Speak Out: Should Bob Costas Discuss Gun Culture After NFL Tragedy?
The nine-time Sportscaster of the Year has caught tremendous flak following his comments during Sunday Night Football.
Bob Costas, the nine-time Sportscaster of the Year, has found himself in a maelstrom following comments on the country's gun culture during Sunday Night Football on NBC.
Costas, discussing the tragic murder-suicide carried out Saturday by Kansas City Chiefs player Jovan Belcher, quoted liberally from Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock about the incident.
In it Whitlock, and by extension Costas, decried the nation's gun culture as being responsible for too many deaths among young people and domestic partners.
Read Whitlock's column HERE.
There was immediate and explosive reaction on Twitter and on the Internet, including this from S.C. Sen. Lee Bright (R-Spartanburg): "These remarks that Bob Costas made are deplorable and without merit."
What do you think? Should Costas be discussing gun culture or gun rights on national television? Are guns to blame for tragedies like this one over the weekend?
Mark
11:33 am on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
If Costas thinks that gun control will end the violent acts man commits against others, then maybe he thinks that forks are the reason our country struggles with obesity.
Robert Kelly
8:33 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Ironically, forks are actually a big part of the obesity! I wish I could remember the details of a study published a few years ago, but the gist of it was that in countries where people eat with forks, and in the study, those people eat more at a sitting than people who eat with more "traditional" utensils. If you eat with sticks, you tend to eat more slowly, and stop when you have had enough to satisfy you. With a fork, you eat faster, and eat beyond the level of meeting your needs.
This might be irrelevant to this topic, but some of these stupid non-sequitor comparisons actually make the opposite point from what you wanted. Maybe guns actually do contribute to violent acts?
Terry
9:38 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
The problem is guns assist more effectively in committing violent acts than forks. No one became obese because someone else force fed them with a fork. No one robbed a bank with a fork (Woody Allen did with a gun carved from a bar of soap).
charles
11:44 am on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
If there was no gun he would have done another way knife, strangulation, etc. The gun was the choice he made to use. Everyone really knows this they just like to put the blame on something other than the sick individual who commited the crime.
Victor Lockey
12:09 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
HE SHOULD REPORT THE INCIDENT AND KEEP HIS PERSONAL OPINIONS TO HIMSELF.
tazz
12:10 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Its our consti.right to bare arms(2nd.ammendment)I myself am an avid outdoorsman I hunt,fish etc.its really sad what happened but putting the blame on guns is obsered & very ignorant,SHAME on you Bob Costas for saying such a stupid comment,that little baby is the real victim here,the NFL should set up a trust fund giving that child ALL her "Daddys" salary they were gonna over pay him anyways so it will gain intrest by the time shes an adult and ready for college...And Bob,next time you THINK you have something wise to say about our rights...just let it go man JUST LET IT GO!!!>>>YOU IDIOT<<< & shame on you too NBC letting him say such garbage during a football game ya'll are IDIOTS too!!!Grrrrrr
stanley seigler
12:45 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
yes, costas and all those who have the TV pulpit should advocate for common sense gun control...ie, you dont need an ak47 to hunt deer...
re: ...forks the reason for obesity.
OTOH how many home runs would ruth have hit w/o a bat...
both are dumb, meaningless, analogies...which tend to beg common sense questions...eg, do you need an ak47 to kill a rabbit (any object of hunting)
politicans should stop pandering to the NRA...the marketing tool of the gun industry...75 percent of NRA contributors are from the firearm industry. http://www.politicolnews.com/what-big-donors-get-for-funding-the-nra/#ixzz2E6ZEc97P
Tom Utley
1:45 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Bob Costas should say whatever he wants to say. That's what the 1st amendment is about.
People should own whatever weapons they want to own. That's what the 2nd amendment is about.
Even without the Constitution, we all have a human right to control our own life and to defend our own life, so no government has the right to tell us what to say, or what measures of self-defense we may employ.
r2ns
2:45 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Bob Costas is a public figure and should keep his opine's to himself unless the network gives him the nod to say what he does. He does have his 1st amendment right but the network is placing the viewer in a situation where people that disagree with him cannot obtain the audience Costas has nor give him their rebuttal. That being said, It's difficult for me to understand why anyone would give credence to anything Costas say's.
Tom Andrson
3:21 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Costas is a Liberal bastard just Obama, a killer without a gun is still a killer. Remember OJ what caliber gun did he have you DUMB BASTARD? Costas should be fired.
stanley seigler
3:05 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
dont agree with NRA-etals 2nd amendment interpretation...but that aside for now...
could someone explain:
1. why an ak47 is needed for hunting...
2. how is one going to stop the US armed forces with their ak47
3. why is there opposition to strict licensing requirements for certain classes/types of 'guns'.
and a Q from the article costos quoted:
'How many lives have to be ruined before we realize the right to bear arms doesn’t protect us from a government equipped with stealth bombers, predator drones, tanks and nuclear weapons?'
re: that little baby is the real victim here...
the babe, along with family/friends of belcher and his girlfriend...the baby and family/friends are the victims of our country's gun culture perpetuated by the for profit NRA and its supporters, the greedy firearms industry.
the firearms industry thru the NRA has tricked sportsmen and hunters (NRA sheep)...have made them complicit in their greed.
stanley seigler
3:47 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
re: Remember OJ what caliber gun did he have you DUMB BASTARD? Costas should be fired...
another dumb NRA created analogy...but in line with the irrational comparison:
FYI
stats on jack the ripper: 5 generally accepted murders; and 9 possible murders...total 14 murders with a 'knife' over 4 yrs (1887-1891).
in less than an one hour: Six are dead, and thirteen others hit by 'gunfire', among them an Arizona Democratic congresswoman...
costos should given a bonus for correctly depicting the results of our the nation's wild west, gun, culture.
r2ns
5:19 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
My first comment on The Patch and I get to read more comments of others. Wonderful... I realize the above verbal assault is not (I hope) directed at me. And the name calling only serves to make me wonder why I even get on this lap? I don't think either one of you are ''dumb'' as you make each other out. The other part I will refer you to your parents. I hope someone will let me know who we are placing blame on... NFL , Belcher, Costas, NRA, OJ, Baby, Niki Haley, Lillian McBride, Geo. W Bush, or 'J' all the above plus the American people?
Joanne H.
5:27 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
The gun used in this crime was simply a tool the perpetrator chose to commit his crime. Guns or knives or baseball bats or axes or pitchforks or anything else an individual chooses to commit a crime with is simply still just that -- the tool or weapon of their choosing. Clamping down and making gun control the hot button issue yet again as it is brought up so many times by those who are misguided and mal-informed does not change the hard facts. PEOPLE and their warped state of being is what causes crimes to be committed in the first place. The real issue at hand that needs to be brought up until those in power finally get it is this -- we have a very dire and critical situation in this country of not properly and effectively and comprehensively addressing mental illness. That is the core issue.
stanley seigler
8:43 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
re: The gun used in this crime was simply a tool the perpetrator chose to commit his crime...
well of course...so whyowhy do people keep stating the painfully obvious...think maybe because the NRA hoodwinked them...has set up straw men...ie,
placed an unrelated subject (people kill not guns) in order to divert discussions from the issue,control of certain types of guns...guns used to kill people.
the NRA has set up other straw men...in fact their whole campaign against gun control is manned by straw men...
now why would the NRA hoodwink the gun culture...think maybe they are tools of the greedy firearm industry bastards...
stanley seigler
11:22 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
PS
re: we have a very dire and critical situation in this country of not properly and effectively and comprehensively addressing mental illness. That is the core issue.
why do anti gun control NRA-ilks conflate issues...this is another example of straw man like arguments...ie, diverting the debate from gun control to mental illness.
indeed there is a dire need to address mental illness...but this does NOT excuse/mitigate the gun control core issue...
Robert Kelly
7:48 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
There is a difference between guns and those other things. The only time I was accosted by a knife wielder, I was able to successfully defend myself because he couldn't stab me from a distance. A shooter could have. You can run away from a pitchfork; bullets will catch up with you.
Many years ago a drunk at a park was going after a guy with a baseball bat. I took him down and held him until his buddies (slightly less drunk) took him away. Would I have been so brave if he was wielding a pistol? Probably not. Guns are different; they have no socially redeeming value and are good for one thing...to shoot people. In the hands of a drunk or a mentally unstable person, tragedy happens and there is nothing the victims can do about it.
Tom Utley
9:07 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Stanley, the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting or shooting targets. The entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is so that we can have guns that kill people.
maizenbluedoc
6:07 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
It's people in today's society, not guns responsible for the murders that occur daily. I was reared in the 1940's and 50's in an area of the country where practically every family had at least one gun, yet I didn't know of anyone being murdered. Granted this was in a rural area, but still urban setting. I happen to own 6 guns and have done so over a 60 year period. I do not approve of assault-type weapons as they are for one prutpose; to kill people. For those who want to ban guns, how is the ban on drugs gone so far? Banning guns will assure you that only those who want to harm someone will have them, while the honest law-abiding citizens will be the prey. Only when there is a normal family life established will the carnage decrease. Unfortunately, I am not holding my breath waiting for that change to occur. Blame the guy who committed the crime, not the gun.
George Grace
9:32 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Bob Costas never recommended banning guns, just tough licensing laws and background checks. I bet Gabby Giffords would appreciate licensing laws and background checks.
stanley seigler
4:25 pm on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
re: Bob Costas never recommended banning guns...
and neither have most of the gun control advocates...they only recommend a common sense approach to the sale of military type weapons...
the 'ban guns' rhetoric is irrelevant and is used because the gun culture cowboys have no answer to why an ak47-etc, is needed (and sportsman-like) to kill a rabbit...
Robert Kelly
11:39 pm on Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Let me try to understand...a television journalist expressed an opinion, and it was not on FoxNews? Clearly he does not understand that only FoxTV has been authorized to express opinions. Why should the country put up with Bob Costas expressing his opinion? Doesn't he know that ALL gun owners are part of the "well regulated militia" as specified in the 2nd Amendment? Surely we do not have nut cases carrying guns, because the NRA is foursquare behind EVERYONE first taking training and demonstrating skill and control before they can actually purchase a gun. Surely if guns were dangerous there would have been a product recall because we don't allow dangerous products on the market.
But then again, guns DO kill people. Sometimes it is an accident; sometimes it is in an act of anger, seldom is it actually in an act of self defense. Guns are INTENDED to kill people; that's what they do! Yes, sometimes they kill animals too, because that is a great sport...killing an otherwise wild animal...probably in self defense because you know how dangerous those deer and birds can be. It is for food? Really, considering the expense of the weaponry and the hunting trip, and the work/expense involved in the after-kill processing? Whole Foods is cheaper. Be honest; hunters hunt because they enjoy killing animals. People buy pistols and AK-47s specifically to kill other people.
stanley seigler
11:09 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
re: 'ALL gun owners are part of the "well regulated militia" as specified in the 2nd Amendment'
you're a funny man...but as you know the 2nd is actually irrelevant and the gun culture has little or no understanding re the 2nd and the times when it was written...at least there is no evidence they do...eg;
**twist the second amendment into being some benign amendment about militias and low-power weapons.
**the 2nd Amendment is about defending yourself from aggression from tyrants, whether they be criminals, gangs, police, or federal agents
**People should own whatever weapons they want to own. That's what the 2nd amendment is about.
**The entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is so that we can have guns that kill people.
**Every weapon is an assault weapon. That's the point.
the 2nd is another NRA straw man to divert the gun culture sheep (and the gun control advocates) from the NRA's sole motive: to increase profits of the fire arms manufacturers...aka greedy bastards who put profits over life.
Susan Breslin
8:52 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
It's interesting that most of the commenters who oppose Costas are angry and can't spell. Costas has a right to say whatever he wants. People who are in despair, or in a rage, are far more likely to inflict death rather than reparable injury if they have a gun. I don't think there's anything "sporting" about hunting with assault weapons. There's a savage (as in uncivilized) streak in American culture, and the gun control fight is a great example of it.
Tom Utley
9:10 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Every weapon is an assault weapon. That's the point. A baseball bat can be an assault weapon. A butter knife can be an assault weapon.
Less guns means more murder and more crime. Why? Simple: good people don't need laws to tell them what to do or what not to do. Bad people ignore laws. That's it. Gun control will never stop murders or violent crimes.
reg
9:34 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
I can defend myself against a butter knife, and against a baseball bat, too -- even without having the same weapon.
I personally could care less if people have guns, and I don't think anyone would really try to challenge that. Military weapons, though? Don't think so. Stupid idea, and only stupid people defend it, in my opinion.
The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify military weapons for ownership or usage by the public, though. It simply says we can have a well-armed militia.
Tom Utley
9:40 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
If you pluck the Constitution out of thin air without any knowledge about how it was created or why it was created, then you might be able to twist the second amendment into being some benign amendment about militias and low-power weapons. Even that takes some intellectual dishonesty; no, a lot of it.
But the truth is the 2nd Amendment is about defending yourself from aggression from tyrants, whether they be criminals, gangs, police, or federal agents. No "reasonable" level of protection or power is given, only that the people have a right to keep and bear arms, and it shall not be infringed.
JoSCh
11:41 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
I agree with your stance on the 2nd Tom, but "Less guns means more murder and more crime." is intellectually dishonest as well. Particularly given "good people don't need laws to tell them what to do or what not to do. Bad people ignore laws"
Unless you think that less guns = more bad people.
reg
1:05 am on Thursday, December 6, 2012
If there's any 'twisting' being done in its interpretation, Tommy, it's coming from you. Take your definition of the 2nd Amendment, for example - were there any gangs or federal agents when the constitution was written? And for you to make such insinuations, then are you really intelligent enough to trust with a military weapon? (I don't think so.) That's why we need to enforce the 2nd Amendment to its original intentions - which was to keep military weapons to the military. (Brush up on the history you say you know so much of, and read about how two different versions of the 2nd Amendment were ratified in different states, and of how those two had different interpretations based on grammatical and punctuation differences alone.)
JoSCh
9:42 am on Thursday, December 6, 2012
"are you really intelligent enough to trust with a military weapon?" - Is anyone? Is anyone in the military?
"If there's any 'twisting' being done in its interpretation... we need to enforce the 2nd Amendment to its original intentions - which was to keep military weapons to the military... different interpretations based on grammatical and punctuation differences alone." C'mon man. The simplest and very likely correct interpretation is as Tom says; the 2nd Amendment is about defending yourself from aggression and given the context of the times, government sponsored aggression. And frankly the commas don't change the fact that it says "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."
Jerry Stevens
9:48 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Costas can say whatever he wants to say so long as his employer is okay with it. As a potential viewer, I would prefer that sports announcers stay away from politics.
I didn't hear Costa's gun commentary because he's terrible so I already don't listen to him. His commentary was indeed a contentious political comment as the comments in this section shows.
I watch sports as a pleasant diversion. If I wanted political arguments, I could tune in to either of the two talk radio stations in Greenville.
Frank Hoesch
10:53 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
He isn't a sport type man and he isn't a spokesman for gun control. He should do his job and keep his desires to his self. He should be chastized for his unacceptable behavior not fired because his time iscoming to a close. This action may speed up his departure.
Wounded Warrior
11:37 am on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
This is isnt gun culture. This is a direct reaction to "thug culture". The two most heavily regulated gun cities are DC and Chicago. Also, two of the most violent. Correlation?
Belcher obtained his gun leagally and even with tighter regs this would not have been averted.
Michael k
3:43 pm on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
It’s curious how some people can be so passionate about the Second Amendment and so utterly opposed to the First Amendment.
JoSCh
5:01 pm on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Like!
Mainly because they believe that they can be evenly matched in a gun fight and they know their limitations in a verbal one.
Bob Costas' Toupee
11:52 pm on Sunday, December 9, 2012
Adam Freifeld
Vice President, Communications
NBC Sports Group
(212) 664-6772
Fax: (212) 664-6035
adam.freifeld@nbcuni.com
Turn up the heat on Costas! I did, but email is too long for this venue.
JoSCh
5:20 pm on Monday, December 10, 2012
That you posted this shortly after he spoke out against DUI is funny to me.
stanley seigler
9:12 am on Monday, December 10, 2012
re: Turn up the heat on Costas! I did, but email is too long for this venue...
would be interested in a short version of your email to NSC...
the heat should be turned up on the NRA, for using the gun culture to increase profit of the firearms industry...
NRA's straw men (eg, 2nd, people kill) divert the debate from their true motive: firearms profit.
gun culture wake up. the NRA uses your membership dues to hoodwink you.
stanley seigler
9:18 am on Monday, December 10, 2012
CORRECTION
NBC (sports group) not NSC
Robert Kelly
10:50 am on Monday, December 10, 2012
OK, I will write to express my support of journalists taking a stand. Guns do, in fact, kill. I don't get the NRA's inability to deal with that, but I am happy to see a respected sports journalist speak up.
John H
8:57 pm on Monday, December 10, 2012
Bob Costas can say whatever he wants. It’s a free country. However, the executives at the dictatorship at which he works may have a different opinion.
As far as gun control is concerned, I adhere to the philosophies put forward by the immortal, common, ordinary, simple savior of America's destiny, perennial presidential candidate, Pat Paulsen.
“Guns don’t kill people, bullets do." Therefore I advocate letting people own all the guns they want then make the bullets illegal.”