The link is to the story about Burress agreeing to take a deal on his case for unlawful possesion of a firearm, and unlawful discarge of a firearm. According to the story, the NY District Attorny wouldn't accept any deal that gave Burress less than 2 years in prison.
Maybe it is because I don't see a problem with guns, where many others do, but this seems way out of line for what he did. No one would argue that what he did was wrong, but in a time where you can take a loaded assualt rifle to a Presidental Speach protest in Arizona, it seems a little harsh.
It use to be that Athlete's would get off more than the normal person, because of their fame, and ability to pay for a good lawyer. But now it seems that might have turned, everyone can remember what happened to Vick, while what he did was horrible, what the system did to him was just as bad. (What he did, when he did it, was not a federal crime, it was handled by the states, but when the news broke, it was quickly made into a federal case and he was railroaded into jail).
I have no real hard feelings for these guys, after all it appears you can still get off if you can pay the family off like Stallworth did, (he is serving 30 days for killing someone with his car, yet Vick and Burress get 2 years each for killing dogs or shooting themselves, don't really seem right does it).