>>RE: lets be honest this isnt about DOGS.. its about
>GAMBLING...
>>...the govt dont like this because it revolves around
>>GAMBLING ..its far less to do about doggies ...in fact
>if
>>there was no gambling involved there wouldn't be too many
>dog
>>fights, dont you think?
>
>Yes, of course the fact that gambling was involved has an
>effect on how the govt. handles the situation.
>
>But I'm not addressing the specifics of Vick's case - I was
>addressing your callous disregard for dogs, and also the
>errors in your logic.
>
>
>And yes, I do think there would still be a case against Vick
>if there was no gambling but there was still torture, killing,
>hanging, electrocution... all that foul shit.
>
>It's still animal abuse, it's still illegal, and those are the
>things that most of the (sane) posters in this thread are
>opposed to.
>
>In this case, I don't give a shit about gambling if no animals
>are being abused.
>
>The gambling aspect is a big issue with regard to the govt.
>Without that, it probably wouldn't be a federal case (I don't
>know, I haven't been that into the details). But he'd still be
>in some serious trouble.
>
>
>And you're right, without gambling, there wouldn't be (as)
>many dog fights. But there would still be people out there
>abusing animals and dogs, and it would still be a crime (and
>rightly so).


dude.. gambling and with BIG $$.. brings in money laundering.. drugs.. and all sorts of illegal activity.. its all connected when you have an operation THIS big.. the feds (and shortly the state) aint doin this for the puppies man..

and i have no disregard for dogs.. not when they are bred for this purpose.. the bloodline in these dogs is to be killers.. its a fact they can and will turn on you even after years of loyalty.. its a fucked up situation..

maybe they should outlaw pits from now on.. most people who buy one aint gettin it because its cute... they want a tuff dog with that rep.. its fucked up i know a little girl who lost an eye to a pit.. it attacked her for no reason..