Last time I checked, the laws for killing a human ARE much stiffer than those for killing an animal.:shrug: :shrug:
But because some lady (or anyone else) got off on manslaughter, Vick shouldn't do time? I don't see the connection.
Last time I checked, the laws for killing a human ARE much stiffer than those for killing an animal.:shrug: :shrug:
But because some lady (or anyone else) got off on manslaughter, Vick shouldn't do time? I don't see the connection.
i don't think that the argument is that vick shouldn't have done time in prison, but that the lady should have done time in prison...both deserved time :shrug:
Ummm I'm pretty sure the gist of the discussion was we value animal life more than human life, or that at the least we have more of an uproar for a murdered animal than we do for a murdered human. And I was under the impression he was arguing we punished Vick more severely than we did this lady, and that that was wrong. It isn't the first time someone argued this angle. Last time I think the outcry was a child getting molested doesn't draw as much anger as an animal being abused. That's complete BS. If Vick was a molester, I don't doubt just as many people would want him locked up.
i'll take that wager. he does the whole 23 months as 1) he gave up the right to appeal the sentence in the plea agreement and 2) there is no parole in the federal system.
I think he can get only 3 months knocked off for good behavior so it would be set at 20.
As for comparisons forget the lady who was abused as a wife which drove her to murder, how about football player v. football player
Leonard Little gets drunk gets behind the wheel and kills a mother, he gets supervision, no jail time served.
Vick kills dogs and gets 23 months.
Not saying Vick should have got more or less than what he got, but how Little can get no time is beyond me.
As for comparisons forget the lady who was abused as a wife which drove her to murder, how about football player v. football player
Leonard Little gets drunk gets behind the wheel and kills a mother, he gets supervision, no jail time served.
Vick kills dogs and gets 23 months.
Not saying Vick should have got more or less than what he got, but how Little can get no time is beyond me.
http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/12318/IA/US/
According to court records, Robert Primmer entered a guilty plea to the charge of animal torture - 1st offense on November 14, 2007. As part of his plea agreement, Primmer's 2-year prison sentence was suspended, and he was placed on 2 years probation. His probation conditions include serving ten days in jail, serving community service, and paying a fine of $625.00. If Primmer violates any of the conditions of his probation, he may be ordered to serve the prison term.
According to court records, Robert Primmer entered a guilty plea to the charge of animal torture - 1st offense on November 14, 2007. As part of his plea agreement, Primmer's 2-year prison sentence was suspended, and he was placed on 2 years probation. His probation conditions include serving ten days in jail, serving community service, and paying a fine of $625.00. If Primmer violates any of the conditions of his probation, he may be ordered to serve the prison term.
So start a thread titled 'Why didn't Little get time'.
But stating it the way you do, suggests you think Vicks is too severe, and that you think there is a comparison between the 2 cases when their isn't.
http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/12096/OR/US/
Judge Locke Williams sentenced Ramos-Reyes to 10 days in jail with credit for time served and two years of supervised probation, the maximum possible penalty under state sentencing guidelines.
Judge Locke Williams sentenced Ramos-Reyes to 10 days in jail with credit for time served and two years of supervised probation, the maximum possible penalty under state sentencing guidelines.
take it easy champ, just posting what punishment a guy got after he set his cat on fire in a barrel.
Please explain to me how I suggest his punishment is too severe by stating that I don't think Vick should have got any more or less time ?
To me that means he got just the right amount of time.
Does that mean you will stop posting links that have nothing to do with Vick and his sentence, then?
I mean by saying 'Vick got time and Little didn't', suggests Vicks punishment didn't fit, or that we value animal life too high.
No it has more to do with the fact that little received very little punishment, he should be put away for more time than Vick.
Only if you pay up on the bet we had about how much time Vick has to do on his sentence.
