Who let the dogs out?

I was listening to WWL today and they devoted quite a bit of the show to Dog Fighting and Michael Vick. The host Garland was saying that when he heard about it his first reaction was that Michael Vick must be sick. (Like sick in the head).

So Garland gets a psychiatrist on the show with the premise that the shrink it going to agree with him. He started the interview out with saying that as a society would we not think that there was something wrong with a kid (9-12) who tortured animals. Would that not be an indicator that the child was going to turn out to be a mass murderer / pervert? The Shrink said well that is what one would typically think, but in the case of dog fighting or cock fighting that was not necessarily so.

He contended that Dog and Cock Fighting are cultural. If a child is brought up in an environment where this is common place that they do not see anything wrong with it as an adult. A caller brought up Bull Fighting in Spain, which is definitely cruel to the bull, yet accepted as a cultural tradition.

After taking a look at the Michael Vick situation from a different perspective Garland agreed that perhaps Vick is not a cruel and sadistic person. They also talked about kids that grow up on farms and think nothing of wringing a chicken’s neck and watching the body run around – laughing the whole time.

I certainly think Michael Vic should have found a better "hobby" to spend his $100 million on. I personally find any sort of cruelty to animals repulsive. So much so that I find it very difficult to eat meat that is prepared for me and certainly will not prepare it for me or anyone else.

I just thought this was an interesting perspective on things; of course based on a strictly visual opinion, Michael Vick does look rather cruel and sadistic, but what do I know?