Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(HyperVocal)   Bob Costas in the crosshairs of gun owners   (hypervocal.com) divider line 125
    More: Asinine, Bob Costas, Jason Whitlock, NBC Studios, Nicole Brown Simpson, Brit Hume, Kansas City Chiefs, Andy Levy  
•       •       •

15920 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Dec 2012 at 2:22 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-03 02:49:58 AM  
9 votes:

puffy999: So, whether or not I agree with Costas, I'd say this was as good as any time to bring this up.


Alright then. Why did he blame the gun? Christ Benoit proved that a roided up strongman needs no weapons to kill his wife and himself. Why not address the issue of concussion-causing brain damage rampant in the NFL? Why not the media's, including NBC's, role in perpetuating and glorifying the "gun culture"? Why take the simpleton's route of blaming the gun for the action of the man?

It's been brought up. Now defend it.
2012-12-03 02:26:28 AM  
9 votes:
There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.
2012-12-03 02:44:15 AM  
8 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.


Lots of people die due to our car culture, and our athletics culture, hell our food culture.

The problems aren't the tools we use to hurt ourselves, merely that we have a systematic breakdown of society that prevents us from recognizing the difference between WHAT we are doing vs WHY we are doing it.

This young man committed violence on not only himself. but another human being. That is what needs to be addressed. Not the fact that he used a lump of metal to do so.

Was the announcer wrong? I would say he had a national pulpit to make his statement from. I don't agree with his words, but he's got stones to say it so bluntly on a national stage. I just wish that he would have gotten to the root of the people instead of beating the same old tired drum.
2012-12-03 02:35:38 AM  
8 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.


Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.
2012-12-03 02:26:31 AM  
8 votes:
Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.
2012-12-03 02:54:21 AM  
7 votes:
Gun ownership? Nothing wrong with it. I have no issues with the legality of any weapons.

Glorifying gun ownership, however, is ridiculous. You can show a guy getting shot in the farking head on network TV but you can't show a bare female breast without getting fined. You can't say "fark" on a talk show, but we can have 25 cop shows, 10 war movies and a million ads for a first-person shooter video game. There's like 100 reality shows about guns, gun owners, gun range visitors, gun inventors, shooting guns, bigger guns, better guns, guns that haven't been invented yet but seem like a cool idea...

That part, I think, is the problem - not the fact that you can legally own one. Glorification of weapons is usually kinda silly IMO when in moderate amounts. We're saturated with violence to the point that we become desensitized to it when we see it and defensive of anything we perceive may be a threat to our right to inflict it.

It's a combination of factors, not the least of which is the psychological crutch that "oh, because bad guys are out there and they may have guns, we must all own guns to protect ourselves!" -- Never mind that you instantaneously become far more likely to have an accident or deliberate criminal action happen with that actual gun you bought to "protect" yourself than to be the victim of homicide from the hypothetical one you use to justify the purchase.

I think all drugs should be legal, too - but I don't think everyone should run out and buy some heroin, nor do I think we need ads for them on TV. If you need a gun, or think you need a gun, you're going to get a gun anyway. Maybe if we didn't get such a boner for Jack Bauer and Call of Duty the whole "gun culture" problem wouldn't exist but whatever -- I'm a 24 fan myself, so I choose to blame media as a whole for flooding the market with it. I know, no personal responsibility, shock right? heh... but that's the thing -- I'm FOR gun ownership, just not in favor of making gun use/ownership seem like it's "cool" or whatever the children call it these days.
2012-12-03 02:52:50 AM  
6 votes:
Hey Blob Cutlas, When I want your opinion on weighty matters, I'll TELL you what they are.

Until then tell me if I'm out 5 grand to some bad men from Vegas.

Either way, go fark yourself you pompous puffed up talking head.



/Costas, the fact that Nicole Brown Simpson was unarmed certainly helped her survive the attack from a kitchen knife, didn't it?
2012-12-03 02:50:30 AM  
6 votes:
Some people have a big problem with having a political agenda pushed down their throats during a football game. The problem isn't with the misguided beliefs but with the stage on which they were espoused.
2012-12-03 02:44:59 AM  
6 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.


... One of a very, very small number of NFL starting players, just yeserday, shot his child's mother dead in cold blood, then drove to the practice facility and home of his employer, an NFL team, and shot himself in front of a front office man and the team's head coach.

So, whether or not I agree with Costas, I'd say this was as good as any time to bring this up.
2012-12-03 02:34:36 AM  
5 votes:
Strange...never heard Costas get all that upset before about a guy killing his girlfriend, then himself...

OH, RIGHT...these were actually important people because NFL.
2012-12-03 02:32:39 AM  
5 votes:
Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.
2012-12-03 03:06:32 AM  
4 votes:

mediablitz: This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.


I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder
2012-12-03 02:58:13 AM  
4 votes:

Frank N Stein: Christ Benoit proved that a roided up strongman needs no weapons to kill his wife and himself.


Ah, the old "not everyone dies via gun violence, therefore there is no need to discuss gun violence" red herring.

This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

Congratulations on your lack of originality.
2012-12-03 02:54:48 AM  
4 votes:

Poo_Fight: Hey Blob Cutlas, When I want your opinion on weighty matters, I'll TELL you what they are.
Either way, go fark yourself you pompous puffed up talking head.

/Costas, the fact that Nicole Brown Simpson was unarmed certainly helped her survive the attack from a kitchen knife, didn't it?



lol. Costas has gained a lot of respect from me. Anything that angers fratboys is good for the world.
2012-12-03 02:41:47 AM  
4 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.
2012-12-03 02:32:00 AM  
4 votes:
NBC pushes their agenda throughout their program list, from Monday Night Football to Law and Order. Costas is just a cog in this.
2012-12-03 02:30:18 AM  
4 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


And which political party that you don't like gets to say what those restrictions are? And when they decide to take them away completely? Do you say "No biggie, I didn't need a gun anyway."
2012-12-03 04:23:51 AM  
3 votes:

mediablitz: Frank N Stein: I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder


I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is


In 2010 Montana was 30th out of 51 states (DC included) in Assaults with a firearm.
It was also 38 of 51 for murders by firearm.
Japan has one of the higher suicide rates in the world even though there are virtually no firearms of any kind available in that country. The problem with suicide is not firearms, it is that people want to kill themselves.
So yeah... You need to stop trotting out this argument.

Another thing to consider is violence vs gun violence. For instance, Illinois is lower than Montana in firearm assaults per capita, but it is twice as high in violent crimes. This supports the idea that while legal handguns increases gun crimes over a total ban it greatly decreases violent crimes in general.

There is also the reporting issues that makes data gathered based on police reports somewhat invalid for inter-state comparison. One aspect is how crimes are categorized. One state may call "brandishing" felony assault with a firearm while another states calls it misdemeanor assault (firearm not mentioned). It is also much easier to get nailed with "brandishing" in states where open carry is legal than in states where it is not, so the numbers get skewed by this. Then there are areas in some larger cities where people who are assaulted with a firearm don't tend to report it, while in towns and smaller cities it is virtually always reported. Police in some cities may also discourage formal reporting of such incidents if they know there is nothing that can be done, which probably doesn't happen in places like Montana as much as in Chicago.

All that being said, the idea that guns being legal and common inherently stops or discourages violent crime isn't entire true. There is a correlation between gun legality/accessibility and decreased violent crime, but it is not a particularly strong correlation. In other words, there is enough of a correlation to say it definitely helps, not enough to explain the difference between, for instance, Chicago and Cheyenne. Those differences are based on a lot of other factors as well.
2012-12-03 04:04:48 AM  
3 votes:

mediablitz:
Switzerland has one of the highest RIFLE ownership levels, not handguns. And Switzerland has very high domestic violence gun usage stats:

Good reading

Switzerland is trotted out regularly, with people unwilling to look past the basic numbers.


That article says the exact opposite of what you are implying it says. It says Switzerland has one of the lowest homicide rates around (.5 per 100,000), despite easy access to guns. All it says is that 48% of the very few homicides it does have are committed with guns. You will note that means that the majority of the very few homicides in Switzerland are committed with something other than a gun, despite their easy access there.

The problem in American isn't gun violence, it's that we are a violent people.
2012-12-03 03:26:40 AM  
3 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access would not have prevented this tragedy from happening. Belcher was an American success story, right up until the time he murdered his girlfriend.

Costas was way out of line with that act.
2012-12-03 03:14:49 AM  
3 votes:

mediablitz: I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is


By "one of the highest per capita gun violence rates" you mean 30th in the nation Link?
2012-12-03 03:04:58 AM  
3 votes:
Guns are for pussy-asses bed-wetters acared of their own shadows, nevermind dark people
2012-12-03 03:02:42 AM  
3 votes:
Ok, being a Canuckistani, who owns no guns, may I make the following suggestion. Granted that I'm sure that it probably wouldn't have helped in this case.

Require people to take a gun safety course when they first decide to purchase a weapon, and pass, a la a licensing exam. As part of said course, have a portion (say an hour of a weekend long course in my view) where people are told how to recognize situations where their judgment can be clouded and how to get out of or defuse those situations.

From my cultural viewpoint, you guys take guns to an extreme. In terms of gun ownership and use you guys are waaaaayyyy ahead of most of the western world. Sadly crimes where guns are invioved are much more common. Access can correlate almost directly with use, just like places with lots of cars have lots of accidents.

You guys have fun with trying to come up with an answer on that issue. I'm glad that here in Canada, it's much more rare that I hear about gun violence.
2012-12-03 02:46:18 AM  
3 votes:
Who the fark cares about what random people on twitter say or care about?
2012-12-03 02:43:30 AM  
3 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


Look, I am not getting into this argument with you. It is like arguing how many angels can fit on a pin head?
2012-12-03 09:34:25 PM  
2 votes:

edmo: Pray 4 Mojo: There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.

Pretty much.

But I always wonder why those so fervently behind the Second Amendment are so quick to limit the First.


Did anyone in this thread suggest that the government do something about his comments? No? Or did we use our free speech rights by calling him an airhead?

Think about it and get back me.
2012-12-03 11:34:52 AM  
2 votes:

Snort: All the people here saying Costas was wrong to say it are Free Speech hating fascists.

You don't like your cocoon's infiltrated by ideas you disagree with. The NFL used to be a nice place of God, Country, and "safe" violence. After all the concussion talk, now this!


So, using our free speech rights to rebut Costas makes us fascists? You're free to say whatever you want, but we're also free to disagree with you. It goes both ways.
2012-12-03 11:31:15 AM  
2 votes:

Hobodeluxe: just because you have a right in the constitution to own a gun doesn't mean you shouldn't have to prove your ability to own and operate one responsibly.


Show me your Internet Communication license, please.
2012-12-03 10:25:38 AM  
2 votes:

SkunkWerks: In the meantime, I'll ask the question again (and please try to bear in mind, Evolution isn't going to save us here, not because it doesn't love us or anything, but simply because that isn't how it works):

We should do nothing then?


You want to drastically reduce gun related violence? Start working against the War on Drugs.
2012-12-03 08:44:46 AM  
2 votes:

Hobodeluxe: GoldSpider: Enough with the "Huuur you need a license to drive, but not to own a gun!" stupidity.

The day driving becomes an enumerated constitutional right like the right to bear arms is the day you can start making that comparison without sounding like you slept through 10th grade civics.

just because you have a right in the constitution to own a gun doesn't mean you shouldn't have to prove your ability to own and operate one responsibly.


May I also assume, then, that you would be OK with passing a civics exam prior to receiving your license to vote?
2012-12-03 08:28:26 AM  
2 votes:

Hobodeluxe: should we mandate psychiatric evaluations and drug testing for gun licenses?


There's no way that could ever be abused by people who hate guns and think a desire to own one is a symptom of homicidal psychopathy.
2012-12-03 05:00:51 AM  
2 votes:

libranoelrose: Pray 4 Mojo: There are plenty of things in every home that will quickly and easily kill a person.

Stop it.

I don't take you for someone that will argue semantics about how easy it is to kill someone with a gun as opposed to any other household weapon.

Don't be that guy.


Don't tell me which guy to be!

Look... it's not a semantic argument. Is a big-ass butcher knife the same as a gun? No. I'm not saying it is. The point is that "responsible gun owners"... in fact as it was said "every" responsible gun owner will not get all murdery just 'cause their life its a bump.

The gun provides an easier option if one chooses to get murdery... that's it.

Case in point... I would guess that if Belche didn't have a gun... the only life that would have been saved is his. A massive, strong and athletic human male got really, really pissed off and shot his girlfriend... I don't think it's a stretch to think that he would have just beaten, stabbed, strangled her if he had no gun.
2012-12-03 04:57:09 AM  
2 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: BlousyBrown: Lighten up no one is taking your car or your gun.

While ownership is technically still legal in California... it's petty much illegal to use them in most cities.

that's the problem.

/interactions with PD's in California get VERY scary when the citizen is carrying.
//and that's really not necessary


I'd say interactions with PDs in the US is freakin scary, irrespective of whether the pd is californian or arizonan or oregonian or ohioan or whereever. American cops are scary, stupid, well armed, protect one another to ridiculous extremes and see the world in terms of Cops and Perps.
2012-12-03 04:54:09 AM  
2 votes:

mediablitz: Mock26: Depending on the statistics you look at, guns are used 80,000 to 2,500,000 times per year to stop crimes. (The 80,000 number is from the Department of Justice, the 2.5 million from an independent study.) They certainly prevent more crimes than they take lives.

A quick and easy debunking of this 2.5 million number:

Link


Also, I would like to point out that the guy who you linked to does not offer up a single shred of evidence when he "debunks" the numbers from the Kleck report. Whether or not you agree with Kleck's numbers (and by the way, I do not), he at least has data to support them. The guy you linked to has none.
2012-12-03 04:33:07 AM  
2 votes:

thegod082: LaughingRadish: That squall you refer to is the concept of not giving an inch. Those who'd rather keep their rights are well-aware of when concessions are made in the direction of eliminating or restricting rights. It's very difficult to get them back again.

I agree that it would be very difficult to get those rights back again, because future generations would be saying, "Why the fark would we go back to the old ways? Clearly, those people were doing something stupid." Sort of like how there isn't much of a serious push to bring back slavery.


The argument of "why the fark would be go back to the old ways" is very commonly used by tyrants to squelch dissent. Read "Animal Farm" sometime. It's full of that sort of thing.

"When a tyrant first appears he always comes as your protector." -- Plato
2012-12-03 04:22:53 AM  
2 votes:

mediablitz: Mock26: Depending on the statistics you look at, guns are used 80,000 to 2,500,000 times per year to stop crimes.

Are you SERIOUSLY going to use a disparity that large as fact?


Yes, because that disparity is not from a single study. If it was then I would see your point. I was just offering two different set of statistics on the subject. Feel free to take either one, because both are still greater than the number of murders each year. Heck, take the Department of Justice number, halve it, and it is still greater than the number of murders committed in this country each year.
2012-12-03 04:15:33 AM  
2 votes:

mediablitz:

Montana is 7th. 71.4% of all violent crimes in Montana involve guns:

Link Go ahead. Sort by "%gun"


According to that link, when it comes to gun homicides Montana is 30th, with 2.31 per 100,000.

Also, from the FBI:
img.photobucket.com
img.photobucket.com
img.photobucket.com

Montana:
Firearm robberies (per 100,000): 49th
Firearm assaults (per 100,000): 30th
2012-12-03 04:00:17 AM  
2 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


The problem is that "smart, reasonable restrictions" usually mean "only the rich and well-connected get to own them".
2012-12-03 03:51:40 AM  
2 votes:

mediablitz: Frank N Stein: mediablitz: I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is

By "one of the highest per capita gun violence rates" you mean 30th in the nation Link?

No. I meant how often guns are used in VIOLENT CRIMES, just like I said.

Montana is 7th. 71.4% of all violent crimes in Montana involve guns:

Link Go ahead. Sort by "%gun"

Montana rates 5th in gun related deaths:

Link

Go ahead now. Ignore that. It doesn't fit your narrative.

Two thirds of all suicides in Montana involve guns, compared to half, which is the average in the United States.

Link

Go ahead. Ignore that statistic too. I realize neither fit your narrative, and discussing these issues frighten you at some basic level. That's the only explanation for your irrational anger. 

Now: do you want to calmly and rationally discuss this, or are you all about screaming and willful ignorance?


I'll say it again... Switzerland has one of the most armed populations in the world... and a "gun culture" that rivals or surpasses that of the US... yet... there is almost no gun violence.

Not saying that this justifies an armed populace... just that most of the violence problems are societal/cultural... doesn't matter if guns are controlled or not.
2012-12-03 03:40:28 AM  
2 votes:

Representative of the unwashed masses: Ok, being a Canuckistani, who owns no guns, may I make the following suggestion. Granted that I'm sure that it probably wouldn't have helped in this case.

Require people to take a gun safety course when they first decide to purchase a weapon, and pass, a la a licensing exam. As part of said course, have a portion (say an hour of a weekend long course in my view) where people are told how to recognize situations where their judgment can be clouded and how to get out of or defuse those situations.

From my cultural viewpoint, you guys take guns to an extreme. In terms of gun ownership and use you guys are waaaaayyyy ahead of most of the western world. Sadly crimes where guns are invioved are much more common. Access can correlate almost directly with use, just like places with lots of cars have lots of accidents.

You guys have fun with trying to come up with an answer on that issue. I'm glad that here in Canada, it's much more rare that I hear about gun violence.


Depending on the statistics you look at, guns are used 80,000 to 2,500,000 times per year to stop crimes. (The 80,000 number is from the Department of Justice, the 2.5 million from an independent study.) They certainly prevent more crimes than they take lives.
2012-12-03 03:29:23 AM  
2 votes:

Triumph: "Gun culture" is derived largely from the video games and movies that advertise during football and pay Costas's salary. Also some of the shows on his network. Culture comes from media. But I doubt we'll hear much bed wetting about restricting the first amendment.


i am afraid 'Gun Culture' is a misnomer.
We live in dire times and guns aren't the only way to die.
Do we derisively attack each other debating whether guns are the culprits of our social anxieties? Or do we address that there are problems in society that far outweigh whether a person owns a gun or not?
i know many people who own guns. They're pretty sound individuals i don't have an issue being around.
i have a hard time believing it's guns that make people kill others. i am fairly sure it's the inappropriate ideas in the minds of those who would kill another that causes murder (self murder also).

/Not a philosopher
//Just an observer
2012-12-03 03:26:45 AM  
2 votes:

mediablitz: Poo_Fight: /Costas, the fact that Nicole Brown Simpson was unarmed certainly helped her survive the attack from a kitchen knife, didn't it?

Look! The same red herring!

Yep. Someone died from something other than gun violence, so that means there is no reason at all to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

Same old tired fallacy. You managed to combine it with ad homs and a whole lot of angry projection.

Congrats.


What fallacy is there in the argument that that a woman who is armed, trained, and mentally prepared is better able to defend herself against a murderer or rapist than a woman who is unarmed?
This is an entirely valid argument in favor of legal ownership of handguns, of the idea that women should be encouraged to be prepared to defend themselves, and that concealed carry permits should be reasonably available to those who desire them in all states of our nation.

Not only that, but you are the one throwing out the red herring, since that is literally all your post consists of. You are not arguing anything and are instead distracting everyone from the core issue with a red herring.
2012-12-03 03:09:59 AM  
2 votes:

Frank N Stein: I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder



I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is
2012-12-03 03:08:11 AM  
2 votes:

Frank N Stein: mediablitz: This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder


DC is similar. And NYC. Generally, the more liberal a city = the more violent the crime statistics.
2012-12-03 03:08:04 AM  
2 votes:
i guess if it was going to be a violent death for her, a gun was better. i know this sounds crass, but i can't see how not having a gun would have prevented this tragedy.
He obviously was intent on ending her life and his own. There are so many other ways to do that.
i feel horrible for the families of both the deceased. They get to experience first hand, the calamity that is murder/suicide.

/Not a gun owner.
//Not a believer in 'no-one-should-have-guns', either.
///i have to believe she died faster than from knife wounds. Or poison.
//What he did was shocking.
/And very sad.
2012-12-03 03:06:18 AM  
2 votes:

Poo_Fight: /Costas, the fact that Nicole Brown Simpson was unarmed certainly helped her survive the attack from a kitchen knife, didn't it?


Look! The same red herring!

Yep. Someone died from something other than gun violence, so that means there is no reason at all to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

Same old tired fallacy. You managed to combine it with ad homs and a whole lot of angry projection.

Congrats.
2012-12-03 03:04:58 AM  
2 votes:

thegod082: naptapper: Some people have a big problem with having a political agenda pushed down their throats during a football game. The problem isn't with the misguided beliefs but with the stage on which they were espoused.

It wasn't being pushed down their throats during the game; saying that implies, to me, that Michaels and Collinsworth got on a soapbox and were quoting Whitlock while neglecting their play-by-play and color-commentary duties. Halftime is different. I think making a social commentary during halftime of one of the most widely watched TV programs and thereby sparking debate is something to be applauded. The other pre- and postgame shows (Fox, CBS) are basically mindless, worthless drivel that does nothing but promote the NFL and its players. I also think that everyone should calm the fark down and stop being so defensive, regardless of which side of the argument you're on.


Oh, OK - so it's fine with you if anyone spouts off anything as long as it's not actually during the game. Hmm. So if someone who is deeply religious, say Tim Tebow for example, got on a halftime show and told people how they were going to Hell, that would be OK with you?

It's all about the time and place. I don't want to be preached to by anyone when I'm watching a farking pastime.
2012-12-03 03:04:07 AM  
2 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


If only cars had some other use besides killing people...
2012-12-03 02:52:43 AM  
2 votes:

you are a puppet: You forgot to answer this.


I don't know. All I know is that a multi-billion dollar international corporation doesn't let some pipsqueak sports journalist go on a soap box without their approval.

Now, answer my questions.
2012-12-03 02:52:21 AM  
2 votes:
It's no different than a politician going on tv and saying abortion is wrong. Every other show on tv made some sort of comment about it, he was told to say something and he spoke his mind. You don't like what he has to say? Who cares, you're watching grown men run into each other while fighting over a ball. Get over it.
2012-12-03 02:47:44 AM  
2 votes:
I saw that, live, and the first thing I thought was, "Oh man, he's gonna be in trouble now..."

Pray 4 Mojo: Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


Can we? That would be awesome and save me a fortune, every year. Unfortunately, there's no real public transportation where I live, so I have to keep mine.
2012-12-03 02:28:33 AM  
2 votes:
this should be good

/fark you Costas
2012-12-04 10:59:37 PM  
1 votes:
"Here's where I stand: I do not want to see the Second Amendment repealed. ... People should be allowed to own guns for their own protection. Obviously, those who are hunters. ... Access to guns is too easy in some cases. I don't see any reason a citizen should be able to arm himself in some states in ways only police or military should - to have a virtual militia [by] mail order or gun shows. Why do you need a semi-automatic weapon? What possible use is there? ... Whitlock wrote about a gun culture. That's what I was focusing on."

Looks like we can throw Costas in with all the other ignorant gun grabbers that haven't so much as a farking clue what their talking about. Another farking idiot who thinks semi-automatic means machine gun. Somebody ask this moran what a barrel shroud is.

For the record Bob YOU CANNOT MAIL ORDER GUNS, purchasing a gun from an ffl at a gun show STILL REQUIRES A NICS BACKGROUND CHECK, and SEMI-AUTOMATIC DOES NOT MEAN MACHINE GUN! Semi-automatic means that for every pull of the trigger one bullet is fired. You know like just about every gun made since the industrial revolution.

If you're going to pretend like you're taking some sort of big brave stand (which this asshole didn't do by quoting someone else to give himself wriggle room) in front of a giant national audience at least do Americans a favor and read up on the subject first instead of spouting a bunch of ignorant bullshiat cliches like the uninformed jack-off you are.
2012-12-04 11:33:19 AM  
1 votes:
A lot of people keep saying First Amendment without knowing what it really means. The first amendment just says "Congress shall make no law". That just says that the Federal Government cannot limit your freedom of speech, religion, or assembly.

Nothing more. An individual cannot violate your First Amendment rights.

The Second Amendment however says "Shall Not Be Infringed" which is much stronger language.

Which one do you think the writers of the Constitution thought was more important?
2012-12-04 06:36:31 AM  
1 votes:

edmo: Pray 4 Mojo: There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.

Pretty much.

But I always wonder why those so fervently behind the Second Amendment are so quick to limit the First.


I don't recall a situation where 2nd amendment supporters said there should be regulation of the first, or even that there should be discussion on how best to control it. Laws controlling his speech are between him and the FCC.

He chose his words and timing poorly, and he's going to pay a social consequence for that, but no ones stopping him from saying what he felt.

/actually, by blogging about what he said, 2nd amendment supporters inadvertently spread his message to a broader audience.
/an audience that may not agree, and one that has its own opinions, but his original statement was delivered uninterrupted
2012-12-03 11:39:34 PM  
1 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


The same could be said of abortion, yet there are people who when common sense restrictions are discussed, blow a gasket and start pouting off about their Constitution right to privacy and freedom of choice.

No, Costas is probably a few months from being out of the sportscasting business (let's face it, Jim McKay he is not, and essentially he fills the same role now for NBC, trotting out and trying to look like the senior sports anchor and an authority figure, which is silly in the era of ESPN), at least on Sunday Night football. He knows it, so he decided to get in a cheap shot against handguns, when in reality there was nothing particularly special about the tool used in the murder/suicide tragedy in KC that couldn't have been duplicated by hundreds of others tools, including simple CO in a garage.
2012-12-03 05:39:08 PM  
1 votes:
So let me see if I got this right.

White men shouldn't own guns because they'll just flip out and shoot everyone.

Black and Hispanic men shouldn't guns because they're all thugs/criminals/gangbangers.

Asian men shouldn't own guns because they'd probably shoot as well as they can drive.

I think that about covers it. Not sure about the gheys.
2012-12-03 01:34:22 PM  
1 votes:

Snort: Ow! That was my feelings!: Snort: Ow! That was my feelings!: Snort: All the people here saying Costas was wrong to say it are Free Speech hating fascists.

You don't like your cocoon's infiltrated by ideas you disagree with. The NFL used to be a nice place of God, Country, and "safe" violence. After all the concussion talk, now this!

So, using our free speech rights to rebut Costas makes us fascists? You're free to say whatever you want, but we're also free to disagree with you. It goes both ways.

You want him to not speak out at all. You would be the suit that tells him not to speak. Don't talk about issues, its not right.

No, that is not what I want at all. I don't give two shiats what an insufferable ass like Costas thinks or says. Most anti-gunners actually help the pro-rights side by blabbering on about a topic they obviously no nothing about. So, preach on brother.

I never mentioned gun rights. Its your knee jerk restraint of speech I find amusing. Gunning down one right for another, as it were.


Huh? Please point out where I supported "knee jerk restraint of speech". He can say whatever he wants. People disagreeing with him is not the same as trying to 'restrain' his speech.

You have the right to say almost anything you want in the US, BUT people have the right to use their speech to disagree. That is not a 'restraint' on free speech.
2012-12-03 12:59:39 PM  
1 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


What you define as "smart" and "reasonable" may be "useless" and "ineffective" to everyone else. I seem to recall the AWB of 94' promoting such language as your own. We all know how well that worked.
2012-12-03 12:08:07 PM  
1 votes:

Snort: Ow! That was my feelings!: Snort: All the people here saying Costas was wrong to say it are Free Speech hating fascists.

You don't like your cocoon's infiltrated by ideas you disagree with. The NFL used to be a nice place of God, Country, and "safe" violence. After all the concussion talk, now this!

So, using our free speech rights to rebut Costas makes us fascists? You're free to say whatever you want, but we're also free to disagree with you. It goes both ways.

You want him to not speak out at all. You would be the suit that tells him not to speak. Don't talk about issues, its not right.


No, that is not what I want at all. I don't give two shiats what an insufferable ass like Costas thinks or says. Most anti-gunners actually help the pro-rights side by blabbering on about a topic they obviously no nothing about. So, preach on brother.
2012-12-03 11:31:59 AM  
1 votes:
Frank N Stein: " Why not address the issue of concussion-causing brain damage rampant in the NFL?"

I'm just cynical enough to believe that Costas spiel got the green light solely because the NFL would *much* rather see this enter the public consciousness as a shiat-storm about guns than have it remembered as another high profile piece of evidence linking Traumatic Brain Injury to American Football.

I'm not quite *cynical* enough to suggest the bit was conceived of by the NFL and floated to Costas, nor that they scripted it and he was told to do it outright.
But, certainly, whoever had to clear that piece had to know that 1. this would cause a shiat-storm 2. the NRA is *much* louder than those who talk about brain injury.
2012-12-03 11:29:52 AM  
1 votes:

Apik0r0s: /waiting for 2Aers to throw off these oppressive Govt shackles
//still waiting
///crickets


Armed groups of civilians have opposed organized governments on four occasions since the passing of the 2nd Amendment. It hasn't always been successful, but it's usually risen to the level of functional opposition.
2012-12-03 11:20:18 AM  
1 votes:

DeathCipris: RobFMJ: DeathCipris: SkunkWerks: DeathCipris: evolve to understand one another and quit killing each other over stupid shiat

You don't understand how evolution works, do you?

DeathCipris: Taking away the guns will do nothing to curb this behavior.

So, again, we should do nothing, right?

Good GOD you are dense...

Yes, I DO understand how evolution works,. What I have been saying is we NEED to head that direction to fix this problem. Will we? Probably not.

So we should waste taxpayer money and government time to take a step that does nothing? You are a moron. VA has some of the most lax gun laws in the US aside from TX. Yet, we didn't even scratch the top 10 for gun related homocides. (Photo from upthread)

[img.photobucket.com image 550x711]

Show me some reliable data that violent crime is reduced by increasing gun control.

Despite its reputation, Texas gun laws aren't really all that much to write home about. Alabama and Florida are definitely more lax. Hell, even Louisiana has open carry (although they do require state registration of NFA stuff *shakes tiny fist*).

Ah, my bad then. FL would be a better example and LA too. Does LA even require a class-3 license to own an automatic weapon?


There's no "license" per se, you pay $200 to the BATFE along with your application and get a tax stamp for each item you buy/make (suppressor, SBR, SBS, AOW, DD or machine gun). They look like this. I think a lot of people get that mixed up with the SOT-class Federal Firearms Licenses that allows you to buy/sell/manufacture NFA stuff as your business. Those are expensive and the ATF frowns upon them for personal use, plus most people don't want the record-keeping requirements and random inspections that go with them.

Some states will restrict what you can own (for example, WA legalized suppressor ownership but still does not allow SBR's, if memory serves me). Louisiana is an odd duck that allows anything but requires registration with the Louisiana State Police.

/I don't trust LSP with a dull spork, but that's got more to do with the organization than my feelings towards firearms registration
2012-12-03 11:20:17 AM  
1 votes:

Father_Jack: Noon'e posted this yet? Im shocked.

[images2.dailykos.com image 450x391]


I actually like that cartoon. But I am a gun owner and agree, the occasional tragedy is indeed the price we pay for the rest of us to own what we want.

At one time I was into the statistics side of the gun argument and came across the stat, that more kids drown in their backyard pools than are killed by guns. Would it be fair to say that the occasional drowning is the price we pay over and over again for the rest of us to enjoy our pools? I don't know, but I think you could and it would be just as logically sound. Continuing any effort to stop the tiny percentage of those tragedies would needlessly infringe on the rights of others.
2012-12-03 11:13:25 AM  
1 votes:

GoldSpider: You don't think limits on magazine capacity are reasonable?


Why would it be? You apparently want the limit, so it's up to you to convince us why it's needed
2012-12-03 11:00:51 AM  
1 votes:
Bob says if we had no guns they would be alive today. That's great then tell Nicole and Ron that OJ doesn't own a gun so no need to worry. With Pictures!
2012-12-03 10:35:49 AM  
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: GoldSpider: Enough with the "Huuur you need a license to drive, but not to own a gun!" stupidity.

The day driving becomes an enumerated constitutional right like the right to bear arms is the day you can start making that comparison without sounding like you slept through 10th grade civics.

just because you have a right in the constitution to own a gun doesn't mean you shouldn't have to prove your ability to own and operate one responsibly.


Well, you have the right to vote regardless of you ability (or lack thereof) to understand how the constitution works or why its in place, so I'd let that one go, there, champ
2012-12-03 10:26:00 AM  
1 votes:

Gleeman: GoldSpider: AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

But they are at odds with the actual words of the 2nd Amendment. So change it.

BoobySnacks: AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

Such as? If you are referring to background checks for criminal history or psychiatric issues, I'm with you. Otherwise, "...shall not be infringed" speaks plainly enough.

"A well regulated militia..."


/just saying
//gun control is hitting center mass


You kind of trailed off there. Since I see this brought up a lot, I'm just going to post this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_State s_Constitution#Meaning_of_.22well_regulated_militia.22

Basically, in the lingua franca, well regulated meant well equipped. It does not invoke regulation in the modern sense.
2012-12-03 09:39:21 AM  
1 votes:
Ahh anti gun threads. I guess the Circumcision and Pitbull threads were getting a lil tired so we will have a month of these.
2012-12-03 09:31:15 AM  
1 votes:

Peter von Nostrand: Try finding a quote that isn't 20 years old. Oh wait, you can't. And why is that? Because gun control is dead at the Federal level. The only people still whining about guns are the fanatics who want everyone to walk around like the old west with a couple of six-shooters on their belt. Remember how in '08 all the gun nuts went out stockpiling guns and ammo (and after this election as well, for the matter) and nothing happened. In fact, Obama increased gun rights


Really? Finding this took about 12 seconds on the Googles, and I don't even look for this stuff like a lot of folks do.

Slowly bringing up legislation on gun control using buzz words like "assault weapons" is laying down the slip-and-slide on the slope toward full bans. It's the exact same is the crazy righties who want 24 hour waiting periods for abortions. It looks innocent enough until you pull back the curtain and look at the ultimate goal.
2012-12-03 09:21:57 AM  
1 votes:

Orgasmatron138: This isn't really related, but I'm waiting for all the people who said that Obama was taking away all the guns as soon as he was elected to explain why he hasn't.


Another Obama promise broken!
2012-12-03 09:11:52 AM  
1 votes:
So you support taking away the firearms of the populace 'for our own safety.'
Know who else did that? Hitler.
Gun control was very prevalent in the south during the time of the Civil Rights movement.
Know why? To protect the lynch mobs from their victims.

Please, cite ONE example, just ONE factual historic example (an opinion piece does not count, must be backed by statistics) of a sustained lowered violent crime rate (Not just violent crimes by guns, total violent crime) attributed to greater restrictions on firearms, and I will be happy to re-evaluate my position on firearm ownership.

*crickets*
2012-12-03 09:09:26 AM  
1 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: Smart, reasonable restrictions on gun access and ownership isn't at odds with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.


But they are at odds with the actual words of the 2nd Amendment. So change it.
2012-12-03 08:48:56 AM  
1 votes:

Huck And Molly Ziegler

If I were truly sure I was in the right when I defended gun culture, unlimited gun rights, etc., I wouldn't go yelping like a scalded dog every time someone suggests we might want to enact a law or two to dial that culture back a notch.
Instead, I would quietly say "Fark you, enact what you want, I'M the one with the guns."

Those who squawl like 5-year-olds deprived of a toy are telling me that deep down inside, they know their position is indefensible.

Quite easily defended, your side just chooses to ignore facts that contradict your bed-wetting panic.
www.press.uchicago.eduwww.buyagunday.net


The sad thing is, they're convinced someone is about to actually do away with the entire 2nd Amendment. Shallow-minded extremism
Yeah, how would they get that idea?

"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
--U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban,
picking up every one of them... "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,
"I would have done it."
--U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95

"The Brady Bill's only effect will be to desensitize the public to regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."
--Charles Krauthammer. April 5 l996 Washington Post

"We'll take one step at a time, and the first is necessarily -given the political realities - very modest. We'll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law and again and again. Our ultimate goal, total control of hand guns, is going to take time. The first problem is to slow down production and sales. Next is to get registration. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and ammunition (with a few exceptions) totally illegal."
--Pete Shields, founder of Handgun Control, Inc. New Yorker Magazine, June 26, 1976, pg. 53

the Brady Bill is:

Called the Brady bill, "the minimum step" Congress should take. "We need much stricter gun control and eventually we should bar ownership of handguns except in a few cases."
--W. Clay, Dem. Rep. St. Louis Post Dispatch., May 8, 1993, pg. A

"I will introduce legislation banning the sale manufacture or possession of hand-guns except in a few cases."
--Senator J. Chafee, Minneapolis Star Tribune, June 15. 1992, pg. A13

Ball's in your court, Sunshine.
2012-12-03 08:44:14 AM  
1 votes:
In other news, shooting people with a gun is still against the law. And just like we take the chance of happening across the path of some unrepentant asshole by going outside, we also take the risk that someone will decide today is the day to shoot us.

It's times like that that it's worth pointing out that most of those dying due to gun violence will be talked about as if their path to heaven is a short paved road. So naturally we should be happy that they are getting there expeditiously. Decrying the gun shot that sent them on their way makes it seem like the heaven notion is happy sappy bullshiat.
2012-12-03 08:42:49 AM  
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing everything he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gunCAR culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.


FTFY

/TAG has to be for Costas
2012-12-03 08:41:43 AM  
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: but instead of operating off of what might happen in your imagination let's instead watch videos of real dumbasses with real guns hurting themselves and others all day long because those people do exist in great numbers in the real world.


Criminals who would never comply with such a licensing scheme anyway as they already don't get their guns through legal channels will still be there shooting each other and victimizing innocent people.

Why are you so butthurt that I have guns? How does it affect you at all?
2012-12-03 08:34:35 AM  
1 votes:

Vegan Meat Popsicle: The types of people who get outraged about what Costas said are truly despicable human beings because all they care about is their precious forged metal.


Guns, cars, knives, rope, fireworks, swimming pools, step ladders, coal generated electricity and seafood dinners all come with some level of acceptable losses.

If you eat Alaskan crab, you have decided that the number of crab boat workers who are injured or killed every year to get your tasty dinner are acceptable losses. You may not think about it, because you're far enough removed from it that you don't really have to, but that's what you're doing.

You are certainly not above those of us who own firearms simply because some of us will actually admit what you pretend not to think. There's always acceptable losses. At least I have the stones to say so.
2012-12-03 08:21:13 AM  
1 votes:

HanBammer:
Thus, in order to receive access to a gun, Swiss citizens must not be mentally unstable. This is called gun control and is one of the two biggest reasons why gun violence per capita is low in Switzerland.


Federal law prohibits firearm ownership of any person in the United States who has ever been involuntarily committed to a mental institution or ajudicated mentally defective.

What we don't do is take rights away from people who have done nothing wrong.
2012-12-03 06:32:40 AM  
1 votes:
When I want to talk guns I certainly won't listen to a Costa who doesn't have his own action figure.

dl.dropbox.com


jso2897: Nah - Costas is a jerk, but gun fappers are too sensitive,


We whine because the stupid burns too much to be ignored.
We've just come off a seventy year run of gun control measures that amounted to bumpkiss. Despite all the office furniture and helicopter time bought by the ATF, crime rates are falling while gun sales are spiking. It suggests that those billions spent to collect serial numbers and hunt moon shiners were wasted while education and actual law enforcement went in need.
Most of these anti-gun measures slipped past because people didn't complain loudly enough at the time.
What we learned was that a few thousand reasonable laws will eventually amount to an unreasonable outcome.

Now We have celebrities telling us that, between two weapons of the same caliber and same performance, one is more dangerous than the other due to the color of its plastic. We've got lawyers arguing that people who steal your things have a right to walk away if caught in the act. We have a man who takes a moment away from his job of narrating a gladiatorial sport to lecture us about how bad an influence those black kids and their loud hip hop music are.

Any fan of living in a free society should whine about this, because bad ideas have small beginnings.

/If you want to see domestic violence tragedies, follow the news in less affluent nations.
/Especially those in Africa, Asia, and the Middle east where gun control is often very strict (if selectively enforced). 
/Locking up the guns won't give women the edge in a fight against men. It would more do the opposite.
2012-12-03 06:09:44 AM  
1 votes:

carnifex2005: Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.

People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.


No, people do not *need* cars. Humanity survived tens of thousands of years without them. Besides, who are you to tell us what he do and do not need, you pretentious twerp?
2012-12-03 05:47:24 AM  
1 votes:

MagicMissile: Its great to see the paranoid gun control crowd under fire, Bob Costas should issue a public apology for what he did.


Nah - Costas is a jerk, but gun fappers are too sensitive, and need more slapping down when they whine, and less coddling. Man up and grow a pair, Nancy-boy.
2012-12-03 05:46:49 AM  
1 votes:

MagicMissile: Its great to see the paranoid gun control crowd under fire, Bob Costas should issue a public apology for what he did.


Right after your parents issue their own.
2012-12-03 05:24:21 AM  
1 votes:

MagicMissile: I just get sick


You won't last a year here. Good luck.
2012-12-03 04:54:18 AM  
1 votes:
Noon'e posted this yet? Im shocked.

images2.dailykos.com
2012-12-03 04:45:25 AM  
1 votes:

mediablitz: Frank N Stein: puffy999: So, whether or not I agree with Costas, I'd say this was as good as any time to bring this up.

Alright then. Why did he blame the gun? Christ Benoit proved that a roided up strongman needs no weapons to kill his wife and himself. Why not address the issue of concussion-causing brain damage rampant in the NFL? Why not the media's, including NBC's, role in perpetuating and glorifying the "gun culture"? Why take the simpleton's route of blaming the gun for the action of the man?

It's been brought up. Now defend it.

I can see the spittle flying out of your mouth.


translation: I got nothin
2012-12-03 04:44:30 AM  
1 votes:

libranoelrose: There's a reason people don't just have a button installed on them that you can press to end their life.


that reason is, because we are not machines. But that is not an answer to my question.

"Everyone's a good, responsible gun owner until their life hits a bump." is obviously not true since the vast majority of gun owners don't kill themselves or others when their life hits a bump, and murder suicides are a very rare event. yes? no? why or why not?
2012-12-03 04:43:47 AM  
1 votes:

libranoelrose: Pray 4 Mojo: libranoelrose: UltimaCS: Pray 4 Mojo: What I do have an issue with is those laws being used to keep guns out of the hands of responsible citizens

Everyone's a good, responsible gun owner until their life hits a bump.

It's amazing how people can't comprehend this.

Not as amazing as it is that people believe it.

I think we might have hit a bump here.

I wasn't meaning to say that responsible citizens shouldn't be able to own weapons.

I was agreeing with UtlimaCS that it's easy to use that weapon responsibly until the human condition takes over.


Problem is... that's not what he or she said.

There are plenty of things in every home that will quickly and easily kill a person... yet... we all don't get all murdery when life throws us a curve.
2012-12-03 04:40:02 AM  
1 votes:

carnifex2005: Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.

People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.


Then move away, asshole.
2012-12-03 04:22:28 AM  
1 votes:

mediablitz: Mock26: Depending on the statistics you look at, guns are used 80,000 to 2,500,000 times per year to stop crimes. (The 80,000 number is from the Department of Justice, the 2.5 million from an independent study.) They certainly prevent more crimes than they take lives.

A quick and easy debunking of this 2.5 million number:

Link


Let me get this straight. You're using a relatively anonymous poster, who seems to be unaware that DGU's are rarely reported, on some forum to debunk the study?
2012-12-03 04:17:48 AM  
1 votes:

LaughingRadish: That squall you refer to is the concept of not giving an inch. Those who'd rather keep their rights are well-aware of when concessions are made in the direction of eliminating or restricting rights. It's very difficult to get them back again.


I agree that it would be very difficult to get those rights back again, because future generations would be saying, "Why the fark would we go back to the old ways? Clearly, those people were doing something stupid." Sort of like how there isn't much of a serious push to bring back slavery.
2012-12-03 04:12:17 AM  
1 votes:

mediablitz: Not saying that this justifies an armed populace... just that most of the violence problems are societal/cultural... doesn't matter if guns are controlled or not.

Switzerland has one of the highest RIFLE ownership levels, not handguns. And Switzerland has very high domestic violence gun usage stats:

Good reading

Switzerland is trotted out regularly, with people unwilling to look past the basic numbers.


I would read it... but their site apparently REALLY wants me to buy a new surround sound system... since the full screen ad re-opens every time I close it. Maybe my puter is broken.

The opposite end of the spectrum would be places like D.C. where gun violence was (still is) out of control... even though guns were illegal.

I had to submit to an extensive background check, take a safety class and demonstrate competent handling of the weapon when I got my CCW. I have no issues with that. I have no issue with regulations/laws designed to keep guns away from criminals. What I do have an issue with is those laws being used to keep guns out of the hands of responsible citizens (as they do in most cities in CA for example).
2012-12-03 04:10:28 AM  
1 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


Heart disease is the #1 killer in America...Perhaps while we're on the subject of banning things for their 'useless nature' we can go ahead and add ALL fast-food joints to the list.
2012-12-03 04:10:18 AM  
1 votes:

Huck And Molly Ziegler: If I were truly sure I was in the right when I defended gun culture, unlimited gun rights, etc., I wouldn't go yelping like a scalded dog every time someone suggests we might want to enact a law or two to dial that culture back a notch.
Instead, I would quietly say "Fark you, enact what you want, I'M the one with the guns."

Those who squawl like 5-year-olds deprived of a toy are telling me that deep down inside, they know their position is indefensible. The sad thing is, they're convinced someone is about to actually do away with the entire 2nd Amendment. Shallow-minded extremism, that is. No wonder they don't want a gun control debate; such a conversation would require nuanced thought.


That squall you refer to is the concept of not giving an inch. Those who'd rather keep their rights are well-aware of when concessions are made in the direction of eliminating or restricting rights. It's very difficult to get them back again.
2012-12-03 04:05:56 AM  
1 votes:

fusillade762: Mock26: People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.

OK, fine. People need cars. We do not need alcohol. And more people die from alcohol related problems than they do from guns. So are you not advocating the prohibition of alcohol? Hmmm?

You can murder someone with alcohol?


Ever hear of drunk driving?
2012-12-03 03:52:14 AM  
1 votes:

log_jammin: thegod082: I figured that eventually head injuries would come into the equation.

I'd say that since jealous guys have been killing their SOs long before football was around, head injuries aren't really needed in the equation.


Do you follow the NFL, or professional sports? I myself am not blaming it on head injuries -- I don't know the facts. But I had strong suspicions that the media, correctly or incorrectly, would eventually tie it to head injuries, because they've probably been the biggest ongoing story in the NFL for the last few years.
2012-12-03 03:49:13 AM  
1 votes:

thegod082: I figured that eventually head injuries would come into the equation.


I'd say that since jealous guys have been killing their SOs long before football was around, head injuries aren't really needed in the equation.
2012-12-03 03:46:15 AM  
1 votes:
I guess the idea that the terrible tragedy of a man killing his girlfriend and then himself (with a gun) providing a springboard to mention that too many other people die by killing themselves (with guns) is just more than some people can bear.

I seriously doubt that if the same guy had killed his girlfriend and himself by driving drunk and going over a cliff, and Costas had taken the opportunity at halftime to speak out against drunk driving, that an equal number of NFL fans and Farkers would be infuriated about his "pushing his agenda" against drinking, driving, or Miller Lite. Or perhaps they would. People get outraged by so many things these days.

Say what you like, but it's not wrong to point out that a lot of people use handguns to kill themselves and their significant others when they are depressed and/or angry. This is a bad thing. They might well find another way to do it, if the handguns were not available; however, it's undeniable that handguns make it much easier and quicker than if they had to use baseball bats or crossbows. That would be a bad thing too, and then people could be angry that Costas was making a halftime speech about people using crossbows to commit suicide, and they'd still look like insensitive idiots.
2012-12-03 03:42:48 AM  
1 votes:

Mock26: Depending on the statistics you look at, guns are used 80,000 to 2,500,000 times per year to stop crimes.


Are you SERIOUSLY going to use a disparity that large as fact?
2012-12-03 03:42:02 AM  
1 votes:

rugby-n-beers: Frank N Stein: mediablitz: I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is

By "one of the highest per capita gun violence rates" you mean 30th in the nation Link?

They do have the highest per capita rate of suicide, and the majority of those (also a nation leading percentage) are by firearm.


I posted the statistics. He can continue to pretend they don't exist. I get the impression he is all about willfully ignoring anything that doesn't fit his narrative/red herring argument.
2012-12-03 03:40:08 AM  
1 votes:

Frank N Stein: mediablitz: I live in Montana. There are very few gun limitations. Montana has one of the highest per capita gun violence rates, and suicide by gun rates in the nation.

Go ahead. Tell me how unfettered access to guns is effective in stopping gun violence?

/that's how idiotic your "argument" is

By "one of the highest per capita gun violence rates" you mean 30th in the nation Link?


No. I meant how often guns are used in VIOLENT CRIMES, just like I said.

Montana is 7th. 71.4% of all violent crimes in Montana involve guns:

Link Go ahead. Sort by "%gun"

Montana rates 5th in gun related deaths:

Link

Go ahead now. Ignore that. It doesn't fit your narrative.

Two thirds of all suicides in Montana involve guns, compared to half, which is the average in the United States.

Link

Go ahead. Ignore that statistic too. I realize neither fit your narrative, and discussing these issues frighten you at some basic level. That's the only explanation for your irrational anger. 

Now: do you want to calmly and rationally discuss this, or are you all about screaming and willful ignorance?
2012-12-03 03:38:33 AM  
1 votes:

Metalithic: ElwoodCuse: SumDumGit: And which political party that you don't like gets to say what those restrictions are?

The Supreme Court does, and even Scalia thinks there can and should be restrictions. Just not "absolute personal ownership" bans, like what was overturned in DC.

B-b-b-ut this is America! The constitution says every family needs at least one fully automatic machine pistol, just for huntin'!

/Or so I've heard.
//But switchblades and brass knuckles are illegal in most states, because, you know, they're like dangerous!



Keep banning stuff that kills people, don't fix the stupidity that caused it in the first place
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
www.sfgate.com
2012-12-03 03:37:54 AM  
1 votes:

logruszed: Pray 4 Mojo: There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.

The time and place to discuss the reality of a possible epidemic of firearms enabled violence must be when and where nobody is looking.


The time and place is when there can be a discussion...

Not when one person is giving me his unsolicited and unquestioned opinion during an entertainment/sporting event... and taking advantage of a personal family tragedy to ply his unsolicited opinion.
2012-12-03 03:37:44 AM  
1 votes:

fusillade762: Mock26: People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.

OK, fine. People need cars. We do not need alcohol. And more people die from alcohol related problems than they do from guns. So are you not advocating the prohibition of alcohol? Hmmm?

You can murder someone with alcohol?


My ex wife drove me to drink. So yes.
2012-12-03 03:37:11 AM  
1 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.


How much are you paying a month in gun insurance and where did you take your gun test.

Look, I'm a firearms owner o.k. but your comparison is the kind of farktard ammunition people who are absolutely against firearms ownership use as an example of everyone who owns a gun. It's poorly thought out rationalizations like those that make us all look as stupid as you. The NRA currently wants people to believe that any sort of legislation and registration and mandatory training (all of which would actually make them somewhat like cars) would somehow lead to the end of western liberty and civilization.

This is the same group that used Charlton Heston, when he was suffering from dementia and forgot that he once loudly stood for registration and sensible gun laws, as a spokesman.

So go back to your cellar and polish your Taurus and Kel-Tec collection and STFU.
2012-12-03 03:34:51 AM  
1 votes:

Mock26: People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.

OK, fine. People need cars. We do not need alcohol. And more people die from alcohol related problems than they do from guns. So are you not advocating the prohibition of alcohol? Hmmm?


You can murder someone with alcohol?
2012-12-03 03:31:24 AM  
1 votes:

carnifex2005: Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.

People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.


OK, fine. People need cars. We do not need alcohol. And more people die from alcohol related problems than they do from guns. So are you not advocating the prohibition of alcohol? Hmmm?
2012-12-03 03:30:38 AM  
1 votes:
If I were truly sure I was in the right when I defended gun culture, unlimited gun rights, etc., I wouldn't go yelping like a scalded dog every time someone suggests we might want to enact a law or two to dial that culture back a notch.
Instead, I would quietly say "Fark you, enact what you want, I'M the one with the guns."

Those who squawl like 5-year-olds deprived of a toy are telling me that deep down inside, they know their position is indefensible. The sad thing is, they're convinced someone is about to actually do away with the entire 2nd Amendment. Shallow-minded extremism, that is. No wonder they don't want a gun control debate; such a conversation would require nuanced thought.

By the way, I'm fine with a gun or two around the home, office, whatever, for personal defense. I think that's what the 2nd Amendment endorses. There are bad guys out there. (I'd have one myself, but I don't like loud noises.) (Or death.) Unfortunately, there's no law that could have prevented what happened to the Chiefs player. That was a mental thing.
2012-12-03 03:30:05 AM  
1 votes:

libranoelrose: XplodedSynapses: He obviously was intent on ending her life and his own.

You don't know much about this story, then.


i must not. i read what i could find on the 'nets. Have i missed something?
2012-12-03 03:29:31 AM  
1 votes:

Serious Black: I'm planning on going out and buying myself some SWAT-grade armor, a Stinger missile launcher, and a bunch of Uzis with radioactive bullets when I get home from work. That seems to be the best way to protect myself at this point with everyone going gonzo for guns lately.


Pussy. I'm getting a nuke. MAD, FTW!
2012-12-03 03:28:32 AM  
1 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: There's a time and a place... this was neither.

Classy Bob... classy.


The time and place to discuss the reality of a possible epidemic of firearms enabled violence must be when and where nobody is looking.
2012-12-03 03:28:07 AM  
1 votes:

Blame Hofmann: Frank N Stein: mediablitz: This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder

Evidence like that, as well as evidence of areas with relatively high rates of gun ownership and low rates of gun violence show that a lot (or most) gun violence in the US is ultimately a product of people living in poor socioeconomic conditions, and that it's simplistic to think that gun bans or high rates of gun ownership, in themselves, will make an area far less or more dangerous.

BUT, preventing unstable or dangerous people from obtaining handguns cannot be unreasonable, whatever sort of culture they come from. So there has to be some amount of gun ownership restriction, although I wouldn't know what that amount is.


I agree. The system we have now, in which people with mental or psychological disorders are prevented from legally owning a firearm, would work much better if we had a mental health system worth a damn in this country.
2012-12-03 03:27:02 AM  
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.


Lots of people needlessly die due to our car culture.
Lots of people needlessly die due to our smoking culture.
Lots of people needlessly die due to our fast food culture.
Lots of people needlessly die due to our drinking culture.
etc.
2012-12-03 03:19:35 AM  
1 votes:
Gun huh?

Hadn't thought about that... better write it down.
www.cardboardconnection.com
2012-12-03 03:19:09 AM  
1 votes:
"Gun culture" is derived largely from the video games and movies that advertise during football and pay Costas's salary. Also some of the shows on his network. Culture comes from media. But I doubt we'll hear much bed wetting about restricting the first amendment.
2012-12-03 03:14:36 AM  
1 votes:

naptapper: thegod082: naptapper: Oh, OK - so it's fine with you if anyone spouts off anything as long as it's not actually during the game. Hmm. So if someone who is deeply religious, say Tim Tebow for example, got on a halftime show and told people how they were going to Hell, that would be OK with you?

It's all about the time and place. I don't want to be preached to by anyone when I'm watching a farking pastime.


Addressing your first point, didn't Tebow appear in an anti-abortion commercial that aired during the Super Bowl, which is a much bigger deal than a midseason Sunday Night Football game? And no, although I don't agree with his views, I managed not to lose my mind over it.

Second, and I believe it's very possible that you are a bright, informed person, I think there are many Americans who may not be as socially aware as you are. After 9 consecutive hours of football-watching, I think it's fine that Costas has five minutes to talk to a large number of Americans about real American issues that transcend, "Bill Belichick: Evil Guy Because He's Mean in Press Conferences and Taped Football Players Practicing" or "Why Isn't Tebow Starting? Jets Suck lol."
2012-12-03 03:08:47 AM  
1 votes:

HaywoodJablonski: Guns are for pussy-asses bed-wetters acared of their own shadows, nevermind dark people


Says the guy that lives in place that where an ID is required to purchase a butter knife.
2012-12-03 03:08:23 AM  
1 votes:

Frank N Stein: mediablitz: This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder


When did I mention handgun bans?

And why are you so over the top angry that anyone even WANTS to discuss the problem of rampant gun violence in the United States?
2012-12-03 03:08:16 AM  
1 votes:

Frank N Stein: mediablitz: This tired fallacy is a staple of those unwilling to discuss rampant gun violence in the United States.

I live in Chicago, one of the most gun-violent cities in America. For 30 years there was a handgun ban, and gun crime continued to rise. Recently, handgun bans were found unconstitutional, therefore the city had to allow them, although the permits are very difficult to get. Murders have gone down a bit, but again Chicago is still one of the most gun violent places.

Go ahead, tell me how handgun bans are effective in stopping gun violence/murder


Are you more scared of black people or Hispanics?
2012-12-03 03:00:40 AM  
1 votes:

God-is-a-Taco: Poo_Fight: Hey Blob Cutlas, When I want your opinion on weighty matters, I'll TELL you what they are.
Either way, go fark yourself you pompous puffed up talking head.

/Costas, the fact that Nicole Brown Simpson was unarmed certainly helped her survive the attack from a kitchen knife, didn't it?


lol. Costas has gained a lot of respect from me. Anything that angers fratboys is good for the world.


*Clicks on profile*

Jesus Christ, YOU'RE a FRATBOY!
2012-12-03 02:58:00 AM  
1 votes:

naptapper: Some people have a big problem with having a political agenda pushed down their throats during a football game. The problem isn't with the misguided beliefs but with the stage on which they were espoused.


It wasn't being pushed down their throats during the game; saying that implies, to me, that Michaels and Collinsworth got on a soapbox and were quoting Whitlock while neglecting their play-by-play and color-commentary duties. Halftime is different. I think making a social commentary during halftime of one of the most widely watched TV programs and thereby sparking debate is something to be applauded. The other pre- and postgame shows (Fox, CBS) are basically mindless, worthless drivel that does nothing but promote the NFL and its players. I also think that everyone should calm the fark down and stop being so defensive, regardless of which side of the argument you're on.
2012-12-03 02:55:27 AM  
1 votes:

Frank N Stein: puffy999: So, whether or not I agree with Costas, I'd say this was as good as any time to bring this up.

Alright then. Why did he blame the gun? Christ Benoit proved that a roided up strongman needs no weapons to kill his wife and himself. Why not address the issue of concussion-causing brain damage rampant in the NFL? Why not the media's, including NBC's, role in perpetuating and glorifying the "gun culture"? Why take the simpleton's route of blaming the gun for the action of the man?

It's been brought up. Now defend it.


I can see the spittle flying out of your mouth.
2012-12-03 02:50:10 AM  
1 votes:

carnifex2005: Pray 4 Mojo: Harry_Seldon: Bob Costa's was quoting a local journalist and nothing he said is wrong.

Lots of people needlessly die due to our gun culture. This seems to be an acceptable cost of business as usual in America.

Lots of people also die needlessly due to our car culture...

so... let's get rid of those too.

People need cars, people don't need handguns as every other Western nation in the world already knows.


You mean like Mexico?

Or like Switzerland?
2012-12-03 02:45:33 AM  
1 votes:

carnifex2005: people don't need handguns


Says who? You?

carnifex2005: every other Western nation in the world already knows.


Citation needed.
2012-12-03 02:32:33 AM  
1 votes:

SumDumGit: And which political party that you don't like gets to say what those restrictions are?


The Supreme Court does, and even Scalia thinks there can and should be restrictions. Just not "absolute personal ownership" bans, like what was overturned in DC.
 
Displayed 125 of 125 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report