# ASPCA Rejects Vick



## pamela berger (Jun 19, 2008)

http://www.aspca.org/blog/ed-sayres-the-road-ahead-for.html


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I agree wholeheartedly to their position. MV should have been providing community service to animal shelters with an emphasis on all aspects of dog care and rehabilitation instead of whiling away months in prison. </span>


----------



## shilohsmom (Jul 14, 2003)

Good for them!!! Just because Vick 'did his time' it doesn't mean this erases his past. We don't let child molestors around kids (or at least we try to avoid it), why would it be ok having this dog killer/abuser/torturer as a role model for them??? I wish more people/organizations would speak up as the ASPCA has!


----------



## APBTLove (Feb 23, 2009)

I can't say I like the ASPCA at all, but I agree with this one decision of theirs.


----------



## Mandalay (Apr 21, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: shilohsmomGood for them!!! Just because Vick 'did his time' it doesn't mean this erases his past. We don't let child molestors around kids (or at least we try to avoid it), why would it be ok having this dog killer/abuser/torturer as a role model for them??? I wish more people/organizations would speak up as the ASPCA has!


I want to second everything said here.


----------



## Mandalay (Apr 21, 2008)

BTW, I "borrowed" the ASPCA link to post to FB.


----------



## Kurys Mom (Oct 11, 2008)

> Quote: I wish more people/organizations would speak up as the ASPCA has!


And perhaps now more will. Sometimes it takes just one person or one organization to open the door.

The ASPCA used the word 'perpetrators' and that is exactly what he is.

We as a society have to stop allowing people to committ acts of horror against others, including animals.

Most 'people' who serve time for their crimes are not released and then get to 'pick up where they left off' resuming the life they led before. Valuable lessons well learned sometimes only happen when we loose it all. He most certainly hasn't been there, done that yet. Nor will he making 6+ million dollars a year. The time served, did no where equal the pain and suffering he caused regardless of what the laws dictate is an 'appropriate amount of time'.

A true measure of whether or not he has gained some valuable knowledge about the depth of his acts, or is sincere about what he says or does ONLY will show with time and his actions. Talk is nothing but words, actions speak volumes.


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: MandalayBTW, I "borrowed" the ASPCA link to post to FB.


I did too Emily. 

Thank for sharing this info! ASPCA said it very well! I agree.


----------



## tnbsmommy (Mar 23, 2009)

I put it on my FB page too...


----------



## GunnersMom (Jan 25, 2008)

Good for them! I'm glad to see they're standing up against him.



> Quote:We as a society have to stop allowing people to committ acts of horror against others, including animals.


I agree. The message needs to be loud, clear and consistent.


----------



## pamela berger (Jun 19, 2008)

As I posted on another thread, even though he has served his sentence, it doesn;t mean he feels any differently about dog fighting. He is lacking in his emotional makeup. Don't think he will ever do it again simply because he doesn't like prison nor all the money he lost but if dogfighting became legal, I think he would be first in line.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

sadly, if dogfighting became legal it would be a VERY long line.


----------



## Doubleminttwin (Aug 21, 2009)

I am so glad the ASPCA didn't buy into his I'm redeemed bs, its nice to see someone taking a stand and not getting caught up in the "I'm and NFL star" crap


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

ill probably get beat up for this, but i see it all from another angle. id prefer they take advantage of the situation for the sake of the dogs. they are standing their ground on a sound principle on the surface, but imo this stance will harm more dogs than it will help.

it is a difficult position for an agency to hold itself up as a champion for animal rights while at the same time missing an opportunity to do something that, imo, will have a net result of saving dogs.

i believe it is a fact that Vick will be active in efforts to reduce dogfighting/cruelty to animals. the ceo/chairman of the Eagles is adamant that Vick will work toward these goals or he will not keep his job. i am not confusing this with his level of remorse. i have no way of knowing how he really feels.

he will do this through whatever agencies will work with him, and the more "at risk" people he can talk to, especially youth, the more it will help dogs escape the fate of being involved in dogfighting and/or other forms of cruelty.

to me, it is indisputable that their refusal to work with him will ultimately be a lost opportunity to reach certain people and in the end that is going to result in more innocent dogs being victimized. therefore, in the end, i cannot be in favor of their stance.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: roxy84
> 
> it is a difficult position for an agency to hold itself up as a champion for animal rights while at the same time missing an opportunity to do something that, imo, will have a net result of saving dogs.



<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I understand your argument. However, the ASPCA stands <u>against</u> cruelty to animals. Having a person like MV as spokesperson for the agency, in effect, would be an hyprocracy.

In another post, I thought MV would be an ideal candidate to speak out againist animal cruelty. After reading the ASPCA article, I clearly understand their reasoning against it. It's like closing the barn door after the horse got out.

IMO, what needed to be done was have MV spend all of those months in service to destitute dogs - not whiling away in prison. The punishment didn't fit the crime, IMO. Further, as part of his "rehabilitiation" MV should independantly be made to go into neighborhoods where dog fighting is most likely to occur, and pubicly speak out againist it at his own cost. MV doesn't need the backing of agencies such as the ASPCA to accomplish a valuable goal that would ultimately send a very strong message on many levels.

</span>


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

i understand their argument completely, and it has that "feel good" aura on its surface, but the bottom line for me is that the net result in their stance will be dog deaths/dogs relegated to the horrors of dogfighting that could have been prevented.

the ASPCA provides a powerful platform, and while Vick doesnt need them to do positive work toward these ends, i feel their resources could be utilized in this case to achieve far more than their principled stance ever will.

i see a far greater hypocrisy in them turning their backs on that opportunity than i do in them using someone who has perpetrated what they want to prevent.

imo, their stance on him will do less to fight animal cruelty than their judicious use of him would. we can all argue that he has been given fame by re-entering the nfl, but doing work for animal rights organizations in itself isnt going to glorify him.

in my mind, the ASPCA's true mission, rather than being served, suffers here.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: roxy84i understand their argument completely, and it has that "feel good" aura on its surface, but the bottom line for me is that the net result in their stance will be dog deaths/dogs relegated to the horrors of dogfighting that could have been prevented.


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I don't think the message from the ASPCA is intended to feel good. If I understand the article, they're saying it would be hypocritical to allow MV to become their spokesperson againist animal cruelty. I mean, think about it... MV electrocuted, strangled, set up rape chairs, used timid dogs for brutal training sessions and the list goes on. Now, you think it's ok and in fact insist the ASPCA is losing out on a great opportunity by not using the likes of MV as their poster person for change aganist dog fighting. No. MV must first put himself out there to prove and take a stand against inhumanity toward innocent animals.


The position the ASPCA is taking, from my point of view is correct. If MV cares, if he's redeemed, if he wants to make a difference toward change, it would be a much more powerful statement if he did it on his own time and expense. Not have the ASPCA backing him up. I'm sorry, I don't see this. If the ASPCA allowed this, I and I think many others would lose respect for them as a caring institution toward the prevention of cruelty. The ASPCA would say in effect, MV is forgiven without him needing to make one effort with the exception of a false smile and words with no real compassion behind it.</span>


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

we will just keep going in circles with our points of view. the bottom line for me is i believe they have harmed more dogs by this stance. i'll never be ok with that.


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: 3dogs If the ASPCA allowed this, I and I think many others would lose respect for them as a caring institution toward the prevention of cruelty. The ASPCA would say in effect, MV is forgiven without him needing to make one effort


they could tangibly show how these efforts have helped bring about a reduction is dogfighting. saving dogs from this cruel fate is what it should be about, and that is what i would respect. as much as they, and many of us (myself included) would love to have a hand in punishing him for what he did, their position will only have a negative effect on dogs.

i know they are involved with such efforts, and have been long before Vick was well known, but as much as he disgusts all of us, the hard truth is that there are large segments of the population that he will be more successful at reaching than they have been.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: roxy84
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: 3dogs If the ASPCA allowed this, I and I think many others would lose respect for them as a caring institution toward the prevention of cruelty. The ASPCA would say in effect, MV is forgiven without him needing to make one effort
> ...


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>And, this is my point. MV can go out to those communities without the ASPCA. He can use his "celebrity" without the ASPCA. In fact, if he was truly sincere he could set up his own grassroots organization with a nice website and start a campaign aganist animal cruelty. MV can go into neighborhood social clubs, churchs, schools, etc., and talk about how regretful he is and how wrong it is to use animals for sport in such a inhumane manner. I think if MV took those steps, organizations like the ASPCA might offer him a backing. In fact, they would probably welcome a person who has clearly taken steps toward redemption.

The ASPCA doesn't want to take on a MV b/c he hasn't proven anything. He hasn't demonstrated that he wouldn't mistreat animals again. Why would the ASPCA endorse a person who might very well end up with blood on his hand again. Allowing MV to become a spokesperson for the ASPCA proves nothing. Many people will see through it with disgust. And, those in dog fighting circles will know it's nothing but horse manure. It will teach nothing but insincerity and just another cheapened way to drum up PR.

I'm actually proud the ASPCA didn't fall for the MV pitch - it would've been dishonorable and a blatant contradiction. The ASPCA is being "real" not selling out with the likes of MV.</span>


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

> Originally Posted By: GunnersMomGood for them! I'm glad to see they're standing up against him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agree too. 

Mr. Vick has served his time and paid for his crimes according to the law. Maybe he is "reformed" but I tend to think not.


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

the ASPCA has admitted that it has been difficult for them to bring the discussion of dogfighting into the national scope and to a level of priority it deserves. working with vick doesnt mean endorsing him as a person. its simply an opportunity to bring the subject more to the forefront, to more effectively achieve their stated goals.

vick should do everything that has been mentioned regardless of whether or not anyone works with him or pushes him to do it. even if he is sincere, i think organizations like the ASPCA would be able to help educate him about ways to make the message more effective.

it is still an opportunity (to help dogs) lost, but for their sake maybe we will all be surprised, and Vick will be a champion for animal rights for years to come and the ASPCA will take advantage of it.

lest anyone thinks i have any sympathy for michael vick, know this: had he been killed in some brutal fashion in prison by some dog loving behemoth in the prison yard, i would have had a little party with my 2 dogs. i just want to see every opportunity taken to help dogs in whatever way is possible.


----------



## MatsiRed (Dec 5, 2004)

There are many great points in this thread, so much so that this is one topic I can't seem to choose a position. But I'm going to try and think it out.

We are all a product of genetics and our environment, which sets us up for our comfort zones in life. Like so many, Vick's comfort zone included savage animal cruelty, which many would conclude as sociopathological. That's a pretty big mental tumor, and I'll bet the top 10 psychologists in the world would argue whether or not that type of disorder is fixable.

Think about your worse bad habit in your life and how hard it is/was to change, as even the smallest most basic changes can really challenge us. For myself, I have health issues and need to get 20 pounds off, and despite being very motivated, it's a HUGE struggle to change my eating habits, because that's my own personal comfort zone. Imagine dog fighting/murdering as a normal comfort zone and that's what you needed to change?! 

For MV, his comfort zone included years of crazed enjoyment at the sight, smell, sound, and feeling of torturing helpless animals. I realize he's got a lot to motivate him right now in terms of shaking this bad 'habit', but I have a very hard time believing that dog fighting is behind him, or even could ever be behind him, at least on a mental level. 

Then I wonder, well, does it really matter how HE feels inside? Does it really matter if he truly IS remorseful? Can someone who tortures animals, who has no conscience, even BE remorseful after only a few years? Could someone like him initiate himself into animal activism like it has been suggested? Remember, it took him a LIFETIME to get this way. At the very least, I think he would need someone stronger and smarter to hold his hand and lead the way. 

Like most of you, I don't really care what happens to MV and I don't really care how he feels. I personally think he's got a bigger chance of failing than succeeding at becoming a decent human being. In fact, a part of me wants to see him fail at football this time around, but then I quiver at the thought of him having nothing else to lose. People like him who have nothing to lose can be quite dangerous to those around them, especially those they carry resentments toward. Four footed furry friends beware. 

HOWEVER, from a broader perspective, I do care about the future welfare of animals, and even the prospective Micheal Vicks of the world. I don't believe an eye for an eye does anything to make the world a better place, even if it makes us feel better internally. I believe if you've got any shot at all, then education/mentoring/supporting is the key to the change we wish to see in the world. So if you go from there, then I think what the humane society is offering is the right way to proceed. As someone mentioned earlier, MV can reach a critical audience that few others probably could, and I'm of the belief that he would need a platform to do this, HSUS. Who cares if WE believe him, as long as the future animal torturers of the world do and he serves as the vehicle to positively influence them. He's on shaky ground anyway, with everyone watching, one slip up and he's back on skid row. The message is going to be powerful, either way, a win for the dogs now. In terms of HSUS, somebody surely had their eye on the ball and it had nothing at all to do with football. 

Ya know, the 'takes one to know one' approach works really well. Maybe there's even a support group for dog fighters in his future. "Hi, my name is Micheal Vick and I like to torture helpless animals. I also love to play football and make lots of money so I need to look for new ways to cope with my rotten childhood other than hanging, beating, and electrocuting innocent dogs...any football teams want to sponsor me and help me find my conscience, even if it's only for public viewing?" Would love to hear the conversations that have been going on behind closed doors. 



****************************************************************

Always loved this parable:

The Hole

On the first day... a man walks down a street...
Suddenly the world goes dark. He thinks he is lost. 
Then he realizes he is in a deep hole. He tries to find his way out, and it takes a very long time. Once he is out the day is gone ... so he walks back home.

On the second day... the man walks down the same street.
The world goes dark again. He is in the hole again.
He takes a while to recognize where he is. 
Eventually he finds his way out... and so again he walks back home.

On the third day... the man again walks down the street.
He knows the hole is there and pretends not to see the hole... and closes his eyes. Once again he falls into the hole, and climbs out ... and walks back home, the day lost once again.

On the fourth day... the man walks cautiously down the street.
He sees the hole and this time walks around it. He is pleased.
But the world goes dark again. He has fallen into another hole.
He climbs out of the second hole, walks home ... and alas... falls into the first hole. He gets out of the first hole... and walks back home... to think.

On the fifth day... the man walks confidently down the street.
He sees the first hole..... and recognizes it.
He walks around it... but forgets the second hole, which he walks directly into. 
He gets out immediately... and walks straight back home - to weep and hope.

On the sixth day... the man walks nervously down the street...
The hole is there and he thinks "I won't fall into the hole again"... and walks around the hole. He sees the second hole, avoids the second hole... but as he passes, he loses his balance... and falls in. Climbing out he walks back home ... taking the time to carefully avoid all the holes. 

On the seventh day... the same man goes for a walk....

... and chooses to walk down a different street.


----------



## MustLoveGSDs (Oct 31, 2008)

I am proud of them for producing that article and making their stance clear







Dogs were being saved before him and will continue to be saved without his "help".


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

MatsiRed,

your post was as fair and balanced as anything ive seen on the subject. you made sevveral good points. i try to look at this from a "what is best for the dogs" angle rather than the "what are my personal feelings about MV" angle.

it is scary to think where he could go with his life if he had nothing to lose. that is why i dont like the idea of him working some crap minimum wage job. he'd have no incentive, other than his own moral compass, to stay away from his previous life. having so much to lose in his current situation, as much as it pains us to see, is going to lead to a better scenario for dogs in the long run. if he were to continue with the efforts he claims to be behind when his playing days are over, then perhaps we could feel he has some true remorse and disgust about cruelty to animals.

i also agree that he definitely needs someone smarter and stronger to guide him through this, and id like to see him indoctrinated to a new way of thinking through as many animal rights agencies as he is willing to participate with.

is his new conscience only for public viewing? none us knows for sure what he feels inside.i think that question will be answered over the years to follow. the actions that he takes now can still help dogs, and many of them dont have the luxury of waiting to see if he really means it or not.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Quote:it is scary to think where he could go with his life if he had nothing to lose. that is why i dont like the idea of him working some crap minimum wage job. he'd have no incentive, other than his own moral compass, to stay away from his previous life. having so much to lose in his current situation, as much as it pains us to see, is going to lead to a better scenario for dogs in the long run. if he were to continue with the efforts he claims to be behind when his playing days are over, then perhaps we could feel he has some true remorse and disgust about cruelty to animals.


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>So the idea then is to keep a MV with a low morale compass in a high paying priviledged job to prevent further cruelty to animals. Huh? This argument doesn't hold. If MV decided to pick up where he left off in dog fighting, he would end up with a longer jail sentence the next time around. 

The time he spent in jail did nothing to rehabilitate or adjust his mentality againist animal cruelity. It's the mentality and behavior that needs to change. And where does such a change begin? It doesn't happen by spending months pining away in a jail cell. And, it doesn't happen when the ASPCA allows a person to become a spokesperson who has demonstrated anything but humanity toward animals

The only way any of us will know if his humanity toward animals has changed is through his actions. Without the actions behind the words, there's nothing there to assess.</span>




> Quote:the actions that he takes now can still help dogs, and many of them dont have the luxury of waiting to see if he really means it or not.


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>The actions that need to be taken by MV *<u>doesn't</u>* require the assistance of the ASPCA. The efforts of the ASPCA has helped bring about awareness in the past and will continue to do so into the future without a MV.</span>



> Quote:from there, then I think what the humane society is offering is the right way to proceed. As someone mentioned earlier, MV can reach a critical audience that few others probably could, and I'm of the belief that he would need a platform


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>MV can make a strong impact on his own if he wanted to. And, a message of kindness toward animals, dogs in particular can be far reaching without the ASPCA. If the ASPCA would provide a platform for MV, it would be like putting his face on a box of Wheaties. Only champions deserve that priviledge - not the MV's of the world. People by and large need to first prove their worthiness before receiving such an honor. Has MV done this? Has he done anything remotely close to showing his behavior and mentality has changed to receive such a platform?



> Quote:vick should do everything that has been mentioned regardless of whether or not anyone works with him or pushes him to do it. even if he is sincere, i think organizations like the ASPCA would be able to help educate him about ways to make the message more effective.


The MV's of the world need much more than education - they need intensive behavior modification therapy. I think this is way beyond the scope of the ASPCA. I think in order to have an effective message the sincerity behind the words must be real to have the intended impact. And, for the sincerity to come across, there must be action behind the words. In other words, put the money where the mouth is.

If MV got actively involved in the cause and came out to talk about it, only then would there be hope his message will impact the targeted the audience. Until he moves in that direction, the ASPCA and the like, will not provide the platform. It's that simple. The ASPCA will not put their reputation on the line, for someone who has yet to prove himself. Time in jail is not enough and frankly, I agree with their position.

</span>


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

i will just agree to disagree with most of your points, since we are simply rewording the same arguments over and over. restating what the ASPCA will not do is unnecessary since that was well established from the very beginning. it is their right to take that position and my right to feel this position will fail some dogs in the process.


----------



## LARHAGE (Jul 24, 2006)

The thing I got from the ASPCA letter is that they were crucial to prosecuting MV with the evidence they gathered, it mentions the heinous crimes that the public STILL doesn't know every detail, their thinking, and mine actually, is that ANYONE who can do that to a dog, and lets face it, these were not stray dogs, they were HIS dogs, is simply of a different moral makeup, the average person just doesn't have that type of cruelty in their heart, I find it hard to beleive that someone who performed those atrocities, is someone even capable of heartfelt remorse, I think he has remorse, no doubt, but the remorse is for being caught and having the whole thing blow up.

I agree with the ASPCA , this person is not capable of true remorse, and therefore the LAST person on earth to champion this cause.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: roxy84i will just agree to disagree with most of your points, since we are simply rewording the same arguments over and over. restating what the ASPCA will not do is unnecessary since that was well established from the very beginning. it is their right to take that position and my right to feel this position will fail some dogs in the process.


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Guess I can't let this go b/c it's a very important subject. 

The ASPCA not permitting a platform for or to use MV as a spokesperson for the institution againist cruelty in and of itself will not fail dogs.

Sadly, dogs will continue to suffer at the hands of humans. By not having MV tied into the ASPCA; it will not increase the amount of cruelty. Having MV use the ASPCA platform will not create a blanket awakening of humanity among those in dog fighting circles. It was here before MV and will continue inspite of and regardless of MV.

It's a nice idea but will not achieve the desired result in large measure as I think you believe it will. I wish it were that simple. Unfortunately, a whole entire mindset must change; a counterculture b/c that's what dog fighting is. It will not change b/c the MV's stand up under the wing of the ASPCA. This is a utopian thought. It's like waving a magic wand and expecting something different to happen except in this case, it's a MV.

</span>


----------



## MatsiRed (Dec 5, 2004)

> Quote:MV can make a strong impact on his own if he wanted to. And, a message of kindness toward animals, dogs in particular can be far reaching without the ASPCA. If the ASPCA would provide a platform for MV, it would be like putting his face on a box of Wheaties. Only champions deserve that priviledge - not the MV's of the world. People by and large need to first prove their worthiness before receiving such an honor. Has MV done this? Has he done anything remotely close to showing his behavior and mentality has changed to receive such a platform?


Barbara,

I think your points are very valid and I don't necessarily disagree with the ASPCA position. However, I think HSUS is taking a huge leap of faith by aligning themselves with MV. I admire their courage to take that risk, and I think they are strong enough to withstand the blow should MV fail. At the very least, if he backpedals, we've still gained in the animal cruelty education department because of his notoriety and all the conversations he has stirred up. If he's kicked off the football team and/or goes back to jail, which I believe is a very real possibility at this point, the message that animal cruelty is not tolerated in our society is again widely reinforced. Since it is still so early, it might be easiest for some to think of him as the errand boy for HSUS, carrying the message back to the hood to do the right thing, to either remind them of the consequences or to reform or redeem themselves, or avoid doing the wrong things altogether. To me, doesn't matter if he's internally genuine at this point, as long as he is believable to the intended audience and his actions hold up over time, there is a chance he can save dogs over the long haul.

I personally don't believe that MV service as a spokesperson needs to be viewed as a championship. I would look at him more like a sponsor, reaching out to people like himself to do the right thing. Like AA, which is a form of behavior modification, I would guess that counseling his own kind could help empower him to stay on the right track and have a positive influence on the next generation of animal terrorists, especially with HSUS mentoring HIM. Sure, he could do this on his own on a smaller scale, being quietly lead, but this way, he's apt to reach a much wider audience. And being under the microscope, and with so much to lose, there's a lot more pressure to succeed. 

As much as I deplore the man, utilizing an ex con to fight the war on animal crimes while he's still so fresh on everyone's mind seems like a good game plan to me, at least on the surface. If he fails, well, the message will be just as clear.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

Donna.

Is this the same HSUS?

See article below:

We've Got A Bone To Pick With HSUS Over Michael Vick


First things first: We’re not fans of dogfighting. And if the charges against Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick prove true, he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But that hasn’t stopped the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) from making him the latest poster boy for its gargantuan -- and apparently misleading -- fundraising efforts. It looks to us like Vick isn’t the only one with some serious explaining to do.

Have we mentioned that we can’t stand dogfighting? We also can’t stand animal rights fundraising that smells of fraud, or smug activists who can’t keep their stories straight.

Case in point: In yesterday’s New York Times, HSUS president Wayne Pacelle called for the pit bulls seized from Michael Vick’s house to be “put down.” That’s HSUS-speak for “killed, because we’d rather not spend part of our $223 million nest egg actually operating any pet shelters.” Pacelle also lamented: “We don’t know how well they are being kept.”


But just a few weeks ago in HSUS’s prominent plea for the public’s donations, the group wrote that it wanted money “to help The Humane Society of the United States care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case … your gift will be put to use right away to care for these dogs …” Click here to see a screen-capture from HSUS’s website, dated July 18. A week later, HSUS quietly changed its fundraising tune. (Click here to compare it with the current, edited pitch for cash -- not that we recommend giving.)

Let’s recap: Vick was indicted on July 17. The next day, HSUS was raising money on the promise that it would be used to “care for” Vick’s dogs. Just two weeks later, the Times reports that not only wasn’t HSUS “caring for” them, but its president had no idea who is, or where. And -- oh, yes -- he’d very much like them dead.

end of article...........


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Donna, I take a wait and see approach. Do you have any article to point to regarding HSUS and MV.

My outlook has always been to treat the disease not the symptoms. Again, dog fighting is a mentality with a counter-culture. Even with organizations like AA, one must first have "recovered" alcholics to lead, reach out and serve those in the throws of alcoholism. To serve as role models; modeling the desired behavior.</span>


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: MatsiRed
> 
> As much as I deplore the man, utilizing an ex con to fight the war on animal crimes while he's still so fresh on everyone's mind seems like a good game plan to me, at least on the surface. If he fails, well, the message will be just as clear.


i agree, but i know it feels right to the ASPCA leadership to take the wait and see approach and keep him out of the loop for now. i think their guidance and education is exactly what would make vicks message more effective, and i would have preferred the ASPCA take on the task rather than the HSUS.


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: 3dogsEven with organizations like AA, one must first have "recovered" alcholics to lead, reach out and serve those in the throws of alcoholism. To serve as role models; modeling the desired behavior.[/size]


ive worked with people in AA. recovered alcoholics play a vital role, but often the greatest role models are those who are the very beginning stages of recovery. it is in them that people in the deepest levels of alcoholic despair can see themselves and that slightest sliver of hope.


----------



## MatsiRed (Dec 5, 2004)

> Originally Posted By: 3dogsDonna.
> 
> Is this the same HSUS? See article below...


Yes, same one. I'm aware of some of the criticism, have no strong feelings either way about HSUS, although based on their donations, seems they are still pretty well respected and influential so they can make a pretty big dent in animal cruelty. In terms of dog fighting issues and HSUS, my perception is that they do a lot in this arena.


The following are a few excerpts from their website:

http://www.hsus.org/acf/fighting/dogfight/vick_faq.html


What has The HSUS done to leverage the Michael Vick case?

Since the Vick case put the spotlight on dogfighting, we have worked with lawmakers, law enforcement officers, community organizers, and others to end dogfighting.

In the last two years, we've upgraded 26 laws (state and federal) on animal fighting. The HSUS has trained more than 1,000 law enforcement officers on investigating animal fighting and paid out 50 rewards for tips leading to arrests in animal fighting cases. We have worked with law enforcement on more than 200 raids on animal fighting operations.

We also launched programs in Atlanta and Chicago to reach at-risk youth. Hundreds of people have participated in our pit bull training classes, which teach dog owners that their pit bulls can be friends, not fighters. We hope to expand these community-based outreach programs to other major urban areas.

There is no other animal welfare organization with an entire unit focused only on combating animal fighting.

While these efforts have put a dent in the problem of dogfighting, there is disturbing growth of the activity in urban areas. We need new ways to address the problem, and we seized on the opportunity to put Michael Vick to work because his celebrity and his unique story have the potential to turn thousands of young people into anti-dogfighting advocates.



Why didn't we choose a different celebrity to connect with urban communities?

Vick was a role model for many young people, and he lost everything because of what he did to dogs. His story is the strongest possible example of why dogfighting is a dead end. Just as former drug addicts are able to reach people struggling with addiction, former dogfighters are some of the most effective voices against this crime. We realized the potential that Vick has to reach at-risk youth and pull them out of the quicksand of animal fighting. That said, we constantly attempt to recruit celebrities and others to join us in our crusade to end dogfighting and other forms of animal cruelty. We want to use all pathways to stopping the problem.



Since Vick is back in the NFL, doesn't your work with him signal that dogfighting is okay and that the penalty is weak?

Given the penalties available at the time he was sentenced, U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson meted out a strong penalty to Vick. He paid a steep price for his crimes, in addition to serving his prison sentence. The HSUS has worked to upgrade the federal animal fighting law twice in the last two years. The penalties are much more severe now than in April 2007, when Vick's home was raided. The HSUS has been pushing for felony-level penalties for animal fighting crimes for years because that's the only way to drive criminals out of this business.



Why were so few people allowed to attend the first Vick appearance in Atlanta?

The goal of the End Dogfighting program is not to reach the general public or the media, but to engage young people at risk of involvement in dogfighting. These are not events for Vick to bare his soul to people already committed to ending dogfighting, but occasions to talk with young people who may not have thought about the moral and legal elements of dogfighting and turn them into advocates for our position. We expect to expand the audience size greatly at many future events, but these events are not for football fans, curiosity seekers, or paparazzi.


----------



## MatsiRed (Dec 5, 2004)

> Originally Posted By: 3dogs<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Donna, I take a wait and see approach. </span>


I'll be watching, too. I have no strong feelings as to how well it will work. I remember when someone proposed to give out free needles to drug addicts in order to control infectious diseases like AIDS and Hepatitis from dirty needles. I thought, are you kidding me?! But if I'm correct, the intervention had a favorable impact. Talk about thinking outside the box. Sometimes desperate situations call for creative ideas, unpopular as they may be. It's very very hard to get past personal feelings for someone who committed such atrocities. But all we can do at this point is move forward and hope for reform on many levels.


----------



## MatsiRed (Dec 5, 2004)

> Quote:i agree, but i know it feels right to the ASPCA leadership to take the wait and see approach and keep him out of the loop for now. i think their guidance and education is exactly what would make vicks message more effective, and i would have preferred the ASPCA take on the task rather than the HSUS.


Derek, why do you feel this way? What would the ASPCA do differently than HSUS? Asking because I really don't know.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: roxy84
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: 3dogsEven with organizations like AA, one must first have "recovered" alcholics to lead, reach out and serve those in the throws of alcoholism. To serve as role models; modeling the desired behavior.[/size]
> ...


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I'm not an addict of any kind but have had family members and friends who have been afflicted. What I do know from experience is this - only those who want help or a different way at approaching life are those who will be served the best.

I do think it's very difficult to take assistance or guidance from an addict of any kind while they're slurring their words. One must walk the talk otherwise, get out of my way - they have no credibility.

You can throw a ton of MV's out there to speak out but unless they are living examples, sorry, I don't see it as reaching the intended masses. Further, unless people realize that cruelity to animals is just plain wrong and want to heal whatever "demons" reside within regarding that behavior, it will continue as long as there are willing participants and venues to support it. Strip away the disease and walla, no more symptoms.

I will applaud and support any organization that eradicates dog fighting once and for all. I will not support individuals who appear on the surface to be an activist with no foundation to support it regardless of the organization they connect with.

I like seeing the work being done by places like Dogtown. I would love to see the MV's getting their hands dirty in that type of work like Dogtown. Dogtown who had to rehabilitate some of MV's dogs - those that were lucky enough. Not standing on the side with the help of HSUS with a pointing finger telling people -







don't do as I so, do as I say BS.

I do not dispute one bit that a reformed MV can bring with the help of a known platform powerful messages of change in the communities needed the most. What I dispute is the validity of his claims for change. Yes, it could work, speak volumes and touch many with the right celebrity. Give me a MV who's done all the hard work, become an activist and make it his mission, work with the right organizations for all the reasons we reasonably expect and perhaps my point of view will change. Until then...
</span>


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: MatsiRed
> 
> 
> > Quote:i agree, but i know it feels right to the ASPCA leadership to take the wait and see approach and keep him out of the loop for now. i think their guidance and education is exactly what would make vicks message more effective, and i would have preferred the ASPCA take on the task rather than the HSUS.
> ...


i suppose id prefer they are both working with him. perhaps that was a hasty statement as i was recalling in my mind how the HSUS handled the vick dogs (and imo used their suffering for their own financial gain and publicity), while the aspca was quite proactive in assisting with the prosecution.


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: MatsiRed
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: 3dogs<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Donna, I take a wait and see approach. </span>
> ...


<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I think giving out needles to addicts is the right approach. At the very least, it's minimizing the spread of infectious diseases. I'm also for dispensing condoms in H.S.'s I rather prevent teen pregnancy, STD's and worse diseases, then lecturing kids about not having sex. Or, worse - teach nothing and hope for the best. I definitely have progressive ideas. What I don't like, is phony outrage, insincere activisim and PR BS.</span>


----------



## sunfluer (May 12, 2009)

I intended to mention, lets not compare the drug addict with those who enjoy dogs fighting to the death. Nope - very different. I don't want to hear it's a gambling problem. There are other ways to satisfy that addiction without involving animal cruelty.

Although, don't get me started on dog and horse racing unless someone wants another can of worms opened here.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: 3dogsEven with organizations like AA, one must first have "recovered" alcholics to lead, reach out and serve those in the throws of alcoholism. To serve as role models; modeling the desired behavior.


You cannot, under ANY circumstances, compare Michael Vick to a recovering alcoholic.

People are in AA becauwe they WANT to be in AA. You cannot force an alcoholic to reform - they have to WANT to. They have to admit they have a problem and ask for help.

Let me repeat - they have to ADMIT they have a problem and *ASK FOR HELP*.

Michael got CAUGHT. He did not turn himself in. He did not wake up one day and say "Oh NO! What I've been doing is wrong and immoral and I should get help."

In fact, if he HADN'T been caught he would still be doing it today.

He has not recovered.


----------

