Did Mike Vick's Sentence Offend The Rule Of Law?

295 Words2 Pages
Mike Vick, superstar quarterback of the Atlanta Falcons had it all; money, fame, respect, you name it. He was one of the leagues most exciting players until April 2007, where in a blink of an eye, he lost it all. Mike Vick was convicted and pleaded guilty of running a dog fighting operation just outside his home in Virginia. Vick was responsible for the torture and murder of innocent dogs. He was immediately suspended by the NFL without pay and he lost his endorsement deals, eventually leading himself to bankruptcy. Mike was originally sentenced to 5 years in prison, which was a harsher sentence than usual, but was released after 23 months. The question still remains; did Mike Vick’s “harsher” treatment offend the rule of law? I would have to say that the rule of law was not offended in this case because in all honesty, Mike Vick got what he deserved. No one is above the law, and although Vick was given an unusual sentence, a message was needed to be sent to other high-profile figures and celebrities. Being such a powerful role model to youths, Vick should have been more responsible for his actions. That is why his sentence was worse than it normally would have been. Vick was probably well aware that his dog fighting actions were illegal but he still continued it. Why would someone with such a high reputation, want to throw all of his accomplishments down the drain? His betrayal to the people who looked up to him was inexcusable. Mike Vick was certainly displayed as immature and irresponsible in this case. The jury did what was right to give a harsh sentence, to help Mike Vick and other celebrities realize their actions can affect

More about Did Mike Vick's Sentence Offend The Rule Of Law?

Open Document