LB Beasley Under Investigation

99gator

Congressman
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
14,892
Likes
14,662
Me too. I've cried over a pet that died. We had to have a dog euthanized due to health issues and that was very difficult as well.
My only point from that is that, yes, there are people or scenarios where people value an animals life more than a human’s life.

And I think a lot of people do depending on the circumstances

I certainly value my dog’s life over that of a pedophile or rapist.
 

LittleVol

Nothing better than good VOL Football
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
11,019
Likes
14,492
I like cats but otherwise agree.... and I still don't think he should be booted for this. I had a calico when I was a teenager that would ride around on my shoulder.
One has to wonder if the owner was a responsible owner for allowing their pet to be put in such "dangerous " situations???
If there is such a supposed history of abuse. Negligence is also a form of abuse...
 

Vols1891

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
727
Likes
1,043
Do we know what happened to the kitten afterward? The ESPN article said it was treated for a brain injury, internal bleeding and other injuries.
I decided to message the girl on Facebook about the cat’s condition and was not expecting to get a response. However, she actually replied back immediately and said the following: “He’s home and still having some smaller issues but he is better and alert!”. She also said it was okay for me to post this.
 

unfrozencvmanvol

High on Heupel.
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
5,200
Likes
8,185
Based on things I've seen and read I'm surprised this isn't higher.

As for the first part, I'm the same guy. I place a high premium on life period. But there is no confusion in my mind about the value of human life compared to animal life.
I think the apples to apples comparison that is relevant here is the punishment for beating up a baby versus the punishment for beating up a kitten, the punishment for beating up a baby would certainly be worse, and really no one in this thread is suggesting it shouldn't be. So I think your persistent attempts to frame this as some sort of comparison between the value of human life versus animal life continue to miss the mark. The position of myself and most of the people you are arguing with in this thread is that both are bad and Beasley should be kicked off the team if he is guilty for either, i.e. that neither is the sort of thing you slap his hand for and send him back to practice, where you differ is that while you apparently would also balk at Beasley returning if he had done the same thing to a baby (just like all of those arguing with you would), you have made it clear you would not as to the kitten.
 
Last edited:
Likes: VolFaninFla

SayUWantAreVOLution

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
964
Likes
1,082
Punish him. Counsel him. Put him on a short leash. Boot him? No.

Much like Jeremy Banks, this is also an opportunity to make a difference in the guy's life that might keep him from harming someone later. As seems to be agreed, not all animal abusers are violent toward people but most of those who are violent against people have or do abuse animals.
Punishing him IS booting him.

The University doesn't need an LB as much as they need some decent publicity. Keeping him will not result in good publicity and it's NOT the university's fault, nor responsibility, to further damage our good name by keeping him. It's a PR loss that is NOT worth keeping him on the team. If they want to reach out and counsel and try to help him get back on track, do it while he's not on the team.

Just pragmatically, it's too big of a story to simply say: We're working with him as he practices. It'll look like the University just shrugged and ignored it EVEN IF he's getting counseling. That's a private, healthcare situation they'll be unable to discuss so it's going to make UT look like they didn't care.

Again, fair or not. He did this. It went viral. It looks like crap for the university. UT should, first and foremost..... more important than one kid's football life, take decent care of the image of the institution.

There's no way to keep him AND reveal his private professional counseling. Fair or not...... he is a liability, a distraction, and there's no good way for the university to deal with him.
 

unfrozencvmanvol

High on Heupel.
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
5,200
Likes
8,185
I decided to message the girl on Facebook about the cat’s condition and was not expecting to get a response. However, she actually replied back immediately and said the following: “He’s home and still having some smaller issues but he is better and alert!”. She also said it was okay for me to post this.
That's great to hear.
 

MBVFL1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
1,487
Likes
2,270
He should be locked away and they should throw away the key. Anyone who would do something like that is capable of much worse.
That's a bit much, if he did what they say he did yes he should be punished, but locked away like a murderer or child molester no not even close. I love animals, my dog is literally my best friend and has been for years. I'm not saying animal abuse is ok by no means but it's also not the same as what I mentioned above
 

HearForGrumors

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
273
Likes
1,268
So you would kill someone over harming an animal? That's where you come down on the comparative value of human and animal life?
Others have tried to explain it to you, but you seem like you don't get it. You're making a comparison between the value of animal life vs the value of human life. The only problem is you're making a false comparison.

What is at stake is not physical harm done to a human. What is at stake is legal harm (punishment) and the removal of privileges (team, education, etc.).

As has been pointed out, the crime he is accused of is a misdemeanor. In Tennessee, a misdemeanor is punishable by jail time. Do you think removing his physical freedom (jailing) is too much? Then, you should write your legislator to say that we should make animal abuse a non-jailable offense.

The privilege of playing football, and the scholarship he receives, is not something he is guaranteed. It is conditioned on a lot of things, including actions which are crimes, etc. Yes, the University, coach, AD has the ability to use discretion to enforce those rules, rehabilitate, etc. However, they have no requirement to do so. Many feel that hurting animals is a sign of someone who does not deserve to play football.

You use Jeremy Banks as an example. Interesting that you leave out all the other facts. He was arrested for a warrant for a failure to appear for a traffic ticket. Not a crime of violence. Then, he made statements disrespecting police. However, did you notice that he was not arrested for those statements? Why? Because those statements are protected by the First Amendment.

What happened? He was kicked off the team for a failure to appear, and the PR of his statements about the police. He was not "rehabilitated" by the University, the AD, or Pruitt. He went home to Memphis, and did things which allowed him to return. He then arranged his return through Pruitt and Fulmer. However, he was kicked off the team - for a victimless crime (not showing up to pay a speeding ticket).

Drugs? That's also victimless. And, incase you haven't paid attention - weed is a nothingburger. The only reason it's illegal is politics. Those kids can be drunk, and its okay. But, have a joint - suddenly they're thugs...

Regardless, you're just completely missing the point. Want to treat him equally with JJ, JB, etc. THEN KICK HIM OFF THE TEAM! That's what happened to those guys. It isn't human life vs. animal life - it's respecting the legality of harming animals, and taking away privileges.

You're whole argument is ignorant, misleading, and misguided. It's laughable you got so many people to take you seriously. (I blame the schools.)
 

volinthenorth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2015
Messages
96
Likes
102
I'm no counselor, nor do I know for sure that what I am about to suggest is true. But one thing we should probably keep in mind about Aaron Beasley is that he might have once been in the place of the kitten. That is, at a time when he was innocent and weak, perhaps some cruel and tormenting things were done to him. Often, that is the case when someone abuses other living things...they learned it through it being done to them. This would not exempt Mr. Beasley from whatever prosecution is able to withstand the scrutiny of a jury of his peers and convict him of a crime. Nor does it mean he should be able to continue to have the privilege of playing UT football. He is a moral free agent who must bear the burden of his actions. What this perspective does do, though, is help us here at VolNation to view him as a real person and a victim--not a sub-human fiend--which might help us to not keep heaping eternal scorn on him, or to call for cruel vigilante justice against him, or to wish upon him more penalties than what our democratically enacted laws would rightly call for. We should probably have pity for Nugget and for Aaron Beasley, since both have endured suffering that is worthy of our regard.
 

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,359
Likes
27,416
Others have tried to explain it to you, but you seem like you don't get it. You're making a comparison between the value of animal life vs the value of human life. The only problem is you're making a false comparison.
I understand just fine. I simply disagree.

Beasley is a human being. Redeeming him is more important to me than his harm to the cat.

What is at stake is not physical harm done to a human. What is at stake is legal harm (punishment) and the removal of privileges (team, education, etc.).
And... the punishment should fit the crime. SO comparing to other things that do harm to say an innocent human life are relevant.

As has been pointed out, the crime he is accused of is a misdemeanor. In Tennessee, a misdemeanor is punishable by jail time. Do you think removing his physical freedom (jailing) is too much? Then, you should write your legislator to say that we should make animal abuse a non-jailable offense.
Are you claiming that all misdemeanors or particularly misdemeanors for (presumably) first time animal abuse charges are punished by jail time?

The privilege of playing football, and the scholarship he receives, is not something he is guaranteed. It is conditioned on a lot of things, including actions which are crimes, etc. Yes, the University, coach, AD has the ability to use discretion to enforce those rules, rehabilitate, etc. However, they have no requirement to do so. Many feel that hurting animals is a sign of someone who does not deserve to play football.
So you agree that a player who does something equally or more harmful to a human being regardless of state of development should carry even more weight?

You use Jeremy Banks as an example. Interesting that you leave out all the other facts. He was arrested for a warrant for a failure to appear for a traffic ticket. Not a crime of violence. Then, he made statements disrespecting police. However, did you notice that he was not arrested for those statements? Why? Because those statements are protected by the First Amendment.
He behaved in a way that put his future with the program in jeopardy. He also threatened a female student.
Drugs? That's also victimless. And, incase you haven't paid attention - weed is a nothingburger. The only reason it's illegal is politics. Those kids can be drunk, and its okay. But, have a joint - suddenly they're thugs...
Oh? Or is it because that crime bothers you less? Folks have mentioned statistics. Statistically a high number of violent criminals are drunk or high when they commit their crimes. Seattle and Denver have seen an increase in murder rates since legalizing pot. That's an anecdote but articles I've seen have not been able to show a crime reduction as many advocates claimed.

Regardless, you're just completely missing the point. Want to treat him equally with JJ, JB, etc. THEN KICK HIM OFF THE TEAM! That's what happened to those guys. It isn't human life vs. animal life - it's respecting the legality of harming animals, and taking away privileges.
Right. It is a crime you don't like. I don't like it. But if what he did isn't a pattern then he should stay and face punishment/counseling.

If it is a pattern then I've consistently said that's a different matter.

You're whole argument is ignorant, misleading, and misguided. It's laughable you got so many people to take you seriously. (I blame the schools.)
Which is why you had such an incredibly ignorant, misleading, and misguided response.....

It is serious. We're talking about changing the course of the next 60 years of this kid's life over a cat.... for better or worse.
 

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,359
Likes
27,416
Punishing him IS booting him.
Not necessarily. There are other ways to punish players.

The University doesn't need an LB as much as they need some decent publicity.
Redeeming a kid who does something very stupid... if not criminal... is very good publicity.

Just pragmatically, it's too big of a story to simply say: We're working with him as he practices. It'll look like the University just shrugged and ignored it EVEN IF he's getting counseling.
To who besides those of us who follow UT football as closely as we do? Who do you think will remember in September if he does what is required and behaves himself?

Again, fair or not. He did this. It went viral. It looks like crap for the university. UT should, first and foremost..... more important than one kid's football life, take decent care of the image of the institution.

There's no way to keep him AND reveal his private professional counseling. Fair or not...... he is a liability, a distraction, and there's no good way for the university to deal with him.
I'm not worried about fair or really even perceptions. I am more concerned about justice. Unless this is a pattern of behavior it would be unjust and out of balance with other things done by players to boot him.
 

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,359
Likes
27,416
I think the apples to apples comparison that is relevant here is the punishment for beating up a baby versus the punishment for beating up a kitten, the punishment for beating up a baby would certainly be worse, and really no one in this thread is suggesting it shouldn't be. So I think your persistent attempts to frame this as some sort of comparison between the value of human life versus animal life continue to miss the mark. The position of myself and most of the people you are arguing with in this thread is that both are bad and Beasley should be kicked off the team if he is guilty for either, i.e. that neither is the sort of thing you slap his hand for and send him back to practice, where you differ is that while you apparently would also balk at Beasley returning if he had done the same thing to a baby (just like all of those arguing with you would), you have made it clear you would not as to the kitten.
Define "baby".

Also, I do not think he should be kicked off the team or slapped on the wrist. There's plenty of space in between those extremes.

And again FTR... I don't know if Beasley is or ever will be a good contributor to the team. I think he's a 3rd or 4th year player and hasn't really made a mark so far. I just think you have to weigh what he did against other potential deeds that you may have to punish as first offences.

I wish there were a way of getting an honest survey of this board... how many have ever thrown a rock at an animal just to see if they could hit it... or shot an animal with a BB gun... or a sling shot? Maybe there's someone here who got their dog drunk just so they could laugh at him? Anyone pulled the wings off an insect? Anyone throw a carp up on the bank to die? I suspect most people have done something especially when they were young that could be considered cruel to an animal.

I just think you all are overreacting to this.
 

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,359
Likes
27,416
One has to wonder if the owner was a responsible owner for allowing their pet to be put in such "dangerous " situations???
If there is such a supposed history of abuse. Negligence is also a form of abuse...
I don't know. I would guess that there were some emotions flying around between the 3 humans involved. Just guessing by how things usually go here... we probably don't have the facts exactly accurate either.

If he tormented the cat then I really don't think he should avoid responsibility. Maybe require him to do community service at a kennel cleaning dog cages? Maybe find a hog farmer who would let him work waste deep in barn sewage? Maybe make him work in an animal adoption shelter too?

I just think redeeming the kid for the next 60 years is more important than getting revenge for the kitten.
 

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,403
Likes
11,569
Beasley is a human being. Redeeming him is more important to me than his harm to the cat.
Please. No one is responsible for redeeming Beasley other than Beasley. He will have a chance to redeem himself, but it may not be while playing football at Tennessee. He's not owed that. Sometimes we don't get the second chances we'd like.

And... the punishment should fit the crime. SO comparing to other things that do harm to say an innocent human life are relevant.
If the punishment should fit the crime, and the crime did not result in the harm to an innocent human life, then by no stretch of logic is an innocent human life relevant to the discussion.

I'm sure you don't mean it this way, but what you keep posting sure sounds like "nothing short of serious harm to another person should result in losing a football scholarship."

So you agree that a player who does something equally or more harmful to a human being regardless of state of development should carry even more weight?
Absolutely. But it's still not relevant because no human being was harmed.

It is serious. We're talking about changing the course of the next 60 years of this kid's life over a cat.... for better or worse.
I think that's a tad hyperbolic, but let's say you're right. That's life. We all make decisions every single day, for better or for worse. Sometimes our poor decisions have long lasting consequences. Life doesn't come with rewind or reset buttons.
 
Likes: VolFaninFla

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,359
Likes
27,416
My only point from that is that, yes, there are people or scenarios where people value an animals life more than a human’s life.

And I think a lot of people do depending on the circumstances

I certainly value my dog’s life over that of a pedophile or rapist.
I won't say that.... even as repugnant as those are. People are still redeemable. An animal should never be valued over a human being. Humans have intrinsic worth. Humans are created in the image of God.... who also commanded us to be good stewards over creation including animals.

I think Beasley should be punished. I just think many here have gone way overboard.
 

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top