Bob Costas goes on Gun Control tirade during Sunday Night Half-Time Show

[Matt1970]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOi7If0zW9s

"If Jovan Belcher didn't possess a gun, he and Cassandra Perkins would both be alive today"

Stick to sports you dumb fuck.

 

[classy]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

 

[OverVolt]

Wish I had a job with television time so I could super-troll.

 

[Genx87]

His paraphrasing that article makes the situation sound so simplistic. This guy obviously had some serious mental health issues that werent addressed. His tool that day was a gun. If he didnt have a gun he would have found another way to do it. The idea if he didnt have a gun they would be alive today is something nobody knows.

 

[OverVolt]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

Yea it works both ways. Just like drugs are a problem. You can make them illegal but I'll be damn marijuana grows despite the law! Its almost like the plant just doesn't care.

Ditto with guns, for war and for police we manufactured millions of them. If you ban them in one area and price just goes up and people run them into the area, resulting in the only unarmed people being the innocent. A lack of gun wouldn't have made a difference in this situation though. If he wanted to do what he did, not much can actually stop him.

No matter how many laws we make its almost like the guns won't smelt themselves, GRR!

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I don't entirely agree with Costas, but I also don't have a problem with him speaking his mind, and without question we as a country have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill people coming into the possession of guns. Only a fool would say otherwise. I don't personally believe the answer to this is more gun control, but can't we at least have a dialogue on this?

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I agree with Bob Costas. Not saying he wouldn't of killed his girlfriend but it would be much more difficult for him to do it and actually get his hands dirty vs just making a snap judgment and pulling a trigger.

 

[Texashiker]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

Article I think is related to your post, and to the topic of this thread,

http://www.livescience.com/25167-murder-is-contagious.html

It may not be the guns that are the problem, but the frustration at the lack of upward mobility.

Why do some people turn to gun violence? Maybe because they feel they have no other course of action?

As for Bob Costas, so what. His opinion does not carry more weight then anyone elses.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Article I think is related to your post, and to the topic of this thread,

http://www.livescience.com/25167-murder-is-contagious.html

It may not be the guns that are the problem, but the frustration at the lack of upward mobility.

Why do some people turn to gun violence? Maybe because they feel they have no other course of action?

As for Bob Costas, so what. His opinion does not carry more weight then anyone elses.

I'm pretty sure "upward mobility" wasn't the problem with this particular guy.

 

[Fenixgoon]

i wouldn't call that a tirade.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

I don't think so man. I mean our history is full of gun violence. From all the wars to the old school duels of founding fathers, guns are a part of America like it or not. The people who made this country thought it was so important as to make it the NUMBER TWO agenda on their newborn political document. That says a message loud and clear to everyone that is not in dispute.

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. It doesn't say maybe later if too many people are shooting each other, or if the government gets scared of the public, or some dude shoots his girl, it says shall NOT be infringed. I people are the worried about getting shot, it is very avoidable. It's not like we're in a war zone in this country folks.

 

[zinfamous]

His paraphrasing that article makes the situation sound so simplistic. This guy obviously had some serious mental health issues that werent addressed. His tool that day was a gun. If he didnt have a gun he would have found another way to do it. The idea if he didnt have a gun they would be alive today is something nobody knows.

this

I don't entirely agree with Costas, but I also don't have a problem with him speaking his mind, and without question we as a country have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill people coming into the possession of guns. Only a fool would say otherwise. I don't personally believe the answer to this is more gun control, but can't we at least have a dialogue on this?

and this.

Costas has the luxury of the bully pulpit when it comes to entertainment, love it or hate it.

No doubt NBC has been and will continue to be flooded with complaints from both the rationally-minded and the gun-hugging whackadoos out there, but this is his prerogative, and to ignore these problems--whether it be unnecessary violence or mental illness due to injury--is to put our society and our culture on hold.


personally, I don't think any kind of sweeping gun control is going to stop any one crazy person from killing, if they are committed to the act. the difference with guns, though, is that I've never heard of an innocent bystander being killed when they weren't the target of a drive-by knifing...

 

[PokerGuy]

Costas needs to STFU and talk about sports and keep his idiotic opinions on other stuff to himself. If enough people complain to NBC they might finally get rid of that idiot.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Costas needs to STFU and talk about sports and keep his idiotic opinions on other stuff to himself. If enough people complain to NBC they might finally get rid of that idiot.

We could only hope. Collinsworth, too. That guy is annoying as shit.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOi7If0zW9s

"If Jovan Belcher didn't possess a gun, he and Cassandra Perkins would both be alive today"

Stick to sports you dumb fuck.

This x5 Billion.

You honestly think some roid raging dumbass isn't going to kill that woman? When you go on a rampage like that, it could be strangling her neck - grabbing a flower vase and smashing it over her head, or a knife. Or how about a bow & arrow?

NOPE NOPE NOPE take guns out of the equation and all crime stops!!!

Or.... all crimes don't get stopped because the innocent people are left defenseless... one of the two!

 

[BoberFett]

this



and this.

Costas has the luxury of the bully pulpit when it comes to entertainment, love it or hate it.

No doubt NBC has been and will continue to be flooded with complaints from both the rationally-minded and the gun-hugging whackadoos out there, but this is his prerogative, and to ignore these problems--whether it be unnecessary violence or mental illness due to injury--is to put our society and our culture on hold.

So the two camps are rationally minded and gun hugging whackadoos? What happened to gun hating whackadoos?

personally, I don't think any kind of sweeping gun control is going to stop any one crazy person from killing, if they are committed to the act. the difference with guns, though, is that I've never heard of an innocent bystander being killed when they weren't the target of a drive-by knifing...

Why is a knife the alternate? Why not a bomb? Or driving a Suburban through a group of people? Both can and have killed many innocent bystanders. Most people don't have the guts for knifing someone to death. Driving them down is far easier.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

Guns aren't a problem.

People are a problem.

And with people as dumbfounded lacking logic such as yourself - there is no doubt that there is a SERIOUS epidemic

 

[Geosurface]

I don't entirely agree with Costas, but I also don't have a problem with him speaking his mind, and without question we as a country have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill people coming into the possession of guns. Only a fool would say otherwise. I don't personally believe the answer to this is more gun control, but can't we at least have a dialogue on this?

Yes we as a country, and a planet, and a species have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill (or mentally healthy, since violence is part of human nature) people coming into the possession of guns. True dat, no denying it.

The same is also true of knives, hatchets, baseball bats, chainsaws, golf clubs, tire irons, cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, toxic gas, anthrax, tanks, poison... and a thousand other things.

Granted, guns do make it particularly easy to kill a larger number of people in a shorter space of time than most of the other things listed. This is true.

But like a knife, for instance, the gun has a legitimate purpose in the right hands (self-defense or cutting a steak) and can be put to horrible use in the wrong hands (murder, injury)

So what exactly would be the purpose of this suggested dialogue? The legitimate need for self-defense, home protection, hunting, law enforcement, etc will remain no matter how long we dialogue about it... so I don't see the point.

I agree that it is sad and unfortunate how quickly a gun can be put to murderous use against multiple people... it leads to some very tragic, but still rare, headline-grabbing shooting sprees none of us are happy to see on the news.

But such are the times we live in... that's just something adults accept.

We live in a time where technology makes many very pleasant, and many very unpleasant things possible. Most technology is a double edged sword. Nuclear energy, the internet, guns, genetic engineering... all have positive uses and negative uses. We should never abandon something entirely and lose the positives because of the negatives.

People say they just want commonsense legislation and for it to be enforced... sure, sounds good. I think we already have that. Just accept, as an adult, that people committed to doing nasty shit will always, always get around such measures. Just like all the shoes taken off and shampoo put into small bottles on airplanes, and expensive scanning equipment. Someone dedicated enough will find a way around it. Guaranteed.

 

[zinfamous]

So the two camps are rationally minded and gun hugging whackadoos? What happened to gun hating whackadoos?

I was referring to people sending in letters [of complaint] to NBC. I don't expect the gun-hating whackadoos to be doing that. (even writing letters of support would be meaningless--their message already having been trumpeted)

Why is a knife the alternate? Why not a bomb? Or driving a Suburban through a group of people? Both can and have killed many innocent bystanders. Most people don't have the guts for knifing someone to death. Driving them down is far easier.

bombs require a certain level of proficiency. Some can be simple to make, but I'm just going to assume that you aren't seriously imagining that today's average gun-preferring criminal would be an equal and comparable bomb-preferring criminal?

Suburbans. again...a bit more difficult to get than a gun, these days. And even with serious gun control, wouldn't change the ease for criminals to get guns. Still, competence with driving a suburban into your target is probably greater than competence with an untrained gun user.

That kid sleeping upstairs in his bed isn't going to be randomly taken out with a targeted suburbaning.

but yeah--if you're only goal was to just run into a crowd and randomly kill everyone you could? I suppose a bomb or vehicle would be more effective...but that isn't the situation I am discussing. These events are, despite what the news would have us believe, exceedingly rare compared to the everyday violence that occurs on the streets, with targeted shootings, that end up taking out far more bystanders.

 

[buckshot24]

Guns are a problem, period. Don't agree that a lack of gun would have prevented this tragedy, but our society has turned to the use of a gun as a first option to solve any dispute. That is a problem.

If that was the case there would be 100 times as many gun crimes as there are now.

 

[Matt1970]

 

[soulcougher73]

Yes we as a country, and a planet, and a species have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill (or mentally healthy, since violence is part of human nature) people coming into the possession of guns. True dat, no denying it.

The same is also true of knives, hatchets, baseball bats, chainsaws, golf clubs, tire irons, cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, toxic gas, anthrax, tanks, poison... and a thousand other things.

Granted, guns do make it particularly easy to kill a larger number of people in a shorter space of time than most of the other things listed. This is true.

But like a knife, for instance, the gun has a legitimate purpose in the right hands (self-defense or cutting a steak) and can be put to horrible use in the wrong hands (murder, injury)

So what exactly would be the purpose of this suggested dialogue? The legitimate need for self-defense, home protection, hunting, law enforcement, etc will remain no matter how long we dialogue about it... so I don't see the point.

I agree that it is sad and unfortunate how quickly a gun can be put to murderous use against multiple people... it leads to some very tragic, but still rare, headline-grabbing shooting sprees none of us are happy to see on the news.

But such are the times we live in... that's just something adults accept.

We live in a time where technology makes many very pleasant, and many very unpleasant things possible. Most technology is a double edged sword. Nuclear energy, the internet, guns, genetic engineering... all have positive uses and negative uses. We should never abandon something entirely and lose the positives because of the negatives.

People say they just want commonsense legislation and for it to be enforced... sure, sounds good. I think we already have that. Just accept, as an adult, that people committed to doing nasty shit will always, always get around such measures. Just like all the shoes taken off and shampoo put into small bottles on airplanes, and expensive scanning equipment. Someone dedicated enough will find a way around it. Guaranteed.

This x eleventy billion

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[FerrelGeek]

Very well said. Sadly, we live in a society that seems to think there should be zero risk, zero failure. Look at the product warning labels. As much as I understand, and respect, Don's sentiment, your comments speak volumes.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Franklin

Yes we as a country, and a planet, and a species have suffered numerous tragedies caused, or at least enabled, by mentally ill (or mentally healthy, since violence is part of human nature) people coming into the possession of guns. True dat, no denying it.

The same is also true of knives, hatchets, baseball bats, chainsaws, golf clubs, tire irons, cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, toxic gas, anthrax, tanks, poison... and a thousand other things.

Granted, guns do make it particularly easy to kill a larger number of people in a shorter space of time than most of the other things listed. This is true.

But like a knife, for instance, the gun has a legitimate purpose in the right hands (self-defense or cutting a steak) and can be put to horrible use in the wrong hands (murder, injury)

So what exactly would be the purpose of this suggested dialogue? The legitimate need for self-defense, home protection, hunting, law enforcement, etc will remain no matter how long we dialogue about it... so I don't see the point.

I agree that it is sad and unfortunate how quickly a gun can be put to murderous use against multiple people... it leads to some very tragic, but still rare, headline-grabbing shooting sprees none of us are happy to see on the news.

But such are the times we live in... that's just something adults accept.

We live in a time where technology makes many very pleasant, and many very unpleasant things possible. Most technology is a double edged sword. Nuclear energy, the internet, guns, genetic engineering... all have positive uses and negative uses. We should never abandon something entirely and lose the positives because of the negatives.

People say they just want commonsense legislation and for it to be enforced... sure, sounds good. I think we already have that. Just accept, as an adult, that people committed to doing nasty shit will always, always get around such measures. Just like all the shoes taken off and shampoo put into small bottles on airplanes, and expensive scanning equipment. Someone dedicated enough will find a way around it. Guaranteed.

 

[Nintendesert]

Regardless of the issue, I don't watch football to get another dose of fucking politics. I like to watch the game, enjoy it and escape from the day to day bullshit. If I wanted politics I'll watch a news channel or CSPAN.

They did this shit during the elections and are continuing it. I'm tired of it.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Regardless of the issue, I don't watch football to get another dose of fucking politics. I like to watch the game, enjoy it and escape from the day to day bullshit. If I wanted politics I'll watch a news channel or CSPAN.

They did this shit during the elections and are continuing it. I'm tired of it.

This. Costas did it during the Olympics too. What a tool.