Home » The Topsoil, Uncategorized

The Topsoil: Michael Vick is a Dog Fighter

By Andrew Padula on Monday, August 27th, 2007, 6:20 am Comments

Contributor Andrew Padula has been in situations throughout his life where he has felt compelled to address racial issues from his unusual perspective. Andrew is a white, politically conservative, blues musician who has been teaching and touring the U.S. and Europe since 1993. He can be seen with blues legend Bobby Parker on B.E.T. Jazz Central as well as on Carlos Santana’s recent DVD release “Montreux Blues Summit”. His point of view adds plenty to our discussion, so I welcome Andrew and his column The Topsoil to Allaboutrace.com. As Andrew says, “You gotta turn the topsoil to plant a crop!”

The other day, one of my students came into his lesson a little distraught. I teach in Hokie country so Michael Vick has more than a few fans.

“I don’t see what’s the problem with killing a few stupid dogs… I don’t get what’s the difference between that and going in the woods with a shotgun and blasting Bambi?” complained this perturbed and misguided, young fan.

Not wanting to waste lesson time on an in depth explanation, I told him to trust me and that there was a difference. When I got home, I saw the news and Mr. Marburys’ comments; I then knew the source of my student’s angst.

Living on the cusp of the South has given me some exposure to both old time and contemporary dog fighting culture, much to my personal dismay. Although I do not consider myself a “Sportsman” I have been hunting more than a few times. For the record, I do not hunt for sport, I will only hunt feral animals or extreme overpopulations. But, I believe that I do have enough experience with these subjects to speak with a reasonable amount of credibility.

Say what you want, but when I was young (late 60s early 70s), it was unusual for blacks in my area to own dogs. There was a history to this that dealt with the ugly issues of slavery and police abuse during the recent Civil Rights era. I’ll never forget the time that an old black postman came to the door and started to run when he saw the two dogs that I had by the collars.

I said, “Don’t worry, they don’t bite!” to which he replied “They gots teeth don’t they!” I had to go outside to the end of the sidewalk to get my package.

Since I grew up around big dogs, a pair of Great Danes who were 150 lbs a piece, I had no fear of dogs… until I encountered my first fighting Pitbull. About 20 years ago I played at a field party and the old tobacco spittin’ redneck who owned the farm had three Pitbulls. Two were pets and were happy docile dogs; the other one was in a 5’x10’ by 6′ high chain link run. I walked over to the cage where the dog was lying on a rug in front of his doghouse.

“Here puppy, come on puppy…” I called while slowly approaching the run. This beast from hell leaped up at me in a snarling frenzy trying to bite through the chain link fence to get a taste of my a**.

“Yep, that’s my fighter, hell of a guard dog,” the owner said as he approached. “I’d leave him be if I were you ’cause I ain’t sure that fence’l hold ‘em.” Thus was my first exposure to fighting dogs.

I first started to notice urban blacks getting involved with fighting dogs during the rise of crack fueled gang culture of the early to mid 90’s. Rotweillers and Pitbulls were a symbol of power. Drug dealers used dogs to protect their stash. I remember walking down Florida Avenue in D.C. after a gig where I ran into a guy with three Rotweillers, spike collars attached to towing chains, relieving themselves near my van. I asked the owner why someone like him, who was living in town, didn’t have more manageable animals. Grinning he replied, “Because I want everyone to see that like my boys here, I’m the biggest, nastiest, baddest dog on the street!” I’ll bet the folks in the apartment next to his just loved him.

About six or seven years ago, a good friend of mine began breeding Pitbulls. He is a black country boy who lives on the edge of the Sticks. He loves his dogs and they are good pets but he knows that many of the puppies he sells (some for $1200 plus) will be used for fighting. To him it is a business. After the sale what happens to the animal is not his concern. I have seen these dogs only hours old in a whelping box. Even with their eyes unopened, if you put two face to face and rough them together, they will gnash with toothless mouths making a snarling noise. This is an eye opening exhibition of how deeply rooted the genetic instinct to fight is embedded within these animals.

The layout of Mr. Vick’s estate as cited in the formal charges leaves little doubt that this was not a small operation done by relatives behind his back as first claimed. Mr. Vick, is a high profile black athlete, and is no stranger to controversy. He should have known better than to have become so deeply involved in such a physically large and damning criminal venture. He should at least have realized the gravity of an illegal gambling operation being linked to a professional athlete.

The interjection of Al Sharpton and the N.A.A.C.P. have added an uncomfortable air of racist innuendo into the mix. Some in the media have tried to make a racial issue out of this case, others blame his transgression to “Southern and Hip Hop Culture”, but in reality the crux of this incident is fairly cut and dried. Mr. Vick broke the law and he knows it. No matter how you try to qualify it, either laws apply to all or our society degenerates into anarchy. Animal cruelty is illegal and so is gambling on it, period! I’m sure this is why all parties who have a vested interest in Mr. Vick’s future are treading so lightly.

And, as for the difference between dog fighting and blasting Bambi…

Contrary to uninformed impressions, hunting is a highly regulated sport. There are strict limits on the types and amounts, of game that may be taken by approved methods by a licensed hunter. There are active Game Wardens that enforce these regulations. The limits are determined by species population. Many animals have lost their natural predators and can overpopulate to the point where they will strip an area of food. This endangers the future of the entire herd. An old buck Deer or Elk that has lost his harem to a younger male is ostracized from the herd and will live a solitary existence. If taken, it is not done in a wasteful way for much of the harvest is used as food for the homeless. Above all, hunters are conservationists who protect the land so it will always be there to enjoy and they do this through the fees they pay to enjoy their sport.

Wild animals require some human help to manage their populations due to the fact that we have screwed up the balance of nature. These animals live long and free lives until they are culled. Dogs on the other hand came out of the wild and thus depend on humans for their health and safety. In return, they give us work, love and companionship. Dog fighting is a reprehensible and cruel breach of that trust between man and his best friend…and most of all…it is ILLEGAL.

  • michael vick is still the man. as far as crimes go, this isnt a double murder like OJ. yet it was for some reason still socially acceptable to be on HIS side? a convicted double murderer?
    Or other criminals whose crimes actually make an impact on the sport they play, like barry bonds. Hank Aaron is a true American hero and his is the REAL home run record
  • Alan
    I do believe that if Peyton Manning were found doing the same thing he too would receive the same exact treatment from dog lovers and animal activists. These guys are held to a much higher standard, because they are heros to alot of kids and they are expected to not be involved in these types of activities. Anyone remember Pete Rose banned from baseball for illegal gambling?
  • Yes, its always about race and the medias racial hypocrisy.
  • Alan
    I definately am outraged hearing about that and do think they should have to answer the same way Michael Vick did. No one, regardless of background can be alowed to walk around unscathed from such heinous acts. We can all do our part by putting pressure on the media to point out this disparity.
  • Hi Alan, I think what Tyler and I believe is that the coverage of the incident has a complexion to it. In my book Mitt Romney's tying his dog to the top of his car and driving until the dog (in terror) defecated down the back window DISQUALIFIES Romney from being leader of the free world. That was bone head thinking/judgment and we don't need it. Also, Rudy Giuliani's wife practiced surgical stapling procedures on LIVE dogs while on her job selling medical staples. After the demonstration, dogs were killed. Where's the universal outrage about that?
  • Alan
    This one area transended way beyond any part of being a racial issue, because dog lovers and animal activists saw this as a clear violation and if a white athlete had done the same, it would be just as vile an act with no mercy in verdict.

    Interesting that a comparison could be drawn from the fact that Scott Peterson was found guilty for the same crime OJ Simpson was acused of and the outcome was contrary to the race card issue.
  • ... I think that race is never not at play. Even if it isn’t the dominant player, it’s there. And we must be aware of it...

    Absolutely, Tyler. Absolutely.
  • Tyler
    I think that we have to make a distinction between Vick's crime and the media coverage surrounding it. I think that we need to be aware that any black man who is accused of a crime generally receives greater ire and condemnation than a white man, regardless of whether he is guilty or not. In this case, Vick is guilty, but that doesn't mean that the tone with which his crime has been committed isn't racist in some ways. There is glee that another bad darkie has been taken down, there have been comparisons to OJ (I guess as a way of making Vick's behavior seem pathological). One could argue that it has as much to do with his class and Americans' general love of pilloring its idols, but I think that race is never not at play. Even if it isn't the dominant player, it's there. And we must be aware of it.
  • fc&g#p
    alan, i disagree because it is not always sport. for example. during the 70s,(cough cough) some environmental yo yo's thought it would be cool to introduce african pronghorn antelope onto a similar
    ecologic landscape in the western u.s.
    these animals are too fast for indigineous preadators and procreate at such a prolific rate that if they are were not hunted by
    humans, they would choke out the native mule deer and long horn sheep. same for certain rodent species like jack rabbits. during wet years(like this one) they procreate at almost plague rates and must be thinned or they will destroy all the grasses (seed eaters) for the following season. a pair of jackrabbits can strip as much grassland as a full grown steer. as squeemish as you may be, hunting is an essential part of proper conservation and land management.
    ..now if you want to talk about pure trophy hunting... i agree that big game trophy hunting of threatend species just to "get one for the wall while you can" is just plain wrong.
  • Alan
    What Michael Vick did goes beyond what words can express. This is a very emotional issue and to any Dog Lover has a "built-in" understanding of why this was so repulsive to find out about.
    The practice of this ritual is criminal, barbaric, primitive similar to the time of the gladiators where victor survived and loser was given the thumbs down. This absolutely has nothing to due with race!

    Hunting is strangely held to another standard, since nature does follow the same course it has for centuries. Survival for each specie of animal is linked to the fact that they will thrive if left alone. Once the traditional rationalization of controlling numbers of herds is used, it hands license to hunters to kill not for survival but for sport and sport should never be a reason to kill anything, because sport sounds like fun and killing anything for fun is just as barbaric!
blog comments powered by Disqus