This is in response to the Michael Vick article posted on yahoo on feb 17th, 2009:
Someone's going to emplyoy Michael Vick. I was quite surprised and somewhat disappointed after reading the comments people made in relation on this article. I do not understand is the fact that anyone, would be infuriated by the sole fact that someone would be willing to offer Michael Vick an employment by the 49ers, and hence a place back in society. Isn't the sole goal of imprisonment to have a corrective effect on the individuals and later provide a proper rehabilitation into society? Aren't ex-convict offered a fair change to reinsert society and take part in the social rebuilding of the community? I find it quite disturbing that individuals would oppose to such thing.
In addition, as a black man I am very infuriated and find it quite outrageous that young African Americans are not given the chance to reintegrate society once they have serve their sentence and paid their debt to society. There is no secrets about the incarceration rate of minorities in comparison to whites. In 1995 alone, 30% of blacks in their 30's were either in prison or jail or on probation as opposed to 7% of white and 18% of hispanics. Why deny them them a second chance once they serve their sentence? What would happen to them if they can't find employment?
It certainly does not make any sense and unequivocally conveys the wrong message about our judicial system unless the latter one is the primary intent of this flawed system. This is very regretful especially when looking at the incarceration rate of African American, and even worse, when comparing it to their caucasians counterparts.
If you follow your line of logic, are you also implying that Michael Phelps should be banned for life for having publicly smoked marijuana? I would love to hear you opinion on this matter because from your article it seems that you do not
believe in second chance and opt for the one strike rule. I, on the other hand, beg to differ. As Dr. Boyd so nicely said in one of his articles, people need to practice the art of forgiveness. Anyhow, this was my take on the matter and I hope it enlightens everyone.
Referring specifically on Michael Vick's case, I think that most of us are hypocrites. There we are, condemning an individual's behavior, sending him to jail, while we still do the same thing. In case you guys don't know it, cock fight, which is almost as violent, if not more violent than dog fight, is still legal in the U.S in at least 10 states. Unlike dog fight, the loser always dies because cocks fight with knives attached to their legs. Is that anymore acceptable than dogfights, or is it because dog is the male's best friend that people are outraged? PETA is gimmicky trying to put us under the impression that they care about animals. I really doubt it. Otherwise, they would have fought for activities such as hunting (for fun) illegal. I simply think that people a full of ****, but we need to stop this and make difference.
Chatboard (0)