Jeff Gladney arrested

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

StanM
Veteran
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:46 am
x 127

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by StanM »

Players sometimes do get a second chance but reports are saying that the charges are “very disturbing” and if convicted the sentence could be up to ten years. If that was the sentence he would be over 30 and no team would touch him. When players get a second chance after serious offenses it’s generally with a different team after enough time has passed to ensure they have truly changed. In this case I think when the trial gets underway and we see what took place we will better understand their decision.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

StumpHunter wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 7:18 am
J. Kapp 11 wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 7:41 pm
It’s public relations.

The Vikings (nor any other team in the league) do not want to be seen as soft on domestic abuse. It’s especially true for the Vikings because of the Adrian Peterson incident with his son. On top of that, the Vikings have the legal right to terminate his contract under the personal conduct clause. The indictment means there is sufficient evidence to charge Gladney with felony abuse and hold him for trial. That’s all the Vikings need.

I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. But I also don’t blame the Vikings for terminating his contract. Allowing him to remain employed sends a message that they care more about retaining the services of a first-round draft choice than they do about domestic abuse — or the woman he allegedly abused. The optics would be horrible.
At the end of the day, most people don't want a guy who beats women on a team they cheer for and the Vikings know that. Not to mention he is a massive distraction that will hurt the team this year if the Vikings had kept him around. From a business and team standpoint he was just not worth the PR nightmare and the distraction he would cause.

Most importantly from a moral perspective, his getting cut could be the ultimate wakeup call for him and maybe he actually realizes he can't be a horrible human being and still make millions because he is physically gifted. Could be this forces him to try and be a better person who doesn't beat women.
Once again we don't know if he beats women. It's suspected that he has beat one woman. I have major issues with taking away a person's livelihood. IMO if a person commits a crime the punishment should be handled by the courts. Michael Vick and his dog fighting ring was disgusting. He did the crime then he did the time. I had zero issues with him returning to NFL football after he did. I don't think taking away Gladney's livelihood will be the wake up call to rehabilitate him from beating a woman or women if he has done so. It could be, but it's just as likely to make him angry and repeat the behavior.

As a fan of NFL football I'm certain there are players that have behaviors that I don't approve of. However, honestly their behaviors are none of my business. I bet like our society they are about one third democrats, one third republicans and one third people who don't give a crap about politics. I don't care about the politics of the players. I don't want to know about their personal lives. I do believe that ignorance is bliss. I don't care any more about whether the Vikings are good human beings than whether my garbage man is a good human being. I would prefer the Vikings and my garbage man to be good people just like I wish everyone on this planet were good people. That's not reality so in the end the Vikings winning and my garbage being hauled away is what matters to me.
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8406
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 1034

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingLord »

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 7:41 pm I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. But I also don’t blame the Vikings for terminating his contract. Allowing him to remain employed sends a message that they care more about retaining the services of a first-round draft choice than they do about domestic abuse — or the woman he allegedly abused. The optics would be horrible.
I don't have a problem saying its right.

Gladney has been indicted by a grand jury. A grand jury looks purely at evidence in a case and determines if the evidence presents cause to indict. While it's not the same as a conviction, it indicates there is strong enough evidence of guilt to warrant a trial.

Any employer has a right to terminate any employee for a lot less reason than Gladney is giving the Vikings in this case. It's so serious, in fact, that the player's union didn't even put up a fight to force arbitration in such situations.

In my view the Vikings should have cut him when he was arrested. The details of the situation surrounding his arrest were public back then and were shocking. That the Vikings didn't cut him on the spot probably had more to do with the fact they spent a 1st round pick on him than anything else, and in my view that is already a black mark on them.

The only way Gladney walks on this is if the prosecution needs the victim to testify and she refuses. However, there is ample evidence independent of her testimony, so they probably don't need her to get a conviction. He's most likely going to be convicted and serve some time.

Everyone deserves a second chance, including Gladney, and I do hope he figures things out for his own sake, but I'm glad the Vikings cut their ties to him.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

VikingLord wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:17 pm
J. Kapp 11 wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 7:41 pm I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. But I also don’t blame the Vikings for terminating his contract. Allowing him to remain employed sends a message that they care more about retaining the services of a first-round draft choice than they do about domestic abuse — or the woman he allegedly abused. The optics would be horrible.
I don't have a problem saying its right.

Gladney has been indicted by a grand jury. A grand jury looks purely at evidence in a case and determines if the evidence presents cause to indict. While it's not the same as a conviction, it indicates there is strong enough evidence of guilt to warrant a trial.

Any employer has a right to terminate any employee for a lot less reason than Gladney is giving the Vikings in this case. It's so serious, in fact, that the player's union didn't even put up a fight to force arbitration in such situations.

In my view the Vikings should have cut him when he was arrested. The details of the situation surrounding his arrest were public back then and were shocking. That the Vikings didn't cut him on the spot probably had more to do with the fact they spent a 1st round pick on him than anything else, and in my view that is already a black mark on them.

The only way Gladney walks on this is if the prosecution needs the victim to testify and she refuses. However, there is ample evidence independent of her testimony, so they probably don't need her to get a conviction. He's most likely going to be convicted and serve some time.

Everyone deserves a second chance, including Gladney, and I do hope he figures things out for his own sake, but I'm glad the Vikings cut their ties to him.
There's what's expedient/convenient/profitable and there's what's right. It's possible for the same decision to be all four on the other hand the right decision might be NOT taking a person's livelihood away. Waiting for a conviction in a court of law rather than a court of public opinion and even then let the court dole out the punishment not the NFL. Why does the NFL feel it's on them to be an agent of punishment? It goes back to the first three.

I'm not saying either is the "right" answer. That's tricky. I just have a big problem with not allowing people to do jobs they are qualified for. Is it OK for Gladney to be a janitor now, but not OK for him to be a professional football player? Does playing football require a higher level of being a good person than being a janitor? Should Gladney be allowed to work at all? Take Gladney out of this and just say abuser X has children Y with Victim Z who is a stay at home mom. X is punished by no longer being allowed to work. X and Z get separated or divorced, but now X no longer has finances to provide for Y who grow up in poverty.
vikeinmontana
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3170
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:23 pm
x 140

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by vikeinmontana »

VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:33 pm
VikingLord wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:17 pm

I don't have a problem saying its right.

Gladney has been indicted by a grand jury. A grand jury looks purely at evidence in a case and determines if the evidence presents cause to indict. While it's not the same as a conviction, it indicates there is strong enough evidence of guilt to warrant a trial.

Any employer has a right to terminate any employee for a lot less reason than Gladney is giving the Vikings in this case. It's so serious, in fact, that the player's union didn't even put up a fight to force arbitration in such situations.

In my view the Vikings should have cut him when he was arrested. The details of the situation surrounding his arrest were public back then and were shocking. That the Vikings didn't cut him on the spot probably had more to do with the fact they spent a 1st round pick on him than anything else, and in my view that is already a black mark on them.

The only way Gladney walks on this is if the prosecution needs the victim to testify and she refuses. However, there is ample evidence independent of her testimony, so they probably don't need her to get a conviction. He's most likely going to be convicted and serve some time.

Everyone deserves a second chance, including Gladney, and I do hope he figures things out for his own sake, but I'm glad the Vikings cut their ties to him.
There's what's expedient/convenient/profitable and there's what's right. It's possible for the same decision to be all four on the other hand the right decision might be NOT taking a person's livelihood away. Waiting for a conviction in a court of law rather than a court of public opinion and even then let the court dole out the punishment not the NFL. Why does the NFL feel it's on them to be an agent of punishment? It goes back to the first three.

I'm not saying either is the "right" answer. That's tricky. I just have a big problem with not allowing people to do jobs they are qualified for. Is it OK for Gladney to be a janitor now, but not OK for him to be a professional football player? Does playing football require a higher level of being a good person than being a janitor? Should Gladney be allowed to work at all? Take Gladney out of this and just say abuser X has children Y with Victim Z who is a stay at home mom. X is punished by no longer being allowed to work. X and Z get separated or divorced, but now X no longer has finances to provide for Y who grow up in poverty.
Well the difference is in the jobs themselves. Pro athletes are very public figures working for very well known businesses(teams). It's not whether or not he is allowed to play in the NFL; it's whether or not any NFL team wants the headache that comes with these kinds of hires. And no one can force these owners to take that on.

It's really no different than any other profession, except a business hiring a no-name janitor is at a much smaller risk of scrutiny than say, the Dallas Cowboys would be.

Best thing would be to not put your hands on a woman, or not be in a situation in which you could be indicted for putting your hands on a woman. It's not very hard. Look at me! Never been accused of putting my hands on a woman! :rock:
i'm ready for a beer.
User avatar
Cliff
Site Admin
Posts: 9603
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Kentucky
x 488

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by Cliff »

VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:33 pm There's what's expedient/convenient/profitable and there's what's right. It's possible for the same decision to be all four on the other hand the right decision might be NOT taking a person's livelihood away. Waiting for a conviction in a court of law rather than a court of public opinion and even then let the court dole out the punishment not the NFL. Why does the NFL feel it's on them to be an agent of punishment? It goes back to the first three.

I'm not saying either is the "right" answer. That's tricky. I just have a big problem with not allowing people to do jobs they are qualified for. Is it OK for Gladney to be a janitor now, but not OK for him to be a professional football player? Does playing football require a higher level of being a good person than being a janitor? Should Gladney be allowed to work at all? Take Gladney out of this and just say abuser X has children Y with Victim Z who is a stay at home mom. X is punished by no longer being allowed to work. X and Z get separated or divorced, but now X no longer has finances to provide for Y who grow up in poverty.
Then you shouldn't have a problem with this at all. Part of the qualification for being on an NFL team is being able to stand up to the court of public opinion. It's being able to avoid distracting the rest of your team with your personal life. Being indicted by a grand jury (meaning there's enough evidence to move forward) for domestic abuse basically crushes your ability to work in the NFL. It *is* a qualification for everyone that wants to play in the NFL. I do believe Tom Brady would be dropped tomorrow under the same circumstances.

If this trial goes forward and he's proven innocent he'll again qualify for the NFL. Until then, he would be a distraction to any team he's on and a PR nightmare; disqualified.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

vikeinmontana wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:36 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:33 pm
There's what's expedient/convenient/profitable and there's what's right. It's possible for the same decision to be all four on the other hand the right decision might be NOT taking a person's livelihood away. Waiting for a conviction in a court of law rather than a court of public opinion and even then let the court dole out the punishment not the NFL. Why does the NFL feel it's on them to be an agent of punishment? It goes back to the first three.

I'm not saying either is the "right" answer. That's tricky. I just have a big problem with not allowing people to do jobs they are qualified for. Is it OK for Gladney to be a janitor now, but not OK for him to be a professional football player? Does playing football require a higher level of being a good person than being a janitor? Should Gladney be allowed to work at all? Take Gladney out of this and just say abuser X has children Y with Victim Z who is a stay at home mom. X is punished by no longer being allowed to work. X and Z get separated or divorced, but now X no longer has finances to provide for Y who grow up in poverty.
Well the difference is in the jobs themselves. Pro athletes are very public figures working for very well known businesses(teams). It's not whether or not he is allowed to play in the NFL; it's whether or not any NFL team wants the headache that comes with these kinds of hires. And no one can force these owners to take that on.

It's really no different than any other profession, except a business hiring a no-name janitor is at a much smaller risk of scrutiny than say, the Dallas Cowboys would be.

Best thing would be to not put your hands on a woman, or not be in a situation in which you could be indicted for putting your hands on a woman. It's not very hard. Look at me! Never been accused of putting my hands on a woman! :rock:
I'm talking about the Philosophical RIGHT. Not about the right thing to do for profit or popularity.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

Cliff wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:41 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:33 pm There's what's expedient/convenient/profitable and there's what's right. It's possible for the same decision to be all four on the other hand the right decision might be NOT taking a person's livelihood away. Waiting for a conviction in a court of law rather than a court of public opinion and even then let the court dole out the punishment not the NFL. Why does the NFL feel it's on them to be an agent of punishment? It goes back to the first three.

I'm not saying either is the "right" answer. That's tricky. I just have a big problem with not allowing people to do jobs they are qualified for. Is it OK for Gladney to be a janitor now, but not OK for him to be a professional football player? Does playing football require a higher level of being a good person than being a janitor? Should Gladney be allowed to work at all? Take Gladney out of this and just say abuser X has children Y with Victim Z who is a stay at home mom. X is punished by no longer being allowed to work. X and Z get separated or divorced, but now X no longer has finances to provide for Y who grow up in poverty.
Then you shouldn't have a problem with this at all. Part of the qualification for being on an NFL team is being able to stand up to the court of public opinion. It's being able to avoid distracting the rest of your team with your personal life. Being indicted by a grand jury (meaning there's enough evidence to move forward) for domestic abuse basically crushes your ability to work in the NFL. It *is* a qualification for everyone that wants to play in the NFL. I do believe Tom Brady would be dropped tomorrow under the same circumstances.

If this trial goes forward and he's proven innocent he'll again qualify for the NFL. Until then, he would be a distraction to any team he's on and a PR nightmare; disqualified.
Cliff I with your definition of qualified to do so. I already covered the things you're talking about in expedience/convenience/profit motives. Jeff Gladney as far as I can tell can prevent a wide receiver from catching passes or gaining yards after as well as the top 200 people in the world can do. There's about 200 CBs in the NFL right. That's what I mean by qualified to do so.
Last edited by VikingsVictorious on Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9784
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1870

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:55 pm
vikeinmontana wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:36 pm

Well the difference is in the jobs themselves. Pro athletes are very public figures working for very well known businesses(teams). It's not whether or not he is allowed to play in the NFL; it's whether or not any NFL team wants the headache that comes with these kinds of hires. And no one can force these owners to take that on.

It's really no different than any other profession, except a business hiring a no-name janitor is at a much smaller risk of scrutiny than say, the Dallas Cowboys would be.

Best thing would be to not put your hands on a woman, or not be in a situation in which you could be indicted for putting your hands on a woman. It's not very hard. Look at me! Never been accused of putting my hands on a woman! :rock:
I'm talking about the Philosophical RIGHT. Not about the right thing to do for profit or popularity.
The Minnesota Vikings have no obligation to do what’s best for Jeff Gladney. That may be hard to accept, but it’s the truth. It’s a contract. Each side has obligations. Gladney didn’t live up to his. ANY organization would have the right to fire him. It’s up to him to turn his life around, not the Vikings. The Vikings are going to do what’s best for the Vikings.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:08 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:55 pm
I'm talking about the Philosophical RIGHT. Not about the right thing to do for profit or popularity.
The Minnesota Vikings have no obligation to do what’s best for Jeff Gladney. That may be hard to accept, but it’s the truth. It’s a contract. Each side has obligations. Gladney didn’t live up to his. ANY organization would have the right to fire him. It’s up to him to turn his life around, not the Vikings. The Vikings are going to do what’s best for the Vikings.
Sure the Vikings can hire or fire whoever they so desire. It's very easy for me to accept. What do I have to do to make it any more clear that I'm talking about the philosophical right thing to do. You saw that I covered everything you're talking about under expedience/convenience and profit. Did my capital letters on Right thing and Philosophical not make what I'm talking about clear?

I see some value in punishment but not much. I see no value in revenge. Sticking a person in prison for 10 years I really doubt has ever had any positive effect. I don't think long prison sentences are a deterrent to crime. I doubt many people think if the sentence for this crime is 5 years in prison I'll do it, but if 10 years in prison I won't.

In summation. Violence is bad whether it's domestic or not. Violence is bad whether committed against males or females. Some punishment is called for in those cases. It's just a question of how much and who should do the punishing. I personally think it should be left to the courts. They will probably get it wrong, but having you and I or the NFL being punishers is just piling on.
vikeinmontana
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3170
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:23 pm
x 140

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by vikeinmontana »

VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:12 pm
J. Kapp 11 wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:08 pm
The Minnesota Vikings have no obligation to do what’s best for Jeff Gladney. That may be hard to accept, but it’s the truth. It’s a contract. Each side has obligations. Gladney didn’t live up to his. ANY organization would have the right to fire him. It’s up to him to turn his life around, not the Vikings. The Vikings are going to do what’s best for the Vikings.
Sure the Vikings can hire or fire whoever they so desire. It's very easy for me to accept. What do I have to do to make it any more clear that I'm talking about the philosophical right thing to do. You saw that I covered everything you're talking about under expedience/convenience and profit. Did my capital letters on Right thing and Philosophical not make what I'm talking about clear?

I see some value in punishment but not much. I see no value in revenge. Sticking a person in prison for 10 years I really doubt has ever had any positive effect. I don't think long prison sentences are a deterrent to crime. I doubt many people think if the sentence for this crime is 5 years in prison I'll do it, but if 10 years in prison I won't.

In summation. Violence is bad whether it's domestic or not. Violence is bad whether committed against males or females. Some punishment is called for in those cases. It's just a question of how much and who should do the punishing. I personally think it should be left to the courts. They will probably get it wrong, but having you and I or the NFL being punishers is just piling on.
I’m trying hard to understand what you’re trying to convey. What would you suggest the Vikings do? You agreed they’re in a position to hire and fire who they choose. You seem to agree that they can base hiring and firing on whatever situation arises. So how is them cutting ties with this guy piling on? It’s just not worth the effort. There are plenty of talented athletes available who won’t put a franchise in jeopardy by being accused of domestic abuse.

And while all “violence is violence”, I would completely disagree they are all equal. Maybe this guy did absolutely nothing wrong. The evidence requiring an indictment could all be bogus. If this ends up being true he’ll get another shot. We’ve seen countless talented athletes getting more chances than you and I would get on this fact alone. But you put yourself in this position, where you’re indicted, lose a job, on the news, random message board fodder; you must accept what comes with all that.
i'm ready for a beer.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9784
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1870

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:12 pm
J. Kapp 11 wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:08 pm
The Minnesota Vikings have no obligation to do what’s best for Jeff Gladney. That may be hard to accept, but it’s the truth. It’s a contract. Each side has obligations. Gladney didn’t live up to his. ANY organization would have the right to fire him. It’s up to him to turn his life around, not the Vikings. The Vikings are going to do what’s best for the Vikings.
Sure the Vikings can hire or fire whoever they so desire. It's very easy for me to accept. What do I have to do to make it any more clear that I'm talking about the philosophical right thing to do. You saw that I covered everything you're talking about under expedience/convenience and profit. Did my capital letters on Right thing and Philosophical not make what I'm talking about clear?

I see some value in punishment but not much. I see no value in revenge. Sticking a person in prison for 10 years I really doubt has ever had any positive effect. I don't think long prison sentences are a deterrent to crime. I doubt many people think if the sentence for this crime is 5 years in prison I'll do it, but if 10 years in prison I won't.

In summation. Violence is bad whether it's domestic or not. Violence is bad whether committed against males or females. Some punishment is called for in those cases. It's just a question of how much and who should do the punishing. I personally think it should be left to the courts. They will probably get it wrong, but having you and I or the NFL being punishers is just piling on.
This conversation is getting off track, but I need to say something.

You tell me about using capital letters and philosophical right and wrong, but if Jeff Gladney had assaulted someone you love, I’m guessing you would consider no punishment too harsh. Prison sentences aren’t meant to be a deterrent to crime. They’re meant to exact justice. You would want justice. I guarantee it.

As for the Vikings, I think it’s important to differentiate between punishment and why the Vikings fired Jeff Gladney. They didn’t fire him to punish him. They fired him because it’s in the best interest of the Vikings.

Sorry, but I have zero sympathy for Gladney. There’s a very simple way to avoid getting fired for violating the team’s personal conduct policy. Don’t violate the policy.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 9:15 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:12 pm
Sure the Vikings can hire or fire whoever they so desire. It's very easy for me to accept. What do I have to do to make it any more clear that I'm talking about the philosophical right thing to do. You saw that I covered everything you're talking about under expedience/convenience and profit. Did my capital letters on Right thing and Philosophical not make what I'm talking about clear?

I see some value in punishment but not much. I see no value in revenge. Sticking a person in prison for 10 years I really doubt has ever had any positive effect. I don't think long prison sentences are a deterrent to crime. I doubt many people think if the sentence for this crime is 5 years in prison I'll do it, but if 10 years in prison I won't.

In summation. Violence is bad whether it's domestic or not. Violence is bad whether committed against males or females. Some punishment is called for in those cases. It's just a question of how much and who should do the punishing. I personally think it should be left to the courts. They will probably get it wrong, but having you and I or the NFL being punishers is just piling on.
This conversation is getting off track, but I need to say something.

You tell me about using capital letters and philosophical right and wrong, but if Jeff Gladney had assaulted someone you love, I’m guessing you would consider no punishment too harsh. Prison sentences aren’t meant to be a deterrent to crime. They’re meant to exact justice. You would want justice. I guarantee it.

As for the Vikings, I think it’s important to differentiate between punishment and why the Vikings fired Jeff Gladney. They didn’t fire him to punish him. They fired him because it’s in the best interest of the Vikings.

Sorry, but I have zero sympathy for Gladney. There’s a very simple way to avoid getting fired for violating the team’s personal conduct policy. Don’t violate the policy.
What I'm trying to convey for some reason is not getting through to you and I consider you a quite intelligent guy. I'm talking about what would do the greatest good. Not what is in the Vikings best interests regarding making profits and public perception. It's not about Gladney anyway. It's about any person who is accused of and possibly guilty of violence. The courts are going to punish these people plenty for whatever they did.

I'm in favor of justice but you seem to mean vengeance. If somebody is going to be sent to prison for 10 years and cost the taxpayers huge amounts of money rather than working and making a contribution to society what is gained. Taking away a person's ability to earn a living by working could easily make his or her children grow up in poverty and turn to crime perpetuating the cycle.

If anybody assault's somebody what good does excessive punishment do anyway. If that person for example killed somebody I love no amount of punishment is going to bring my loved one back or make me feel even the tiniest bit better. So what good would it do?

I believe in very limited punishment with true rehabilitation to return perpetrators to be positive members of society again. I believe in forgiveness and second and even third chances. If the person is too dangerous to return to society than use the death penalty. If not then don't put them in prison for huge stretches of time and take away their ability to earn a living.

Once again I'm talking philosophy not reality. I know people who are punished by the courts are almost always punished in more ways including great difficulty finding work leading to a return to crime wash, rinse and repeat.
User avatar
Cliff
Site Admin
Posts: 9603
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Kentucky
x 488

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by Cliff »

What I'm trying to convey for some reason is not getting through to you and I consider you a quite intelligent guy. I'm talking about what would do the greatest good. Not what is in the Vikings best interests regarding making profits and public perception. It's not about Gladney anyway. It's about any person who is accused of and possibly guilty of violence. The courts are going to punish these people plenty for whatever they did.
But the Vikings best interests and focusing on making profits is what allows Gladney to have a job in the first place. Not to mention all of his other teammates who would also have to suffer the unwanted publicity and distraction. Should the entire team be punished for Gladney's mistake? If we're talking about "greatest good" it's more than "greatest good" for one person.
I'm in favor of justice but you seem to mean vengeance. If somebody is going to be sent to prison for 10 years and cost the taxpayers huge amounts of money rather than working and making a contribution to society what is gained. Taking away a person's ability to earn a living by working could easily make his or her children grow up in poverty and turn to crime perpetuating the cycle
In general, sure, I agree. Taking away a person's ability to earn a living is a fast way to send them back into crime. "Not being able to earn a living" and "not being able to make millions of dollars in the NFL" are different. Yes, his mistake (if he indeed made it) probably cost him his dream job. That doesn't mean he'll be homeless or turn to a life of crime. It probably means he'll open a car dealership with the millions of dollars he already made.
Once again I'm talking philosophy not reality. I know people who are punished by the courts are almost always punished in more ways including great difficulty finding work leading to a return to crime wash, rinse and repeat.
But reality and philosophy have to meet somewhere don't they? Sure, philosophically it's a great idea to send people to "rehabilitation centers", wash the slate clean, and allow them to return to their lives. Therein, they would go to a 9-5 job every day, make an honest living, and never bother anybody ever again.

In reality many people are likely to repeat offend and we owe it to business owners to inform them. Or does the reformed criminal deserve more rights than them? I own a business wherein I work with sensitive data. If someone was caught stealing credit card information from a database I want to know that. Indeed, I feel I have a right to know that. That may mean nobody in the data industry will hire them. That doesn't mean they can't get a different job. It just means they've ruined their chances at that line of work. Yes, sometimes when you make a mistake in life it has lasting impacts that you can't undo. Being able to do exactly what you want and not being able to survive in a suitable manner are different things.

In reality hiring people with the proper skills to deal with all of the criminals would cost way more than the police and on top of that, we don't have nearly enough trained people to do it.

Philosophy without considering reality at all is worthless. You might as well have the conversation with your own belly button.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4274
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 762

Re: Jeff Gladney arrested

Post by VikingsVictorious »

Once again I'm talking philosophy not reality. I know people who are punished by the courts are almost always punished in more ways including great difficulty finding work leading to a return to crime wash, rinse and repeat.
But reality and philosophy have to meet somewhere don't they? Sure, philosophically it's a great idea to send people to "rehabilitation centers", wash the slate clean, and allow them to return to their lives. Therein, they would go to a 9-5 job every day, make an honest living, and never bother anybody ever again.

In reality many people are likely to repeat offend and we owe it to business owners to inform them. Or does the reformed criminal deserve more rights than them? I own a business wherein I work with sensitive data. If someone was caught stealing credit card information from a database I want to know that. Indeed, I feel I have a right to know that. That may mean nobody in the data industry will hire them. That doesn't mean they can't get a different job. It just means they've ruined their chances at that line of work. Yes, sometimes when you make a mistake in life it has lasting impacts that you can't undo. Being able to do exactly what you want and not being able to survive in a suitable manner are different things.

In reality hiring people with the proper skills to deal with all of the criminals would cost way more than the police and on top of that, we don't have nearly enough trained people to do it.

Philosophy without considering reality at all is worthless. You might as well have the conversation with your own belly button.
[/quote]
My graduate level research was on employment and recidivism. Some results were that finding employment made recidivism far less likely which should be rather obvious. I don't remember the numbers exactly now but it was huge. Once a person reaches 5 years clean they are no more likely to commit a crime than a person with no record at all. I'm in favor of a system that liberally expunges all criminal background over time with certain criterion met. Canada has a very successful expungement system.

Something IMO kind of sad about our country is we have the highest rate of imprisonment of all countries on Earth.