Felons vs. Felons

[blakstang98]

So when I was at work today, I saw a random article on MSN talking about people that have done well with their 2nd chances at life after a felony. I didn't read the article, but it was on the home page and it had a picture of Martha Stewart and Michael Vick.

Now, my question to you is, aside from being felons, are Stewart and Vick (or any other similar felons) really comparable?

Honestly, I have a hard time connecting the 2, considering their crimes. I mean, Stewart had insider trading information. The ridiculous part about that is that she was filthy friggin' rich already, and she needed stock help? How greedy can you be? Vick on the other hand, had a dog fighting ring, which he was directly a part of. He had his own fighting dogs and would sacrifice lesser dogs to help his own fighting dogs.

Even though Stewart essentially stole money from people, even though it wasn't directly harmful to people. And now we just see her as the Martha Stewart of old, doing all her homing things and such. Vick killed dogs, and found amusement in activities that involved killing dogs. I see that as inexcusable, as I'm sure a good amount of the population feels. And it's not that he'll never be able to shake that bad person he was, but it will take a much more drastic effort and it will take much longer for him to be forgiven for it, if at all.

It's the whole white collar crime vs. violent crime deal. White collar crime is bad, in my opinion, but not nearly as bad as a violent crime. I can get on board with white collar criminals, but I'd always have to be aware that I don't get conned around one. With a murderer, I would never want to be hanging with them.

 

[GalaxyFlare]

How do you feel about Cannibals?

I get what you mean, I vaguely remember Vick from the news but the article was clearly pinning for a connection regardless off how weak it was the 2 could have 5% in common with there respective crimes.

Shades of Grey, degrees of wrong do the outcomes and intentions of a crime really lessen its impact? what if the money Stewart was stole was going to be used for something good or a health problem.......its just money ,it doesn't matter
its the only thing that matters when it gets you what you need.

But Stewart and Vick were celebrities who had profile and were caught in the red, it may be a huge difference between there crimes but they had profile thats all any publisher will need to get there point across.

You could get on board with a white collar criminal

 

[Sum1sgruj]

Animal cruelty isn't taken as seriously in a courtroom as people think. This is why they compare the two.
The big deal is the money. Having a dog fighting ring can be directly linked to tax evasion. The U.S. is only one of few countries that give a damn about animal ethics to this degree, and it's not about the animals.
Anyways, Steward should have gotten way more than 6 months. The average joe would've gotten well over that. Same for Vick to. If there wasn't leverage such as his membership in the NFL, he would've been screwed to no end.

 

[Rydia]

Martha Stewart at least became better after serving time. In jail, she taught other women inmates to cook and sew. On her show, the inmates sewed together an outfit for her as a gift. I also heard that she became much more easier to deal with on her show. (Before she was a little bitchy and a drama queen, and she has mellowed out since serving time)

Michael Vick, I can't forgive what he did. Dog fighting is so cruel and most of the time, those dogs get put down and the people simply go to jail.

I find violent crime to be worse. I don't know, i guess after having a clinical in a psych unit and interacting with people involved I'm a bit more sensitive towards it. Some criminals just have such a warped way of thinking such as seeing killing as simply a hobby or how they believe that some people do not have a right to exist based on their looks or color of clothing. And yeah, I know they are mentally ill, but still, it's a little unerving to hear their stories.