them of having an unreasonable contract that allows them to punish employees beyond what is required by society. Fines are understandable, maybe even an additional year of suspension beyong jail even, but banning for life for engaging in dog fighting is totally unreasonable and excessive. Vick is a football player. That's his career, and that's how he earns his living. The NFL would essentially be banning him from working in his profession in an unreasonable and vindictive manner.
I have noticed that white american seems especially vindictive when successfull black men take a fall. Sure Vick is a criminal, and he broke laws, and deserves to pay for his crime. Sure he owes the Falcons money that they paid him and all that. But I also think that some of the white people out there clamoring for his head, and clamoring for his future inability to play football are just letting their racist side get the best of them.
2007-08-25 07:43:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by me 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
He can be banned for life from the NFL because he broke the morals clause in the standard NFL contract. He is not denied the right to work once he has done what ever it is this plea agreement and the judge deems appropriate ( jail time, probation etc). He can be a productive citizen again just not in a highly visible arena such as the NFL. He might be unofficially blackballed in other sports, but not from earning a living
To Septembersong, I felt the same way about the NAACP but the organization as a whole has not supported VIck. It is only the head of the Atlanta chapter, so he sticks out like a sore thumb and none of the other chapters have come to support his viewpoint.
2007-08-25 03:24:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by thequeenreigns 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
That's not a plea agreement or a confession. That's the Summary of the Facts. The plea agreement contains a lot more than that. That's only between Vick and the federal DA. If the judge would have ever denied a plea agreement or Vick changed his mind, that would have been thrown out and never used as evidence. That's all public record. Everyone knows the basic facts as stated there. How would that be able to make someone decide whether or not he should be able to play again. It's each individual's moral/value judgement. Russell Simmons and Al Sharpton, especially that buffoon Al Sharpton, would have no impact on most people's decision.
2016-05-17 10:45:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by joye 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes he should be banned for life. Not only that, he should be required to return money paid to him by the Falcons.
When he signed his contract he agreed to abide by certain morality clauses. He broke his contract.
After he serves his time, he will still be a criminal. He will be known for thuggery and animal torture. In edition, during the investigation he had a meeting with the NFL commissioner and lied in the man's face - told him he had nothing to do with it.
So, is a thug, animal torturer and proven liar what the NFL wants to be the face that represents the league?
Hmmm.....people are pretty forgiving when the lying is from a high paid NFL quarter back.. who is a huge role model to American youth -- but if it's an American president - it's "impeach him" and "what about the example to the children..he lied".
Considering that over 99.99% of the american population earns a living by means other than NFL quarterback...Vick will still be able to earn a living.
"But that won't be his chosen profession." -- yep. And if I were to break the law and have my professional license suspended then I would not be able to earn a living in my chosen either would probably have to take a lesser paying job. Welcome to the grown up world.
2007-08-25 04:27:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Boots 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Put simply he would not be kept from earning a living He can be kept from earning a living in the NFL due to the fact that he violated his contract by breaking the rules agreed to by the players union and therefore the contract is void. I do however, believe that he will be back in the NFL. If he serves his time and is still a viable athlete, because no matter what a person does he/she is almost always able to overcome it. If they are a good enough at what they do and someone else is able to make money off of them.....
2007-08-25 03:12:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by thehowlingone 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Absolutley, he should be banned for life (he's a cold blooded killer). Why would people support such a dispicable person. I have more hatred for someone that kills animals as cruely as he did then I do for person that has killed people. He honestly doesn't deserve to be allowed back into the NFL. I wish the federal court system could order him to go through the same torture as those poor animals. He should do something else other than play football, he has done that to himself. He should have earned a degree while attending Virginia Tech, maybe he can put that to use somewhere. I would be happy if I never see his smug face on television ever again.
2007-08-25 03:20:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by S.C. 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
In most states, the worker has very few rights when it comes to being terminated. it's called "right to work" An employer can fire you with out giving a reason. as far as Vick, the NFL isn't keeping him from earning a living. I read that there is a McDonalds in Wyoming or somewhere out west that is offering $10.00 per hour. After he does his time, maybe they will hire him. don't equate the NFL suspending/banning him wiht not being able to earn a living. There is no "right to play football" in the constitution. The NFL has morals, obviously, Michael Vick doesn't.
2007-08-25 03:09:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by forjj 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Vick needs to pay for his crimes,and as far as I am concerned, the NAACP has tarnished its fine record by defending him. Race has nothing to do with this; sadistic abuse is sadistic abuse. Of course, mouthpieces are blaming his behavior on a troubled childhood. Whats next; animal killers rehab? OJ got away with what he did, and I don't expect to see Vick moving into a housing project any time soon either. You can bet that he has money socked away somewhere. And that he is only sorry that he got caught.
2007-08-25 03:22:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
When you sign a contract (he has one with his team and one with the NFL) you are bound by the rules contained within. This is simple business. They agreed to pay him millions of dollars to play and to abide by the rules.
2007-08-25 03:12:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by sensible_man 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Cruelty to this level! No punishment is enough. Serves the piece of **** right.
2007-08-25 17:13:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by lunistan 2
·
0⤊
1⤋