I see my conservative, gun-loving friends are up in arms about Bob Costas interrupting their fucking football to preach about gun violence. Now, I haven't seen or heard one word of what Costas had to say -- and in general I'm of a mind that I don't want politics mixed with my sports or my rock concerts, etc -- but I will still applaud him for having the balls to try to interject some sanity into this situation, albeit likely falling on deaf ears.
What really burns my ass is the assertion that Belcher could have as easily killed his girlfriend and himself if he didn't have a gun. Bullshit! You can make a snap, rash, out-of-your-mind decision to kill someone and if you have a gun handy, you can execute that thought without a chance to take it back. A bullet is much more sudden and deadly than your other options. (and by the way, I'm not going to expound on the thought that guns don't kill people, just like nuclear weapons don't kill people -- leave that for another day) With a gun, especially the semi-automatic favorites of today, you can kill someone with the second or third bullet fired less than a second after the first...no time for it to sink in what you've done before it's too late.
If all you have at your disposal is a knife or your bare hands, for instance, it's a whole lot more personal and difficult to fully and completely carry out your momentary insane instinct to kill someone. You have to thrust that knife into their body from a very close distance and likely will have to repeat the act of stabbing. And strangling someone is even more up close and personal and time consuming. All the time these options take is time you might come to your senses and stop; and then instead of remorsefully killing yourself for what you've done, your remorse might actually help you save that person's life, to say nothing of your own.
So just color me disappointed, but not the least bit surprised, that the people who most need to hear an opposing opinion on this matter heard nothing but a dog whistle warning about taking away their god-damn guns. They're selfish and always will be...they'd rather have their guns that ever contemplate what a safer world it would be for everyone, not just them and their loved ones, if their were a whole lot less of them out there (even though I realize we're long beyond the point of return)
Just to prove the point (although some people are allergic to logic) I'll give you two scenarios: Scenario one, two people are together and neither of them has a gun. Scenario two, two people are together and at least one of them has a gun. In which scenario is someone much more likely to die? And if both people have guns, you're much more likely to die than you are safer. And don't give me that shit about people being able to make mature decisions.
