When I read accounts describing waterboarding as being a simulated drowning, I thought they strapped the detainee to a board and actually dunked him into a water tank. I was mistaken. As it turns out, waterboarding is a much simpler procedure.
The Associated Press reported that the 50 pit bulls seized from Michael Vick’s property were likely to be euthanized. Am I the only one that thinks this is a bit insane? In this dog fighting debacle, Michael Vick is the bad guy. Who are the victims? Society? Tangentially, at best. No, the victims of this tragedy are the dogs. The ones that Bad Newz Kennels abused and executed. And, if the Feds are prosecuting Michael Vick ostensibly to protect the dogs, how exactly are they in a better position at the end of the judicial process by being executed euthanized by the government?Quite simply, this prosecution leaves them in a worse position than the one they were in. Sure, the dogs will no longer be abused, mistreated or forced to fight. But, at the same time, they will no longer be alive. Talk about being victimized by the prosecution. When you have a defendant that is a multimillionaire, during the plea bargain, can’t the prosecution extract some fine that can be applied towards the upkeep of those dogs so that they can live out the rest of their natural lives in peace? Is that too much to ask?
After the criminal justice system finishes with Michael Vick, should the NFL allow him to re-enter the league? A lot of people (including some visitors to this website) have proposed such a ban. However, I am not so certain this is the right move. After all, Michael Vick isn’t seeking admission to the bar. Committing a crime of moral turpitude might get you kicked out of many professions, but he’s not seeking to be a doctor, lawyer, banker or other position that requires some indicia of trustworthiness. You don’t even need a college degree to get a job (as an athlete) in the NFL. Let the man resume his career the Atlanta Falcons or another team will take him. In reality, if he is in playing condition after his release from prison, he will take a big pay cut because of his diminished marketability. Let him become a hard-working, tax-paying citizen again.
By now, the details of Michael Vick’s indictment for dog fighting have been well-covered. And, since he has agreed to plead guilty, let’s reflect a bit on the offenses with which he has been charged.The Animal Fighting Venture Prohibition, found at 7 U.S. § 2156, prohibits knowingly sponsoring or exhibiting an animal in an animal fighting venture, as well as buying, selling, delivering, or transporting animals for participation in animal fighting venture.So, what exactly is an animal fighting venture? The Code defines this as a fight between at least two animals and is conducted for purposes of sport, wagering, or entertainment. However, an animal fighting venture does not include the use of one or more animals in hunting another animal or animals, such as waterfowl, bird, raccoon, or fox hunting.And, what is an animal? Not you or me, my friend. Animal means any live bird, or any live dog or any other mammal, except man.So, what lessons can one learn from Michael Vick’s misfortune?Fighting Fish. The title says animal fighting venture, but birds and mammals (except humans) is more accurate. Next time, if he must bet, toss two fighting fish into one tank.Release the Hounds. If Michael Vick had to see two pit bulls face off, he should have used one to hunt the other. Two pit bulls – bad. Two pit bulls, one horse, one hunter, one rifle – good. See, there’s no pit bull lobby in Washington. But, once you brandish a rifle with a pit bull, then it’s a Second Amendment issue. “I was just hunting with my pit bull and availing myself of my constitutional right to bear arms.”Planet of the Apes. You can’t pit two chimpanzees against each other, but two humans facing off in the ring is somehow acceptable? We can protect the gorillas and chimps, but we can’t even protect us from ourselves.Boxing Promoter. Michael Vick should have just been a boxing promoter. He could have done all the sponsoring and exhibiting he wanted, just not the messy execution of poor performers. He just picked the wrong animal to back, except we’re not animals.
In a previous post, I asked you to guess the act that this sign had forbade. The answer is “No Climbing.” How anyone that doesn’t read Chinese or English would interpret this to mean “no climbing” is quite a mystery, but all prohibited acts must be illustrated. Can’t afford to have a bunch of hooligans hanging around pleading ignorance of the law.
Last week, Federal News Radio interviewed Cully Stimson, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs regarding the Guantanamo detention center.
In Guantanamo Bay: Five Years Later, Secretary Stimson names the major law firms in this country representing the alleged terrorists held in Guantanamo (about 3:23 into the interview) and questions whether CEOs should continue to retain such firms since the 9/11 terrorist attacks represented a direct hit to Corporate America’s bottom line.
Here is Secretary Stimson’s blacklist:
No pole dancing? That’s my first thought when I spotted this sign. After an initial chuckle, I took a closer look to see what acts were exactly prohibited. Care to guess what was prohibited and where I spotted this sign?