Yeah, focussing on the act of killing animals for sport points up a seeming hypocrisy. We condone and license horse racing, and poor performers are often sacrificed, yet Vick get's crucified for brutalizing dogs for sport and killing underperformers. Simplistic analysis asks: How do these acts differ?
Change the focus to the humane treatment of animals, and dispatching a disabled horse no longer equates to body slamming to death an animal brutalized into a fighting machine for profit and some kinda sick thrill. The law makes such fine distinctions. Justice is being served. bye, bye, $130 mill. I hope the Judge imposes a creative sentence like 12 mos. jail and 12 months on parole cleaning dog kennels in Atlanta.

I'm sure glad they rescued all those dogs from Michael Vick so they could euthanize them (http://tinyurl.com/2eg85y). How humane.

Dog = fish. Human adult = human fetus. I don't think he wants to go there....

what matters is *intent*. euthanasia is not the same as shooting a dog to death that didn't win a fight.

as the buddhists say--it's about intention.

come to think of it, it's what some of our laws say, too.

Antiplanner, as sad as it is that those dogs had to be euthanized they probably wouldn't have been adoptable. It takes a lot of money and time to rehabilitate fighting dogs. It's hard enough to adopt out the socialized and trained pit bulls that fill the shelters; they don't waste much time on dogs that are going to be such a liability. And, frankly, pit bulls don't need any more bad press, so these pit bulls not getting adopted out was probably a overall good thing for the breed.

Euthanasia by a trained doctor who cares about animals is much more humane than getting torn apart in a ring or electrocuted and drowned by a bad man with violent tendencies.