The furor over Michael Vick is a perfect example of why the USA has such a high prison population

[Cali_Democrat]

The absurdly high prison population in the USA is not only a result of draconian government measures, but it's also driven by
American citizens who wish to see their neighbors behind bars when they are either no threat to society or have already served their time in jail.

The furor over Michael Vick really makes it easy to see why the United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world. Not only do we like to wage violent, unjust wars in foreign lands, but we also like to lock up our citizens like no other country in the world.

The United States has the largest prison population in the world by far. 1/4 of all prisoners IN THE WORLD are locked up in US jails:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/americas/23iht-23prison.12253738.html

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population. But it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

Indeed, the United States leads the world in producing prisoners, a reflection of a relatively recent and now entirely distinctive American approach to crime and punishment. Americans are locked up for crimes — from writing bad checks to using drugs — that would rarely produce prison sentences in other countries. And in particular they are kept incarcerated far longer than prisoners in other nations.

Criminologists and legal scholars in other industrialized nations say they are mystified and appalled by the number and length of American prison sentences.

The United States has, for instance, 2.3 million criminals behind bars, more than any other nation, according to data maintained by the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College London.

Obama never praised Vick. Obama praised Jeffrey Lurie for giving an ex-convict a second chance. This is what people don't understand. The failure to give convicted felons a second chance leads to things like an absurdly high incarceration rate in the USA. When when people do get out of jail, it becomes difficult for them to find jobs and become productive members of society. They are then usually driven to crime once again.

There are many more people like Michael Vick that deserve a second chance and they are rotting in jail.

[hlthe2b]

1. Because we value only celebrity and not justice for those

average people who truly deserve a second chance. If 1/10 of the concern for Vick were put towards those average people being released, what a difference we could make. Those that Obama praised are not giving second chances nor working with groups that might afford second chances to these average poor people. If they were, they would deserve not only Obama, but every former President and current political leader lining up to sing their praises. How sad that that is not the case.

[chimpymustgo]

But we are talking about this as an issue facing society. It's a good thing.

[OKNancy]

4. His celebrity is what got him 23 months.

He did his time. If he wasn't in football, but in a different profession I also think some DUers would not be so outraged. There are a lot of anti-sports snobs here.
Sometimes people around here care more about animals than humans. Of course they still eat them, hunt them, and select WHICH animals to care about and which ones to not bother with.

[hlthe2b]

6. I personally am proud that most people care about the poor

and the unempowered, including animals, so much. That to me is what differentiates us from the other side. Our emphasis should be on helping the most "humble" among us, those who can't always fight for themselves. I don't see Vick in that category, yet so many here seem to have all-consuming concern for his welfare.

[woolldog]

64. I'm assuming you're a vegetarian, since you're so concerned

about animal cruelty?

[hlthe2b]

33. His crimes are what got him 23 months. Please...

He not only committed the crimes, but he LIED to a Federal Judge about them.

RICHMOND, Va. -- Michael Vick was sentenced to prison Monday for running a dogfighting operation and will stay there longer than two co-defendants, up to 23 months, because he lied about his involvement when he was supposed to be coming clean to the judge who would decide his fate.

The disgraced NFL star received a harsher sentence than the others in the federal conspiracy case because of "less than truthful" statements about killing pit bulls. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3148549



Now YOU are actually excusing him... to suggest he went to prison only because of his celebrity? THAT is surely INEXCUSABLE.

[martymar64]

55. It's not who he is , it's what he did. He tortured and killed innocent creatures for fun and profit.

He tortured these poor animals and ENJOYED it?
People like that are known as sadists. And you are saying that we should give him a pass because he cried crocodile tears and lied to our faces saying that he was sorry. He isn't sorry for shit.

If he stole a car or even held up a liquor store or sold drugs, then your point would be valid.

But he committed sadistic, horrible violence against creatures that couldn't defend themselves. Where is your compassion for them?

If it was a human he did this to, he would be on Death Row.

But since he is a celebrity athlete, we should all just bow down and praise him?

Not gonna do it.

[martymar64]

57. He should have gotten 23 YEARS

[Top Cat]

61. some that murder,rape etc humans don't get the

23 years you wish on Vick. I think your 23 year sentence is BS. I'm a dog lover but I do place a higher value on human life. Vick served the time and will live with his crime for the reminder of his life.

[martymar64]

63. You're right, he should have gotten 5 years, which wasthe maximum allowable sentence.

As far as living with his crime, I'm sure that there are plenty of us around to gladly throw it in his face at every opportunity.

He will go down in the history books as The Dog Killer, his football career will be merely a footnote. That will be his legacy the way OJ's legacy is murder.
That stain will never wash off. Nor should it. He has shamed his family name forever and his family will also pay the price in shame and embarrassment forever.

He will never have a career as a sportscaster. No network will touch him. He can forget about endorsements too. Would you buy something that Dog Killer endorsed? Not me.

He may be rich for a little while, but he'll piss it away soon enough. He doesn't seem too bright.

Unless he makes extremely wise investments (doubtful), he's fucked for the restofhis life.

His name is Mud.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

8. You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions in your post about what

others believe and where their concerns lie. Are you certain that there hasn't been a concerted effort to reform our justice system and work towards a fairer institution?

In other words, there has been a very strong, forceful movement to reform our judicial system when it comes to how minorities and the poor are mistreated. While you may not hear about what these organizations are doing on a day to day basis, doesn't mean that there's no movement.

Why are we placing an entire broken justice system on the shoulders of one man? Why are we scapegoating Michael Vick to prove a larger point?

[hlthe2b]

11. I"m sure that if you have knowledge of those reforms...

I (and many others) would be very interested in hearing about them. Why not start a post. This is an important issue and I'd appreciate hearing from someone involved in the field.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

18. I'll give you two examples of efforts that have been ongoing for decades now...

The first is an effort to free Mumia Abu-Jamal, a man wrongly convicted of heinous crimes who cannot get a decent trial or even a competent lawyer. More about that case here:

http://www.freemumia.org/

The other example is one that has also been the subject of many debates. That is the disparate treatment of non-violent offenders, often those convicted of posessing and/or distributing drugs. Civil rights and liberties advocacy organizations of all stripes, such as the Sentencing Project, have worked tirelessly to get fairer standards for sentencing non-violent drug offenders. Their efforts paid off with the Fair Sentencing Act that I believe Congress passed just this year.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/rd_reducingracialdisparity.pdf

These are only two.

As for violent offenders, there exists a large number of organizations and programs that have attempted to rehabilitate ex-offenders, such as the Center for Restorative Justice and Peacemaking:

http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/rjp/Resources/Research_Annotated_Bibliography/AB_Title.asp

and at the federal level:

http://www.doleta.gov/grants/sga/reentry_app.cfm

[CakeGrrl]

2. The thing is, it's all academic. To what end are people up in arms?

Vick was tried, convicted, and served his time. He didn't avoid jail.

I suppose in fantasy land, some of these people who are so angry would send him back to jail for good. As long as it's happening there, I guess there's no taxpayer burden either.

[jobycom]

3. People don't want justice, redemption, or rehabilitation,. They want revenge.

That's why it's so easy to convince people to invade other countries or support the death penalty. We don't understand the difference between a crime and the person who commits it. Used to be that was a primarily conservative trait, but times have changed.

[hlthe2b]

35. .No... Most people believe in redemption...

But they want the person to be sincere in that notion... not just saying/doing whatever it takes to remove the consequences. All too often we have seen celebrities and the wealthy do the latter. THAT is why people are wary. The bar is higher for those who have committed especially heinous crimes--as it should be.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hlthe2b]

40. I did not post anything about "ripping apart Vick's face"

That was the post above mine. You apparently can not see well.

I told you my post was accidentally posted in response not to the OP, as intended in terms of Hawaii, but by error under that particular post.

I alerted before and am doing so again.

[jobycom]

41. Wary is good, but I wouldn't use "wary" to describe the "Get a rope" response I'm seeing here today.

[SidDithers]

46. +1...nt

Sid

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hlthe2b]

9. Those that disagree with you are not "haters"

Those that disagree on one or more policy issues with the President are not "haters"
Those who hold an opposing view to yours are not "haters"

But labeling them as such is definitely against the rules.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. The same applies to you. All day long there have been threads about Obama and Vick.

That's why I made the comment that I made.

Of course I don't think that people who don't agree with me are haters. I really don't give a shit. But I do hope that they would make an attempt at a cogent argument without resorting to hyperbole and hysterics.

This forum has been filled with a lot of anger and a great deal of hyperbole without context, without knowing the complete details of a story.

It's becoming quite unfortunate.

[hlthe2b]

14. I have not done so to you... at all

We all can disagree without being disagreeable, without labeling others as being "hyperbolic," "haters," or denouncing them because they feel anger. People have a right to feel emotion about that which they feel strongly. We can all disagree with respect for others.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. If my earlier post doesn't apply to you, then don't worry about it.

I was referring to DU in general. And we all know that every week there's something new to grind our teeth into.

I just think that the forum has been very, very disfunctional for the last few months, especially since the Democrats suffered heavy losses in the midterm.

Earlier I attempted to lighten the mood with this thread, which I thought would be fun:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x81846

But no, people continued to want to start new threads about Vick and Obama or social security and Obama's nefarious attempts to dismantle the system.

Both stories have been played up in the media without context and without full details. And yet, DU has lost its collective minds.

[hlthe2b]

29. I didn't see that post but would surely have appreciated a diversion

The elephants in the snow post that I saw earlier had been the only really enjoyable post I'd seen today...

[progressoid]

7. What's your point?

That other nations give their convicts a second chance and that's why they have lower incarceration rates?

[Cali_Democrat]

15. The US govt and American citizens have a draconian mentality when it comes to crime and punishment

Prisoners in other countries aren't locked up as often or as long as prisoners in the USA. The US government and American citizens are all too supportive of draconian measures that lead to a high prison population.

Also, when prisoners have gone through the prison system, it becomes very hard for them to find jobs and become productive members of society. They are essentially outcasts. This leads to more crime and more incarceration. It's a vicious cycle that needs to be broken.

[progressoid]

25. Ufortunately, the President chose exactly the wrong person to make his point

If anything it ignores our prison problem and only highlights the enormous gulf between the haves and the have nots.

If the President really wanted to break this vicious cycle, he could do so by reforming our "war on drugs" policy.

[martymar64]

58. S owe as a society should embrace killers and torturers and other sadists with open arms?

For lesser crimes, like theft or drugs, I totally agree with the premise. But crimes of violence are a different thing indeed. The punishments are not harsh enough for the truly guilty, like Vick.
This premise you promote would have us releasing Charlie Manson and his crew, John Gotti Jr and his crew, Eric Rudolph, Terry Nichols, Scott Roeder and many many more murderers and rapists just because they say "I'm sorry".

Sorry doesn't cut it when it come to crimes of violence. Sorry doesn't bring back the dead.

[rucky]

10. Best post yet on the topic.

K/R

[benddem]

12. good explanation

conservatives have larger fear center in brain
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/conservatives-fear-center-brain/
A study at University College London in the UK has found that conservatives' brains have larger amygdalas than the brains of liberals. Amygdalas are responsible for fear and other "primitive" emotions. At the same time, conservatives' brains were also found to have a smaller anterior cingulate -- the part of the brain responsible for courage and optimism.

[KansDem]

16. "...American citizens who wish to see their neighbors behind bars."

Michael Vick my neighbor? You got to be kidding...right?

I can see it now: I walk out my backdoor into the yard and see neighbor Mike over the fence. He has several dogs. I walk over to the fence and call out to him...

Hi'ya, Mike! Whatcha doin'?
Well, this dog here I'm goin' to shoot. That dog I'm goin' to hang. Then I'm drowning this dog and slamming that dog to the ground. I need to kill them all 'cause they aren't doing very well as fighters.
Oh, okay.....Can I borrow your lawn mower?

[bluestateguy]

17. I'm all for second chances

But they must be earned, and Vick doesn't make the cut.

Playing a children's game for enormous pay is a privilege and not a right. It is reasonable to expect that such players be men of respectable character; OK, not Saints, I get it, but not people who committed sadistic crimes, and even then, not unless they show great remorse and penance.

Vick can start over bagging groceries, flipping burgers, pumping gas or cleaning the bathroom stalls at football stadiums. If he does well at that, then in 10-15 years I am willing to consider thinking about maybe possibly allowing him back in the NFL---as a backup QB.

[backwoodsbob]

27. and this is different from fundies

wanted to lock first time offenders away forever in what way?

EVERYONE here who is familiar with me knows of my love for my dogs but this stuff is getting out of hand.The man paid what society said he must for his crimes.Let it go.Or are we going to start sitting overseers who get to decide what ex-cons are allowed to do when they are released?

[Voltaire]

44. Oh YOU are willing

Sometimes you folks crack me up. But only sometimes.

[treestar]

50. Ridiculous

that's entirely absurd. There is no way American law allows for that. If he is out of jail and free he can work for whoever will employ him. There is no way to legally prevent the NFL from hiring him.

[apocalypsehow]

52. The content of this post is simply unbelievable.

:thumbsdown:

[tularetom]

19. You make it sound like Lurie acted out of altruism

Or concern for the rights of a poor ex convict. He didn't. He hired Vick because he thought the guy could make a few million bucks for him. That's not compassion nor concern. It's naked greed and not worthy of presidential praise.

[frylock]

21. astounding that more people don't get that..

even more astounding that people can't seem to wrap their minds around how truly heinous his crimes were, going as far as equating the eating of meat with electrocuting and drowning these animals. i don't begrudge vick is second chance, but feel it was monumentally stupid of obama to praise the eagles for hiring an ex-con as if it was some regular joe working the concession stand or something. of course, if you look at the group of people defending this you'll find that they're the same dozen or so posters that truly believe that there is absolutely NOTHING obama can do that would warrant criticism.

[cottonseed]

28. You're wrong about the 2 points you've made in this comment.

It's odd really. You're just building a reality that's not their. Most of the things you've been claiming to have happened on this post and others, did not in fact happen. You should take a break.

[frylock]

37. Just wondering how many people eviscerating Vick eat meat, eggs or dairy products?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x81657

[AndrewP]

31. Well said.

But I've been told I'm not a liberal because I'm not crying with joy at Vick's "Redemption".

[cottonseed]

26. At the time he hired Vick he had 2 quarterbacks considered to be better players.

There was no guarantee of Vick's performance. Many football people believed Vick had nothing left. Lurie took a chance. He more than likely should have lost money on his decision.

You're just making things up. That clouds your understanding of the issue and it's something you should take care to not repeat.

[MH1]

30. Actually, head coach Andy Reid lobbied hard for hiring Vick, because Reid's son has been in trouble

and is going to need someone to go to bat for him.

At least that's what Reid said at the time. It was all over the papers here. But I guess Reid could have been lying, right? He could have just been covering for Lurie, right?

And it's because they knew what a great star Vick would still be THAT THEY HAD VICK PLAYING BEHIND KEVIN F******* KOLB WHO HAS ALL THE MOBILITY OF A TANK???? Until Kolb was knocked out of the game?

Yeah, Lurie hired Vick purely out of greed because he KNEW he would still be pro bowl caliber. Yeah right.

[SidDithers]

47. Good post...nt

Sid

[joshcryer]

65. That clears up the total narriative, linky. Vick shouldn't have been hired, but Reid...

...wanted to work through his past criminal behavior.

Linky: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/21/andy-reid-says-experience-with-sons-helped-him-with-michael-vick/

[treestar]

51. So it would be in any case

Of a football player who was never convicted of anything, or was in the past convicted of anything else.

the reason they get rich is people pay for the tickets. Period. If people don't want athletes to make big money, they should not pay for the tickets or watch the games.

[Union Scribe]

22. "people like Michael Vick that deserve a second chance"

Actually, there are tons of people NOT like Vick (i.e. not violent offenders, not torturers, not sadists, etc.) that are locked up and deserve to be let free. Most of the people "like Michael Vick" are felons and wind up with long stretches. They are NOT why we have such a ludicrous imprisonment rate. The people in need of the President's and the media's accolades and support will never get it because they got caught with some weed and aren't football stars.

[emilyg]

24. Good post.

[shireen]

32. +1

well said.

[highplainsdem]

39. +1

[jimlup]

23. In Vick's case I respectfully disagree.

I'm in favor of giving the guy a 2nd chance but he was serving time for a real crime. One that I think correctly resulted in incarceration. Many serving time in the nations jails are in for crimes that don't have nearly the moral weight of Vick's conviction. I would be in favor of reviewing their cases and the case law that put them in prison but in Vick's case, he was rightly in Jail. Now that he's served his time, I'm in favor of giving him a 2nd chance but that is much different from saying he should not have been in prison which your post seems to come dangerously close to.

[alcibiades_mystery]

34. Absolutely right...

Even on a liberal board, you have people who clearly desire almost medieval regimes of punishment. You have prison rape fantasies for all manner of offenders. Multiple people have suggested that Vick be torn apart by dogs. This is on a liberal/progressive board, so you can imagine the frothing revenge fantasies harbored by the general population.

This has been one of the great successes of the conservative culture warriors since the 1960's. They've invented categories (the so-called "sociopathology") and basically eviscerated 200 years of progressive legal advocacy, convincing even the most liberal citizens that prison warehousing and vicious retribution are attributes of a healthy society, rather than the most retrograde sort of conservative nonsense.

[SidDithers]

48. +1...nt

Sid

[ZombieHorde]

36. The US has a high prison population because people on the internet talk shit about Vick?

Funny.

[mtnsnake]

42. A better example of high prison population is all the people locked away for marijuana

Legalize pot and give THOSE people a second chance. Oh wait, the beer industry and the powerful pharmaceutical companies won't allow it to happen.

[KansasVoter]

43. +1000.....only logical post I have seen!

[slackmaster]

45. I think someone packing a loaded gun in his sweat pants, with no holster, is a threat to society

Holsters are owr friendz.

[BobbyBoring]

54. Esspecially in a bar

That serves booze!

[treestar]

49. +1 million

continuing to punish them after they are out of jail is just a recipe for disaster and recidivism.

[martymar64]

59. Well then, let's release OJ and Charlie Manson too!

Dog Killer does not deserve our respect or praise. He has a right to be able to work but we are not obligated to give him one iota of respect. We are not obligated to refrain from wishing him the worst misfortune and pain. I personally hope he suffers a spinal cord injury and spends the rest of his days in a wheelchair. I can legally wish that upon him, as long as I don't make it happen. Football is a dangerous game and things sometime happen. I just hope they happen to him.

He is now and always will be known as the Dog Killer, even if he wins a million Super Bowls. Nothing will wash away the stain from that sadist. The blood of those dogs will stick to him forever like he was Lady MacBeth.

[frylock]

53. jeff lurie did not give an ex-con a second chance..

what he did was hire potentially one of the premier quarterbacks in the league. if lurie had hired some guy out of the hole to work in his office, or a concession stand, then i'd be impressed. people appear to believe that lurie did this out of the goodness of his heart. i don't believe they understand that people wth vick's talent are often given second, third, and fourth chances. if obama wanted to congratulate someone for giving an ex-con a second chance, i'm postive that there are any number of businesses he could have called to express his gratitude.

[martymar64]

56. So who do we give a second chance to next? Charlie Manson? Terry Nichols? Eric Rudolph?

Maybe we should just call Osama Bin Laden and tell him that all is forgiven? How about we just release every violent criminal out of of prisons and give them all high paying gigs?

I guess violence against animals is AOK with you?

[PurityOfEssence]

60. A moment of reflective perspective from a consistent Obama critic

That would be me.

He's taken too much flak for this inference-laden bit of second-hand information, and that bears underlining. What this touches on, though, is a very emotional wellspring.

My beef with the whole thing is that he should have had sense to say NOTHING, and this is a bit surprising from a rather risk-averse fellow like him. If he's going to be our point-man, he needs some more finesse than this, and since his long suit seems to be social grease, this is a substantial failure on that front.

Even if it was just in the most blithe moment in passing while dealing with a phone call that was totally unrelated, this is precisely the kind of thing a politician needs to know to avoid, and since the continual politicking is high among my differences with our President, it's surprising to see it happen at all.

We are a tiresome Puritanical bunch of individualists in this country, and our annoying need to be better than others is one of the mechanisms for having the highest rate of incarceration in the industrialized world. It's also one of the reasons we have so much religion, and the us vs. them xenophobia is an odd paradox for what is also a multi-cultural country. Self-righteous moralizing, coupled with an aversion to anything that's not starkly black or white leads people to mindsets of certainty (religion, political extremism) and a need to banish anything "bad", contradictory or complex. Thus, those who are convicted should be ELSEWHERE, and forever out of our Little Bo Peep sight. Forget the social reality of the aftermath, and to hell with the offenders.

Those who are subjugated tend to be the harshest masters when given a mote of power, and history is rife with this; those who subscribe to belief systems that have them submitting to the power of others and embracing or literally exalting in their own inferiority are quick to crush those they perceive as worse.

Enough of that, though; we're pretty much inclined to have a vindictive mentality when living with a punishment philosophy.

What Vick did was deeply perverse and terrifying. It was obsessive and beyond brutal, done for sport, and done for money. Couple this with the widely-held perception that the sentence was too light, and there's plenty of rage to go around. A politician needs to know to avoid this kind of thing. There's more: he's a celebrity, which means there's a huge privilege component here (which hits a nerve among liberals), he's also a sports figure (and many of us can't stand the cultural influence of sports) who is a role model in an industry based on beating the system. There's also the race component, and much as I've taken one poster to task (and probably somewhat unfairly) on this issue, it's there.

He's out and he served the penance meted out by the legal system, but that doesn't mean he's a clean slate. People need to accept the degrees of culpability, the shades of responsibility and the nuances of various misbehavior. To me, and to many others, VIOLENT crime is an entirely separate and more heinous category than crime of dishonesty or substance abuse. It is far harder for many of us to warmly embrace those who use violence against weaker creatures, especially when done for amusement and profit. That's just the way some of us pantywaists are.

Here's the really huge issue: detractors of the President (and I'm definitely in that boat) need to stop seizing on every lapse and amplifying it to ridiculous extremes, just as his fans need to stop excusing everything and attempting to crush all dissent. Obama did not condone Vick's actions, unless I'm just completely wrong about the man. Posts who skew a bit of praise for giving a guy a second chance as approval of the guy's actions are either unable to discern between shit and shinola, or are playing nasty games. Likewise, people who rush to the defense of every bit of clumsiness, or character-assassinate those who question a particular stumble are not helping the dialogue any, either.

Fuck sports, by the way; they tend to bring out some of the worst in people. At least when you pay to see guys slamming into each other and trying to hurt each other for the amusement of others they're somewhat willing and getting paid. Dogs don't get such a deal. Still, the fixation of the sporting mentality veers toward some of our worst characteristics, and that should be recognized.

Enough of all this, though. He's not perfect, and his detractors aren't either. This was a bit of clumsiness and has been badly damage-controlled. Those who rear up with dudgeon at criticism of him for this probably aren't going to help the matter much, especially not if there's a hint of violence to their rebuttals. Those who need to seize on this to further slag Obama do their cause no good either, coming off as willing to use any bit of ammunition, regardless of what a stretch it is, to undermine him. Using allegations of racism, violence, condoning of violence, or of Obama-bashing are no help at all.

This is all too hot to handle, and people need to step back and analyze their actions.

[truedelphi]

62. Wishing I could rec your post.

A fellow panty waist here.

[Skip Intro]

66. Fight a dog to it's death and get a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

Poor Michael Vick, he's the victim.

:sarcasm: