Fire Bob Costas for what? Gun defenders disrespect free speech
Barb ShellyIt’s fairly astounding that some of the same people who advocate for the 2nd Amendment, even to the point of defying common sense, would have no respect for the freedom-of-speech principle unheld in the U.S. Constitution’s 1st Amendment.
I speak of the intolerant folks who are calling upon NBC to fire long-time sportscaster Bob Costas for suggesting in a halftime commentary on Sunday Night Football this week that the deaths of Kasandra Perkins and Jovan Belcher in Kansas City could have been avoided if Belcher hadn’t had access to a handgun.
Costas cast his lot with Fox Sports columnist Jason Whitlock, reading aloud a portion of a Whitlock column. “If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today,” Whitlock wrote.
As you see here, Fox News hosts and others are debating whether Costas should be fired. The inevitable “Fire Bob Costas” Facebook page has been created.
Fire him for what? Costas crossed no lines here. He expressed no racist sentiment. He didn’t use his platform to unfairly bully a person or group of people. Those are things that could get media personalities fired by their corporate bosses.
Costas was weighing in on an issue. As a commentator, he has the right to express a vigorous opinion, popular or not. The gun defenders will choose not to believe this, but Costas was actually expressing a mainstream view. All across America, people heard the terrible story of Belcher shooting his girlfriend and then himself and said to themselves, or to someone in the room: “If only he hadn’t had access to a gun.”
I’m not sure I even agree with the Whitlock/Costas premise in this instance. As more details emerge, Belcher, the former Kansas City Chiefs linebacker, comes across as deeply troubled. He seemed to be out of control on Saturday morning. If he hadn’t had two guns in his house, he may have figured out how to get one. It’s easily done in Kansas City, unfortunately. Or perhaps Belcher might have used another deadly method.
It’s all speculation, of course. Nobody really knows. I do think we can say with certainty that the United States would experience many fewer homicides if it were not saturated with firearms. You hear the stories of people who used weapons in self-defense and possibly avoided becoming victims. But they are vastly outnumbered by the gun tragedies.
Matt Henry
6 months, 2 weeks agoIt is truly stupid that people would suggest that Bob Costas should be fired for what he said. What he said was stupid, but that’s not the point.
It is equally dumb that Barb would do a column wherein she cites the first amendment defending Costas while (seemingly unknowingly) demonstrating that she has defined the lines that we can’t cross. I mean, it’s not like he said something she deems racist or he unfairly bullied someone. THEN it would be okay to look for his firing. Where did Barb stand on the Don Imus fiasco? Where would Barb stand if Costas got on the air and landblasted the black community and it’s commitment to violence in the things and people that define their culture? What if he did say that this is a “black culture” problem, not a “mainstream” problem? Would she be screaming about first amendment rights then or would she be calling for Costas’s head? We all know the answer.
Classic progressivism. What’s okay for me is not okay for thee.
William R. Nelson
6 months, 2 weeks agoWho said anything about firing Costas - except maybe the fringe element??
Costas, et all can say whatever his employer allows over the air. Big deal.
I do find this odd, though: Bob Costas, NFL Surrounded by Armed Security.
These mouth piece / talking heads often condemn that which they benefit from, and would curl up in a ball, sobbing, if left undefended from, say, an unruly stadium mob, if not for those men & women who are armed with firearms.
But that’s not hypocrisy…
Phil Cardarella
6 months, 2 weeks agoThe Gun Crowd are not unlike religious fanatics who want to kill blasphemers or apostates. It is not enough that they dominate their society. It is not enough to have the law tilted to their every whim. They must stifle dissent.
Of course, the need to silence the critic is a sign of the essential weakness of your doctrine — and a tribute to the effectiveness of the criticism.
Belcher might very well have strangled his girlfriend — Othello-style. Or — like most men who strike out in anger at the one they love — he might have been so shocked at his own behavior that he might have stopped far short of serious harm. She might have had a chance to run away or seek help from his mother.
Unfortunately, when you have a firearm involved, you cannot recall the bullet once fired. You find yourself — like Belcher — crying apologies that cannot be heard.
This is not a matter that can be resolved by threats to punish the person who commits a crime with a gun. Belcher took care of that himself. But, punishing the shooter does nothing to prevent the killing. To do that, you must limit the easy availability — especially of handguns. Gunsafes with timers, guns with trigger-locks — none of these would prevent the lawful use of firearms.
What conceivable reason is there for a LINEBACKER living at 54th and Crysler to feel the need for a gun in the house? Who was he afraid of? Or was it so she could feel safe? From whom?
Why must we all be hostages to these silly macho masturbation fantasies about guns?
Phil Cardarella
6 months, 2 weeks agoActually, Rocky, there is a rational argument for security guards — properly trained and armed. Especially in a society where every nut is free to fill his closet with semis and banana clips. And, every drunk in the stands could be packin’.
William R. Nelson
6 months, 2 weeks agoYour assumption being that those who’re not security guards or police are not properly trained and armed?
Gun safety is job one among fire arms dealers, ranges and trainers.
There’s an estimated 55 MILLION gun owners in the U.S. of A. Last year, 54,998,044 of them DIDN’T kill anyone.
Laws can’t fix stoopid. I’ll put my money on the vast majority of responsible, law abiding gun owners every time.
Bob Robertson
6 months, 2 weeks agoMs. Shelly,
According to the Missouri State Highway Patrol’s website, 4.4% of ALL vehicular wrecks in the state of Missouri in 2011 involved drunk drivers. If we take the drunk drivers OFF the road they no longer drink and drive. However, if we remove the weapons related to drunk driving (automobiles) about 95 people in every 100 are going to suffer because about 5 in 100 can’t handle the vehicle. Removing firearms is putting us law-abiding citizens in the same mold as if all automobiles were removed.
I’m all for supporting the 1st amendment, but let’s be fair. Hank Williams Jr and many other conservative personalities have been squelched by the media, or removed from endorsing products because they exercised their 1st amendment rights. The problem I see with Costas is that he will suffer no consequences, when in fact he should be removed from the broadcasting booth and sports reporting in general. I have NO problem listening to other people’s opinions, but I dislike it when they let their opinions cloud the facts.
Cain killed Abel, the rock did not do it. OJ Simpson did not SHOOT Ms Brown with a knife. Settlers in the Old West were not hanged with a gun. Murders/suicides are conducted with the assistance of tools & implements, whether that be hands, ropes, knives, bombs, guns, rocks, poison, what have you. Get off your soap box about gun saturation already. Punish the killer, not the majority of the citizens who are properly trained to handle the implement.
Now back to your non-support of the 2nd amendment. Please submit to me your address because I’m needing to raise some extra cash. Knowing that you have no firearms in YOUR home will make it much easier for me to raise the much needed funds needed to cover the shortfall that the government is creating in my personal/household budget. If you would like my address and want to test my ability to protect my family and home, I’d be happy to supply it to you or anyone else.
Thank you for your time,
Bob Robertson
Steven Fetter
66223
6 months, 2 weeks agoThe Chick Filet owner exercises his right of free speech, people organize a boycott and want him gone.
A sitting congressman gives his opinion on abortion, people want him and his party’s President candidate (who disowns him) voted out.
You disagree with any politician of color, you are labeled a racist.
It is what it is, a very rigid and angry world.
Guns will continue to be legal. So will abortion, birth control, Christmas, and most every wedge issue that people want to fight on and on and on… The right to dissent; that may be in real jeopardy.
Suzuki Ishikawa
6 months, 2 weeks agoSilly steven, the world today is “either you’re with us or we’ll crucify you”
Democrats are doing most of the crucifixion
Bret Wolfe
6 months, 2 weeks agoPlease watch as this represents how most gun owners feel about Bob’s remarks:
http://youtu.be/a5dBOR2V9nU
George Hunsucker
Northland
6 months, 2 weeks agoFor those of you wanting a “fair and balanced approach”, watch O’Reilly tomorrow night when he talks with Costas…..
7:00 PM, Fox News Network
Mark Hastert
6 months, 2 weeks agoGuns don’t kill people gun owners kill people. Thus there should be fewer gun owners…
I own guns but I don’t think that right should be unfettered. Guns are as much a responsibility (a potentially deadly responsibility) as a right and far too many gun owners are irresponsible. It seems that you meet people who happen to own guns and others that are owned by their guns as if the gun defines who and what they are. More and bigger guns don’t make you more manly. That you have to earn, not buy.
Joel Chaney
6 months, 2 weeks agoWhen Howard Cosell said: “Look at that little monkey run!” that was Howard’s free speech. He got fired for it. “We can’t blame Bob Costas… we need to blame his microphone for the words he used.” [I] don’t blame his microphone. That would be like blaming guns for the actions of a violent individual. No, clearly Costas’ actions are the result of a chronic, volatile mix of prescription drugs and alcohol and lack of self control.
Sam Woods
6 months, 2 weeks agoTo the crazy right, the very worst part about Costas is that he - and Whitlock - are right. If Belcher didn’t have a gun, he and the mother of his child would be alive today.
Xuni Leca
6 months, 2 weeks agoIn 2009, CBS fired Don Imus for his comments about the Rutgers Girls Basketball Team. That was free speech and he was terminated for it, which set a precedent. This is no different. Progressives/Liberals only like actions when they favor their agenda/emotions and go on the attack when they are expected to uphold those actions even when they are opposed to them. Progressives/Liberals/Democrats = “Do as I say, not as I do.”
Charles Purvis
6 months, 2 weeks agoIF no one had a car, there would be no deaths by automobile accident. We could save many multiples of the number of lives lost to guns every year. What’s that cliche that was so popular in business not so long ago, something about going for the ‘low-hanging fruit?’ Let’s go for it.
If no one had a swimming pool…..
If no one had a ladder…………
The list of things that takes more lives per year than guns is quite long.
But banning guns isn’t really about saving lives, is it?
Jamie Tine
6 months, 2 weeks agoI’ll tell you why he should be fired:
He Intentionally Undermined the Constitution of the United States, Showing himself as an Enemy of freedom, and insulted over 150,000 million gun-owning Americans. He also took it upon himself to teach everyone watching how to deflect accountability and blame inanimate objects for a human beings actions.
BTW, the NUMBER ONE and TWO WEAPONS OF CHOICE BY MURDERERS are BLUNT OBJECTS AND STRANGLING. SO, outlaw Louisville sluggers and hands while you are at it, they kill more than guns. Also, guns being used to thwart crime, as opposed to carry out crime in America, is 30-1 in favor of stopping crime.
What cities have the highest crime rates in America? Why the the Two Cities with Gun Bans. New York and Chicago, imagine that. He should be fired for pure ignorance and insidiously misinforming the populace, nefariously pushing a trumped up, anti-gun agenda. THAT’S WHY.
They fire people for insulting a 20 or less people on a Volley ball team.
Adam May
6 months, 2 weeks agoIt is ignorant to think that everyone who wants Bob Costas fired fails to support the first amendment. NBC is a business. In this case it was a business that was responsible for broadcasting SPORTS. Not politics. Many of us have strong political opinions and almost all of us get tired of hearing political propaganda all of the time. That being said, it is bad for a business to have one of their employees to do something that pisses off millions and millions of people. It is not that Bob Costas did not have the right to say what he said, it is that it was a completely foolish business move for him to make. He is a smart man. I am sure he knew that what he was doing was not his place and that it would offend millions, but he did it anyway. Now there are countless people angry at an NBC broadcaster, and one employee is responsible for it. Seems logical to fire him to me.
Steve Mcd
6 months, 2 weeks agoI hate to break it to all of you crying free speech, but Adam May is entirely correct. When you work for any corporation you are contractually bound by their standards and broadcast journalism is no different. Bob Costas was NBC’s paid time when he decided to say what he did. See think of it this way….any one of us could walk into our bosses office right now and flip them the bird. Technically that’s free speech right? The problem is the company you work for isn’t required to pay you for violating company policy, and if you did something like that, you would get fired, and rightly so. You don’t have to agree with what Bob Costas said, I know I don’t…but the difference is there are anti-gun people who understand that when you are on someone else’s paid time, the first amendment doesn’t apply to you….and Bob Costas should be fired for that reason alone.