Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21
Another question I have for those who want call Pacman's situation different from Vick's: In Pacman's case, he has gotten into trouble for multiple separate incidents over time. Right? Now, he still hasn't been convicted of any of them, but there are eye witnesses placing him at the various scenes and his repeated alleged offenses led to a suspension. So, what's the difference here? Vick isn't being accused of one isolated incident. Rather, he is being accused of breaking the law on multiple separate occasions. And there are eyewitnesses placing him at each of the various scenes where illegal activities were being conducted.
So, should the NFL somehow reward the person who gets charged all at once because the Feds do the responsible thing by building a case before charging him over the guy who is just unlucky enough to get caught each time he allegedly breaks the law by the local authorities? I mean, both men are being accused of repeated instances of illegal activity. It's not like Vick is being indicted for one instance of dog fighting. Why are are willing to go easier on the guy whose repeated behavior over the course of 6 six years just happens to get lumped into one indictment?
|
Diffenence is that pacman was given times not to be out yet he still was out. He got introuble and was told not to do things but still did them and got introuble doing them. I would be fine if vick wasn't allowed to do things. NO being out past midnight. No more getting arrested. No going to the pet shop, whatever.