IT BEGAN as a sports story. It has evolved into a story that has consumed the front page in every major newspaper in the country: Michael Vick's dogfighting. The Vick case has gone far beyond sports into issues ranging from accusations of racism to conditions in federal prisons. Though Vick's acts are deplorable, they have been placed by the public in an irrational context.
Vick admitted to killing dogs and bankrolling the dog fights that took place, and one of Vick's three codefendants in the case claimed Vick either helped drown or hang dogs that "underperformed" in fights. The media has condemned him and the public cries for a lifetime NFL ban. Even Vick's fans in Atlanta have seemed to turn on him. The Atlanta-Journal Constitution ran a poll last month in which 65 percent of Atlanta said they believe Vick should be banned from the NFL if he was found guilty of dog fighting. Now that he pled guilty, there seems to be little hope of Vick redeeming himself, at least in the eyes of the public.
Such sentiment is, frankly, baffling. We must remember that animals are routinely killed and it is accepted as part of everyday life. Countless dogs and cats die everyday at shelters across this country when no one adopts them. Scientists experiment on animals through all sorts of invasive means. Hunters routinely (and legally) kill defenseless animals. While some oppose such events, people who partake in these activities are rarely condemned as Vick has been.
There is a difference between these events and Vick's crimes. Besides their differences in legality, Vick's acts were more vulgar and cruel than many of these acts. The heartless killing of animals, especially man's best friend, strikes people deep within their souls. There is an irrational sentimentality placed on dogs in our culture that really cannot be understood or justified. Because Vick has struck at this connection, the public has chosen to judge Vick more harshly partly because of the way he killed the dogs, rather than look at the facts of the crime.
The media and leaders of several organizations have also blown Vick's crimes out of proportion. Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the U.S. Humane Society stated, "This case has opened America's eyes and jolted its conscience ... The only good that can come from this case is that the American people dedicate themselves to the task of rooting out dogfighting in every infected area where it thrives." The language used by Pacelle places dogfighting among the most serious crimes. The American people can "dedicate themselves" (in other words, spend their tax dollars) to stopping far more criminal tasks than dogfighting -- like murder and sexual assault.
Sexual assault should bring with it a harsher reaction than cruel treatment to animals. If we look at recent celebrity cases, however, this does not appear to be so. The best comparison is the Kobe Bryant case. Bryant, the star player of the Los Angeles Lakers, was accused of rape in 2003. He faced intense scrutiny and lost many of his endorsement deals. But the scrutiny never approached what Vick currently faces. No one even suggested that Bryant be banned from the NBA and a Harris Poll conducted in January 2004 found that 29 percent of over 3,300 respondents thought Bryant was "probably not guilty" versus a nearly equal 31 percent who thought he was "probably guilty." Bryant had a substantial backing even when he was accused of rape. Vick has never had more than a handful of supporters.
In addition to the graphic descriptions of Vick's acts, the disparity in support can also be attributed to expectations. According to a 2003 USA Today article, there were 164 athletes accused of sexual assault between 1991 and 2003. The public has become desensitized to such behavior from athletes. Dog fighting, however, has sparked interest from the public because of its novelty. With this interest has come widespread condemnation. This interest, combined with the instincts of people when they hear horrific descriptions of Vick, have caused the public to place Vick's crime in an irrational context without the consideration of other more serious crimes.
Michael Vick deserves whatever penalty he receives; dog fighting is a crime and deserves the strength of its sentence. Legal experts seem to believe he will receive a sentence anywhere from one to two years, though he could receive a maximum sentence of five years. But he does not deserve to rot in jail for the rest of his life or to be banned from the sport he loves. Instead, accept that he has made a mistake -- that is to say, he is human.
Rajesh Jain's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at rjain@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 3 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
