I-n-n-o-c-e-n-t....

[Balloon guy 158]

now now, lets not jump to conclusions here. vick could be innocent and just taking the guilty plea cause he knew those "business partners" were gonna blame it on him. he still hasnt been proven guilty, so its wrong to criticize him. 13cards, im suprised at you for jumping on the vick hating bandwagon now. i thought you were better than that.

Now now, 13cards didn't say he definitively wants Vicks head on a platter, so until he does you are being a little judgemental in assuming he does in fact think Vick is scum.Let's try to keep an open mind here

[Don Giovanni 0]

Now now, 13cards didn't say he definitively wants Vicks head on a platter, so until he does you are being a little judgemental in assuming he does in fact think Vick is scum.Let's try to keep an open mind here

im not sure what you are trying to argue because a few posts up he did say that all of the sudden the sight of vick makes him sick and he wants him to be severly punished so...

[Balloon guy 158]

im not sure what you are trying to argue because a few posts up he did say that all of the sudden the sight of vick makes him sick and he wants him to be severly punished so...

Never mindsorry, thought you were being ironic, which would have made my post ironic as well which could have been funny but you killed it.

[Don Giovanni 0]

Never mindsorry, thought you were being ironic, which would have made my post ironic as well which could have been funny but you killed it.

i was being ironic but i thought you werent. i was thinking that you killed it. oh well, we will do better next time.

[NickTheKid 0]

dude, all the evidence is in... he's having to take a plea because his three business partners are testifying against him. ALl you people are freaking dumb as rocks " Innocent till proven guilty, innocent till proven guilty!!!" are you all out of your minds? If you wanted me to bet on innocent, you have had to given me like 2000-1 type odds. Is there a CHANCE He was innocent.. well, sure, but it was so remote, you're a freaking loon to believe it.

BigDMcGee... having respect for you, I will hold back on the "idiot" and "dumb" remarks, but you are missing the point. It's not about 2000:1, 10,000:1, a million to 1. There is a reason I don't believe in the death penalty, because people jump the gun, get in a witch hunt, and turn into... well... people like DN. They get passionate about what they do, their emotions get the better of them and they start to lower themselves to the level of the guilty parties (assuming they are guilty).The fact is, the guy was in court, NOT even proven guilty yet and DN was jumping on the guy on how he'd like to do all this sadistic shit, I don't really have a quote here, because I'm too lazy to scroll through it. THIS IS BEFORE he was even found guilty. I don't even agree with his mindset even now that he pleaded guilty. I don't believe in "eye for an eye", or any of that revenge shit, and I don't let this stuff cloud my judgment. Is this guy scum? Yes. Do I even watch football? No. Do I think OJ Simpson is innocent? No. Do I think Michael Jackson is a child molester? Yes. Do I love animals? Well I own 2 German Shepherds myself have had 2 previous to these two, and love them all like family, still regret not having more time with my latest deceased... they are FAMILY. But don't sit there and tell me I'm as stupid as a rock because I think DN was completely out of line, and very immature for writing that. We have an imperfect system as it is. At least let it go through the motions before you put your foot in your mouth... I'm glad DN isn't a judge, he's just some poker player, wow - His opinion must be so valid. He doesn't have ANY, zip, zero cred with the judicial system in my book. DN is just another guy, not Socrates.I respect DN, don't get me wrong - I think he's a classy guy who just happened to put his foot in his mouth, we all do it... we're all human. Eye for an eye leaves the world blind, BigD.and for reference, I suggest you look up the name "Guy Paul Morin", another "WITHOUT A REASONABLE DOUBT" case.

[mase_gotsem 0]

lol the 7 to life shirts are funny

[irishguy 14]

BigDMcGee... having respect for you, I will hold back on the "idiot" and "dumb" remarks, but you are missing the point. It's not about 2000:1, 10,000:1, a million to 1. There is a reason I don't believe in the death penalty, because people jump the gun, get in a witch hunt, and turn into... well... people like DN. They get passionate about what they do, their emotions get the better of them and they start to lower themselves to the level of the guilty parties (assuming they are guilty).The fact is, the guy was in court, NOT even proven guilty yet and DN was jumping on the guy on how he'd like to do all this sadistic shit, I don't really have a quote here, because I'm too lazy to scroll through it. THIS IS BEFORE he was even found guilty. I don't even agree with his mindset even now that he pleaded guilty. I don't believe in "eye for an eye", or any of that revenge shit, and I don't let this stuff cloud my judgment. Is this guy scum? Yes. Do I even watch football? No. Do I think OJ Simpson is innocent? No. Do I think Michael Jackson is a child molester? Yes. Do I love animals? Well I own 2 German Shepherds myself have had 2 previous to these two, and love them all like family, still regret not having more time with my latest deceased... they are FAMILY. But don't sit there and tell me I'm as stupid as a rock because I think DN was completely out of line, and very immature for writing that. We have an imperfect system as it is. At least let it go through the motions before you put your foot in your mouth... I'm glad DN isn't a judge, he's just some poker player, wow - His opinion must be so valid. He doesn't have ANY, zip, zero cred with the judicial system in my book. DN is just another guy, not Socrates.I respect DN, don't get me wrong - I think he's a classy guy who just happened to put his foot in his mouth, we all do it... we're all human. Eye for an eye leaves the world blind, BigD.and for reference, I suggest you look up the name "Guy Paul Morin", another "WITHOUT A REASONABLE DOUBT" case.

From Daniels blog "I know revenge isn't the answer, but I'm human and my first instinct is....." its seems to me that people are choosing to ignore this part of the blog. Revenge is a very real human emotion not comparing the crimes to Vick's but many people say that if a loved one was murdered or raped etc I;d kill the sob. The bottom line is this is instinct I imagine how most people would feel a strong need for revenge under those circumstances but how often does ones loved ones go about getting revenge in this manner? Almost never. The fact that some people feel as though its improper to say Vick is guilty without the court saying so is just silly on so many levels

[Hockey Guy 4]

From Daniels blog "I know revenge isn't the answer, but I'm human and my first instinct is....." its seems to me that people are choosing to ignore this part of the blog. Revenge is a very real human emotion not comparing the crimes to Vick's but many people say that if a loved one was murdered or raped etc I;d kill the sob. The bottom line is this is instinct I imagine how most people would feel a strong need for revenge under those circumstances but how often does ones loved ones go about getting revenge in this manner? Almost never. The fact that some people feel as though its improper to say Vick is guilty without the court saying so is just silly on so many levels

ding ding ding ding we have a winner. Did any of you innocent until proven guilty and Daniel is out of line posters even read the blog.

[NickTheKid 0]

Oh okay, so if I were to say "I'm not a racist... but I hate all black people, because my natural instinct when walking home alone at night is that I'm going to get robbed, but I'm human and I know it's not right to think that way". Would be acceptable?He put his foot in his mouth.

[irishguy 14]

Oh okay, so if I were to say "I'm not a racist... but I hate all black people, because my natural instinct when walking home alone at night is that I'm going to get robbed, but I'm human and I know it's not right to think that way". Would be acceptable?He put his foot in his mouth.

Yep that example is the exact samething. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you are very young.

[Hockey Guy 4]

Oh okay, so if I were to say "I'm not a racist... but I hate all black people, because my natural instinct when walking home alone at night is that I'm going to get robbed, but I'm human and I know it's not right to think that way". Would be acceptable?He put his foot in his mouth.

This analogy is laughable. Go back and read my first post in this thread & you will realize I don't agree with stuff in the blog but I do understand the emotion involved.

[NickTheKid 0]

This analogy is laughable. Go back and read my first post in this thread & you will realize I don't agree with stuff in the blog but I do understand the emotion involved.

How do you figure? In fact, it's dead on. Let's just go a bit further hypothetically.Here we have a guy - "EVERYONE" KNOWS HE'S GUILTY, I mean, they just KNOW. (Based on no conviction, just emotion and ignorance for the system)We have an ethnicity that is (maybe not as much today) VERY PERSECUTED - by "EVERYONE" - All blacks rob liquor stores right? (Generalization, based on emotion and ignorance)"I am only human and I know revenge isn't right""I am only human, and I know racism is wrong""But I want to (insert sadistic stuff) he DESERVES it" (Mind you, without even being convicted yet)"But, I really hate ni(insert racist stuff), I mean seriously, they are crap and DESERVE it!" (Stereotypes)I was making a point - saying something, then contradicting yourself in the next sentence is just one of those things where you just, type it to look open minded, but all you're doing is fueling this rightist thinking - I also wasn't calling you out personally, I was doing that to McGee, and I understand it too, in my post I said it, clear as day. I said you shouldn't LET it cloud your judgment. Which is what happened to DN. I mean, the guy DIDN'T EVEN GET CONVICTED.They say "never attack the guy with the mic"... and this is why, the guy with the mic "MUST" be right. (and again, I'm not talking about you Hockeyguy).EDIT: I really hope someone doesn't respond to this with "He was following the case"... that isn't even a valid response, Again, I'll say it. Yes, he probably did it (apparently he admited it), YES, he is scum for doing it, but saying what DN said was WRONG, and ignorant. Pointing it out himself doesn't give him this golden pass to say whatever he wants.

[irishguy 14]

How do you figure? In fact, it's dead on. Let's just go a bit further hypothetically.Here we have a guy - "EVERYONE" KNOWS HE'S GUILTY, I mean, they just KNOW. (Based on no conviction, just emotion and ignorance for the system)We have an ethnicity that is (maybe not as much today) VERY PERSECUTED - by "EVERYONE" - All blacks rob liquor stores right? (Generalization, based on emotion and ignorance)"I am only human and I know revenge isn't right""I am only human, and I know racism is wrong""But I want to (insert sadistic stuff) he DESERVES it" (Mind you, without even being convicted yet)"But, I really hate ni(insert racist stuff), I mean seriously, they are crap and DESERVE it!" (Stereotypes)I was making a point - saying something, then contradicting yourself in the next sentence is just one of those things where you just, type it to look open minded, but all you're doing is fueling this rightist thinking - I also wasn't calling you out personally, I was doing that to McGee, and I understand it too, in my post I said it, clear as day. I said you shouldn't LET it cloud your judgment. Which is what happened to DN. I mean, the guy DIDN'T EVEN GET CONVICTED.They say "never attack the guy with the mic"... and this is why, the guy with the mic "MUST" be right. (and again, I'm not talking about you Hockeyguy).

I believe revenge is a natural instinct I however don't find anything natural about racism and have never heard of it described as a natural emotion therefore is the difference. The "mind you without even being convicted" thought is absurd especially considering the fact that in an earlier post you stated that you believed OJ was a murderer and Michael Jackson was a child molester. Not only were these ppl never convicted of these crimes they were found to be not guilty. So how irresponsible is for you to state your belief in there guilt when the justice system disagrees? Or is okay for you to take that opinion but would it be wrong of Daniel?

[NickTheKid 0]

I believe revenge is a natural instinct I however don't find anything natural about racism and have never heard of it described as a natural emotion therefore is the difference. The "mind you without even being convicted" thought is absurd especially considering the fact that in an earlier post you stated that you believed OJ was a murdered and Michael Jackson was a child molester. Not only were these ppl never convicted of these crimes they were found to be not guilty. So how irresponsible is for you to state your belief in there guilt when the justice system disagrees? Or is okay for you to take that opinion but would it be wrong of Daniel?

I think we're missing the point - (Okay, I'm not the best writer). I mean I don't SAY stuff like "I want to take OJ's skull and thump it", "I'm going to throw MJ off of a building"... Of COURSE people have opinions of guilt and innocence!DN had his mind made up, and ranted up a violent storm before the ink was even wet on the jury's ballot.

[NickTheKid 0]

**** it, I was going to stay away from this... but what the hell.Everybody KNEW, JUST KNEW, in 2001 IRAQ hit NY on 911. EVERYONE knew.Everyone gets on the bandwaggon! KILL THEM ARABS....oh wait... it wasn't Iraq? That's right, anyone with half a brain even back in 2001 KNEW that it was crap that GB was selling.Here we have a guy on trail, Everyone KNOWS he did it,DN gets on bandwaggon, "I WANNA TORTURE THIS GUY!"...Are we seeing a connection here? Even if the guy is guilty or NOT, it doesn't change the bullshit mindset some people have.Again, EYE FOR AN EYE... it leaves the world blind.

[irishguy 14]

I think we're missing the point - (Okay, I'm not the best writer). I mean I don't SAY stuff like "I want to take OJ's skull and thump it", "I'm going to throw MJ off of a building"... Of COURSE people have opinions of guilt and innocence!DN had his mind made up, and ranted up a violent storm before the ink was even wet on the jury's ballot.

Okay I see your point but the truth of the matter is a lot of people felt the way Daniel did when they first heard it. As a dog owner my first instinct was "make him fight for his life" is that what I really think the answer is. of course not. But its an honest reaction I don't think many people thought "well thats golly that isn't a friendly hobby I sure hope the court handles this swiftly'. The fact of the matter is most people made up there minds as facts began to come out and this is almost always the case. "Daniel ranting up a violent storm....etc" is a bit of an exageration as again his rant started with "I know revenge isn't the answer, but I'm human and my first instinct is....." Perhaps you don't react as such and all the power to you. If you hear things like all the Michael Jackson stuff and think let the courts handle it as your first reaction I imagine you are in the minority as most people likely thought he should have his nuts chopped off.Edit: Your last example is absurd and really hope you see why.

[NickTheKid 0]

Okay I see your point but the truth of the matter is a lot of people felt the way Daniel did when they first heard it. As a dog owner my first instinct was "make him fight for his life" is that what I really think the answer is. of course not. But its an honest reaction I don't think many people thought "well thats golly that isn't a friendly hobby I sure hope the court handles this swiftly'. The fact of the matter is most people made up there minds as facts began to come out and this is almost always the case. "Daniel ranting up a violent storm....etc" is a bit of an exageration as again his rant started with "I know revenge isn't the answer, but I'm human and my first instinct is....." Perhaps you don't react as such and all the power to you. If you hear things like all the Michael Jackson stuff and think let the courts handle it as your first reaction I imagine you are in the minority as most people likely thought he should have his nuts chopped off.Edit: Your last example is absurd and really hope you see why.

Again, no. no it's not.If I'm going to put it in one sentence.Emotions tend to twist things around, and things end up in a mess because of manipulation of them. The idea is to TAKE in all information, and form an informed opinion, not some half-assed violent rant.

[EStormOk 0]

WOW!Signed, sealed, delivered, convicted and quartered already.I have to say that I have lost some respect for DN.

Innocent until proven guilty is for the court of law only! Individuals are blessed with a thing called an opinion.

[freak2304 0]

**** it, I was going to stay away from this... but what the hell.Everybody KNEW, JUST KNEW, in 2001 IRAQ hit NY on 911. EVERYONE knew.Everyone gets on the bandwaggon! KILL THEM ARABS....oh wait... it wasn't Iraq? That's right, anyone with half a brain even back in 2001 KNEW that it was crap that GB was selling.Here we have a guy on trail, Everyone KNOWS he did it,DN gets on bandwaggon, "I WANNA TORTURE THIS GUY!"...Are we seeing a connection here? Even if the guy is guilty or NOT, it doesn't change the bullshit mindset some people have.Again, EYE FOR AN EYE... it leaves the world blind.

Uhhhhh...I didn't think it was Iraq. I thought it was Al-Qaeda Muslim extremists like most of the sane Americans. It wasn't until Bush pumped Iraq into the equation to finish his daddy's war, but that's not the point now, I guess. -shrug-

[irishguy 14]

Again, no. no it's not.If I'm going to put it in one sentence.Emotions tend to twist things around, and things end up in a mess because of manipulation of them. The idea is to TAKE in all information, and form an informed opinion, not some half-assed violent rant.

Your example was absurd because it was months after 911 where the Bush administration began to push a connection between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda. Now if your example had stated "its like 911 and after evidence pointing out Al-Qaeda being responsible people jumped on the bandwagon to go off after the terrorist instead of finding an alternate method to resolution..." it would've been an adequate analogy. As I stated if your first reaction to unspeakable acts is to search for clear cut evidence and a peaceful resolution as opposed to feel a desire for revenge then all the power to you but you are in the minority.

[Balloon guy 158]

Finally someone has turned this debate into something worth argueing about.I do love how you younger people have absolutely no problem 'knowing' Bush's feeling, motives and thoughts about Iraq, and judge him with the harshest words and vile hatred. You see no problem saying that he wanted impress his daddy, or steal oil, or was looking for any reason to go to war with Iraq. Must be nice to read minds of people you have never even seen in real life.But Negreanu's snap judgements about something that is stomach turning as dog fighting makes you all Perry Masoneque. Innocent until proven guilty. Oh the shame for Daniel to see Vick as a criminal. We must reserve all judgement until all the facts are in and a jury of 12 people will tell us what is right and wrong after they are hand picked by a consulting firm who is paid to stack a jury in either sides favor using scienific methods for no other reason than money. And which side will spend th most money for Vick? Yep...they're the ones we can trust.Those of us on the sidelines are chuckling and can tell you now that you will be eating Thanksgiving dinner at the children's table again.This is why they shouldn't let you vote till you own property.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

BigDMcGee... having respect for you, I will hold back on the "idiot" and "dumb" remarks, but you are missing the point. It's not about 2000:1, 10,000:1, a million to 1. There is a reason I don't believe in the death penalty, because people jump the gun, get in a witch hunt, and turn into... well... people like DN. They get passionate about what they do, their emotions get the better of them and they start to lower themselves to the level of the guilty parties (assuming they are guilty).The fact is, the guy was in court, NOT even proven guilty yet and DN was jumping on the guy on how he'd like to do all this sadistic shit, I don't really have a quote here, because I'm too lazy to scroll through it. THIS IS BEFORE he was even found guilty. I don't even agree with his mindset even now that he pleaded guilty. I don't believe in "eye for an eye", or any of that revenge shit, and I don't let this stuff cloud my judgment. Is this guy scum? Yes. Do I even watch football? No. Do I think OJ Simpson is innocent? No. Do I think Michael Jackson is a child molester? Yes. Do I love animals? Well I own 2 German Shepherds myself have had 2 previous to these two, and love them all like family, still regret not having more time with my latest deceased... they are FAMILY. But don't sit there and tell me I'm as stupid as a rock because I think DN was completely out of line, and very immature for writing that. We have an imperfect system as it is. At least let it go through the motions before you put your foot in your mouth... I'm glad DN isn't a judge, he's just some poker player, wow - His opinion must be so valid. He doesn't have ANY, zip, zero cred with the judicial system in my book. DN is just another guy, not Socrates.I respect DN, don't get me wrong - I think he's a classy guy who just happened to put his foot in his mouth, we all do it... we're all human. Eye for an eye leaves the world blind, BigD.and for reference, I suggest you look up the name "Guy Paul Morin", another "WITHOUT A REASONABLE DOUBT" case.

There are two issues here, imo..there first is the absurdity of jumping to Vick's innocent till proven guilty defense. Which is just silly, the guy is guilty as sin. and yes, the odds do matter, when it comes to someone's opinion of another person. Because if you think someone is 1999 out of 2000 to have done an act, you can go ahead and make your character judgments based on those odds. If it turns out at a later date you were wrong, well, you can adjust your opinion then.. but when ALL evidence points to vick being a dog murder, well, you can, as far as I'm concerned, think the guy is scum before the jury comes in on the issue. The second issue, and one where I think I'm a little more sympathic, is the crazy way Vick has been vilified, as if he had murdered humans or something. I personally do not equate human suffering with animal suffering ( we went into this in further detail in another thread about the meat industry). I think our society is completely hypocritical about the animal suffering it allows and the animal suffering it doesn't. To tell you the god's honest truth, I really don't care at all about dog fighting. I don't get fired up in the slightest the way many animal lovers are about this issue, and I don't think Vick is the most evil man since Ted Bundy or what ever, and I find it bizarre the way he's been made out into a monster for dog fighting.

[mase_gotsem 0]

wow nickthekid some of your analysis are pretty ridiculous your taking instinct and twisting it with something that is brainwashed into ppl instinct we are born with racisim is tought, by generations of brainwashed ppl.

[Miguel McHarris 0]

Wow, I bet some of you wish had that 10 minutes back. This was as obvious as my lack of pants right now. Side note: Vick is a terribly overrated quarterback.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

This is why they shouldn't let you vote till you own property.

Is having a wife close enough?