Commentary: Michael Vick, dog fighting and the ASPCA

by Steve Dupere

Michael Vick, above the law? That Michael Vick had been raised amid the brume and rubble of inner-city chaos does not, nor should not, excuse such reprehensible behavior on any level.
Let's suppose for the sake of argument that it had been you or I that had partaken in such behavior, shall we?

With a lack of financial backing and or legal support, would anyone below the radar of empirical justice have been privy to the same societal treatment as has Michael Vick?
Well, I believe this to be a two-sided issue in that, anyone with lesser renown would have never been given such unmitigated coverage as has Mr. Vick; And while no one on any lesser socio-economic level could afford the legal council as has been given Mr. Vick, neither could we therefore expect that we'd have been given even a semblance of air-time as has been allocated unto Mr. Vick, by any stretch of the imagination. This does in no way however diminish the effects of such horrific behavior on any level.

Let's face it, as deplorable an act as has been undertaken, so too has history proven time and again, that these same activities have been going on for centuries. It is only now that it has been brought to light to the degree that it has. Therefore, for the purposes of "equal justice" one must consider the implications, that had the law imposed itself in a more proficient manner prior to Mr. Vick and his actions, could this problem perhaps have been avoided all together?

While I myself find his actions detestable, I also believe that all prior, current and subsequent focus should not be placed on Michael Vick per se. Albeit, he is without a doubt as guilty as a man could be - but should we label him the poster boy for all wrong doings as they pertain to dogfighting and or pro sports?

In the case of Michael Vick, when a person is found to be guilty or has simply admitted to his guilt, so too should justice be imposed as swiftly and as such. To the degree that Michael Vick had committed his crimes, as well as the depth of those who were involved to form such an allegiance, so too should the punishment indeed fit the crime.

Unfortunately, for anyone with such renown, not only does the limelight wreak havoc upon society's perception of the accused, but could also sway the very same perception based upon that which the public-eye has been privy to.

Could this in any way delude the decision making process come time of the trial? Well, who's to say it could or couldn't. In any regard, as I've stated, we as a society must be aware of that which we have in fact been privy to under and below "all" necessary facts. We then must base our "assumptions" upon the equation of - limited facts x depth of injurious effects x historically documented like cases x that of our own perception x our own values and beliefs!

Whether or not you or I feel that Michael Vick should be punished for his actions, and or to what degree he should be punished matters little, if in the end we do not take a good long look at how society chooses to sweep bygone issues of such pertinence under the table, until someone of Mr. Vick's renown have themselves broken the law on any level.

Let the law impose itself unto those seemingly reprehensible acts as it sees fit; However, let it do so in the face of all prior, current, subsequent and potential violation. We must not only consider the acts which Michael Vick himself has partaken in, but we must consider all prior, current and future requisite as well, if we are to be fair, just and impartial in the end.