Lott Guns Down Costas!

[bigrebnc1775]

Well Jillian what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

FWIW I put forth my theories on this is posts 10 and 16. They remain back there unmolested.

Let's be honest and boil this down to what it really is. For the Church of the NRA the issue here isn't gun control or the Second Amendment. Clearly it isn't, since neither Costas nor the source he quoted brought that up, and they know it.

The issue here is blasphemy.

In proposing their analysis, the crime of Costas and Whitlock was that they dared to defy the prevailing dogma, suggesting that it might be possible that The Lord Our Gun might not be all He's cracked up to be, that maybe He's even not deserving of the deification His followers require of not only themselves but the entire national discourse. And for that crime of heresy, they react exactly as, say, an Islamic fundamentalist would react to Salman Rushdie: the infidel must be silenced (or fired, or executed, depending which thread you read) in defense of the vicious attack on Our Load.

It's what religious fanatics do, and the prescribed resolution is always the same. And free speech is always the first casualty.

Ironically all this hair-on-fire foaming at the mouth about Second Amendment issues that were never brought up serves only to demonstrate the reverse of their supposed position, and validate everything that Whitlock and Costas said. The hair-trigger mentality: shoot first, ask questions later. Post first, read the commentary and the nuance later.

Except they stopped short by terming it "gun culture". They should have just come out and said "gun religion".

Nothing irritates me more than when someone dances around a question that has been asked. It pisses me off when someone jumps in an answers the question with bull shit. So shut the fuck up you never answered the question. You just danced around like a virgin getting ready to get fucked for the first time.

 

[Pogo]

Well Jillian what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

FWIW I put forth my theories on this is posts 10 and 16. They remain back there unmolested.

Let's be honest and boil this down to what it really is. For the Church of the NRA the issue here isn't gun control or the Second Amendment. Clearly it isn't, since neither Costas nor the source he quoted brought that up, and they know it.

The issue here is blasphemy.

In proposing their analysis, the crime of Costas and Whitlock was that they dared to defy the prevailing dogma, suggesting that it might be possible that The Lord Our Gun might not be all He's cracked up to be, that maybe He's even not deserving of the deification His followers require of not only themselves but the entire national discourse. And for that crime of heresy, they react exactly as, say, an Islamic fundamentalist would react to Salman Rushdie: the infidel must be silenced (or fired, or executed, depending which thread you read) in defense of the vicious attack on Our Load.

It's what religious fanatics do, and the prescribed resolution is always the same. And free speech is always the first casualty.

Ironically all this hair-on-fire foaming at the mouth about Second Amendment issues that were never brought up serves only to demonstrate the reverse of their supposed position, and validate everything that Whitlock and Costas said. The hair-trigger mentality: shoot first, ask questions later. Post first, read the commentary and the nuance later.

Except they stopped short by terming it "gun culture". They should have just come out and said "gun religion".

Nothing irritates me more than when someone dances around a question that has been asked. It pisses me off when someone jumps in an answers the question with bull shit. So shut the fuck up you never answered the question. You just danced around like a virgin getting ready to get fucked for the first time.

That's what "10" and "16" mean, Brainiac. You just quoted what you were looking for and looked right past it. I even linked them for you.
And you weren't even asking me anyway

The incompetent should not play with guns, nor the illiterate with words.

Asshole.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

FWIW I put forth my theories on this is posts 10 and 16. They remain back there unmolested.

Let's be honest and boil this down to what it really is. For the Church of the NRA the issue here isn't gun control or the Second Amendment. Clearly it isn't, since neither Costas nor the source he quoted brought that up, and they know it.

The issue here is blasphemy.

In proposing their analysis, the crime of Costas and Whitlock was that they dared to defy the prevailing dogma, suggesting that it might be possible that The Lord Our Gun might not be all He's cracked up to be, that maybe He's even not deserving of the deification His followers require of not only themselves but the entire national discourse. And for that crime of heresy, they react exactly as, say, an Islamic fundamentalist would react to Salman Rushdie: the infidel must be silenced (or fired, or executed, depending which thread you read) in defense of the vicious attack on Our Load.

It's what religious fanatics do, and the prescribed resolution is always the same. And free speech is always the first casualty.

Ironically all this hair-on-fire foaming at the mouth about Second Amendment issues that were never brought up serves only to demonstrate the reverse of their supposed position, and validate everything that Whitlock and Costas said. The hair-trigger mentality: shoot first, ask questions later. Post first, read the commentary and the nuance later.

Except they stopped short by terming it "gun culture". They should have just come out and said "gun religion".

Nothing irritates me more than when someone dances around a question that has been asked. It pisses me off when someone jumps in an answers the question with bull shit. So shut the fuck up you never answered the question. You just danced around like a virgin getting ready to get fucked for the first time.

That's what "10" and "16" mean, Brainiac. You just quoted what you were looking for and looked right past it. I even linked them for you.
And you weren't even asking me anyway

The incompetent should not play with guns, nor the illiterate with words.

Asshole.

Bitch I quoted everything you posted. everything you posted was irrelevant to the question.
Here's the question again and do not respond if you're going to answer with irrelevant bull shit
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

 

[Pogo]

Bitch I quoted everything you posted. everything you posted was irrelevant to the question.
Here's the question again and do not respond if you're going to answer with irrelevant bull shit [sic]
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

smh ...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bitch I quoted everything you posted. everything you posted was irrelevant to the question.
Here's the question again and do not respond if you're going to answer with irrelevant bull shit [sic]
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

smh ...

Can't answer the question?
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

 

[daveman]

I didn't say the Belcher incident was a defensive use. But this incident and others like it must be weighed against the hundreds of thousands to millions of defensive gun uses every year.

Amazing. "I didn't say X" -- followed immediately by X.

The two have zero to do with each other, that's my point. So this incident and others like it do not need to be weighed against blah blah. They're two different things. I would explain further but you've already left the complete explanation in the part of my post you already quoted, so I'll just leave it right where it is below and maybe if we do this over and over you'll eventually read it:

I did read it. And saying that defensive gun uses have nothing to do with gun culture is asinine.

But like I said, the fact that guns save more lives than they take doesn't fit your emotionalism.

You just put words in my mouth and then have the temerity to utter "be honest"??? No one but you and the bubble you're in said anything about "taking away people's anything".

Look it up: I've never said word one about gun control or gun laws. Not in this thread, not on this website, not on any website anywhere, at any time. It's not my issue. I am no more talking legal/constitutional issues here than Bob Costas and Jason Whitlock were. What all three of us are talking about is a social issue. That's my field and that's what I actually do write about.

Hey, maybe I should just remove the hypertext that denotes my quote so you'll think it's your words and actually read them next time

Really? You want to pretend you have no opinion on gun control? After your emotional rant on gun "fetishism"?

Do you really expect anyone to buy that?

 

[Pogo]

Really? You want to pretend you have no opinion on gun control? After your emotional rant on gun "fetishism"?

Do you really expect anyone to buy that?

Not until you figure out what the glaring difference is, no.

For a hint, check the last line of your own auto-signature. I can't help you more than that but your inability to comprehend (or fear of addressing) the distinction just ain't my problem.

 

[Pogo]

Bitch I quoted everything you posted. everything you posted was irrelevant to the question.
Here's the question again and do not respond if you're going to answer with irrelevant bull shit [sic]
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

smh ...

Can't answer the question?
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

Actually you've quoted two links to my answers at least four times now and you're looking right past them. Duh. Maybe you should try a less challenging game, like "Find your Foot".

But let's look back at your original question, shall we?

Well Jillian what exactly did costas mean when he said this?

- Does my name look like "Jillian"? Is the P silent?

That's right Einstein, I answered this question two days before you asked it, because you're hounding me on a question you asked somebody else. Despite that, I gave you the courtesy of a referral to those answers, you quoted that referral multiple times and yet you can't find your own nose with both hands and a road map.

Way to read the thread. But then that figures since this entire thread is based on illiteracy. I can fix a lot of things but I can't fix stoopid.

 

[Dot Com]

FWIW I put forth my theories on this is posts 10 and 16. They remain back there unmolested.

Let's be honest and boil this down to what it really is. For the Church of the NRA the issue here isn't gun control or the Second Amendment. Clearly it isn't, since neither Costas nor the source he quoted brought that up, and they know it.

The issue here is blasphemy.

In proposing their analysis, the crime of Costas and Whitlock was that they dared to defy the prevailing dogma, suggesting that it might be possible that The Lord Our Gun might not be all He's cracked up to be, that maybe He's even not deserving of the deification His followers require of not only themselves but the entire national discourse. And for that crime of heresy, they react exactly as, say, an Islamic fundamentalist would react to Salman Rushdie: the infidel must be silenced (or fired, or executed, depending which thread you read) in defense of the vicious attack on Our Load.

It's what religious fanatics do, and the prescribed resolution is always the same. And free speech is always the first casualty.

Ironically all this hair-on-fire foaming at the mouth about Second Amendment issues that were never brought up serves only to demonstrate the reverse of their supposed position, and validate everything that Whitlock and Costas said. The hair-trigger mentality: shoot first, ask questions later. Post first, read the commentary and the nuance later.

Except they stopped short by terming it "gun culture". They should have just come out and said "gun religion".

Nothing irritates me more than when someone dances around a question that has been asked. It pisses me off when someone jumps in an answers the question with bull shit. So shut the fuck up you never answered the question. You just danced around like a virgin getting ready to get fucked for the first time.

That's what "10" and "16" mean, Brainiac. You just quoted what you were looking for and looked right past it. I even linked them for you.
And you weren't even asking me anyway

The incompetent should not play with guns, nor the illiterate with words.

Asshole.

Good call. lil'rebnyc1775 melted down on another guy too. He's known for taking the internetz reeeal seriously.

 

[daveman]

Really? You want to pretend you have no opinion on gun control? After your emotional rant on gun "fetishism"?

Do you really expect anyone to buy that?

Not until you figure out what the glaring difference is, no.

For a hint, check the last line of your own auto-signature. I can't help you more than that but your inability to comprehend (or fear of addressing) the distinction just ain't my problem.

You fall all over yourself to blame America's gun fetishism...but utterly fail to place the blame where it belongs:

On Belcher himself.

Gun culture didn't kill the young woman. Thug culture didn't kill her. Football didn't kill her.

HE did.

But you just can't bring yourself to admit that, can you?

If he hadn't had a gun, he'd have used something else. He could have killed her with his bare hands, easily.

America has a hand fetish. And it's killing people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

smh ...

Can't answer the question?
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

Actually you've quoted two links to my answers at least four times now and you're looking right past them. Duh. Maybe you should try a less challenging game, like "Find your Foot".

But let's look back at your original question, shall we?

Well Jillian what exactly did costas mean when he said this?

- Does my name look like "Jillian"? Is the P silent?

That's right Einstein, I answered this question two days before you asked it, because you're hounding me on a question you asked somebody else. Despite that, I gave you the courtesy of a referral to those answers, you quoted that referral multiple times and yet you can't find your own nose with both hands and a road map.

Way to read the thread. But then that figures since this entire thread is based on illiteracy. I can fix a lot of things but I can't fix stoopid.

Dumb ass I started posting at post number 56 to this thread. I never quoted any of those post you're talking about and I'm not going back to reasd them.
And the Post with Jillian's name was made to Jillian you edited that post. click on the arrow and it will take you to a different post I made. And no dip shit you did not answer the question nor has Jillian.,

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Nothing irritates me more than when someone dances around a question that has been asked. It pisses me off when someone jumps in an answers the question with bull shit. So shut the fuck up you never answered the question. You just danced around like a virgin getting ready to get fucked for the first time.

That's what "10" and "16" mean, Brainiac. You just quoted what you were looking for and looked right past it. I even linked them for you.
And you weren't even asking me anyway

The incompetent should not play with guns, nor the illiterate with words.

Asshole.

Good call. lil'rebnyc1775 melted down on another guy too. He's known for taking the internetz reeeal seriously.

dumb com I love it when you agree with an idiot who is wrong it just make you look just as wrong.

 

[MarcATL]

WoW...the newbie Pogo totally and completely PWNED Politichic.

You're right brok, the term "Gun fanatism" is apropos with these freaks.

 

[jillian]

We have meet the enemy and it is you.


Of course, you couldn't be more wrong.

"Perhaps America's 90 million gunowners should be grateful to sports pundit Bob Costas for exposing how ignorant the mainstream media is about guns and gun laws in his now infamous 90-second halftime soundbite that serves as insightful commentary today.

Costas, quoting heavily during Dec. 2's Sunday Night Football halftime on NBC from a column by foxsports.com's Jason Whitlock about Kansas City Chiefs Jovan Belcher’s murder-suicide, ignored the crime and the victim, dismissed assigning blame to criminals who commit crimes, and opted instead to make an emotional appeal for gun control by exclusively blaming guns and the "gun culture" without mentioning domestic violence, NFL brain injuries, or substance abuse."
Bob Costas' Rant Exposes Ignorance of the Gun Control Lobby | Outdoor Life



"Bob Costas did a grave disservice to the world recently when he chose to redirect the discussion about Jovan Belcher’s murder-suicide to a rant on lax gun laws."
Bob Costas Gun Rant: The Blame Lies With Jovan Belcher, Not Guns


"I think it’s obvious if you’ve traveled abroad, and traveled to countries where they have legitimate gun laws,..."
Columnist Who Inspired Bob Costas Rant: 'The NRA Is The New KKK'


Let me know if you need more help with this.

Honey you're retarded sometimes. Costas specifically referred to "gun culture", not gun control. I know nuance is difficult for people on the extreme right, but there's a difference,

I'd like to return the compliment, but I don't use that term.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uOi7If0zW9s]Bob Costas on Gun Control following Jovan Belcher tragedy Sunday Night Half-Time Show Tribute - YouTube[/ame]

At :44, Costas: "Today, Jason Whitlock said it so well...".(that's 44 seconds, not .44 caliber)

At 1:09 'handguns do not enhance our safety, they exacerbate our flaws (then goes on to explain how they encourage shooting)'

he's right. but where did he use the term "control" or talk about legal limitations? are you people so wacked that you don't understand the yahoos are problematic?

 

[PoliticalChic]

WoW...the newbie Pogo totally and completely PWNED Politichic.

You're right brok, the term "Gun fanatism" is apropos with these freaks.

This post hardly adds 'Perceptive' to your resume, Marc-ey.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Honey you're retarded sometimes. Costas specifically referred to "gun culture", not gun control. I know nuance is difficult for people on the extreme right, but there's a difference,

I'd like to return the compliment, but I don't use that term.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uOi7If0zW9s]Bob Costas on Gun Control following Jovan Belcher tragedy Sunday Night Half-Time Show Tribute - YouTube[/ame]

At :44, Costas: "Today, Jason Whitlock said it so well...".(that's 44 seconds, not .44 caliber)

At 1:09 'handguns do not enhance our safety, they exacerbate our flaws (then goes on to explain how they encourage shooting)'

he's right. but where did he use the term "control" or talk about legal limitations? are you people so wacked that you don't understand the yahoos are problematic?

So, your analysis is that he supports gun ownership?

Would you use that judgment as the decider on a job application?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Honey you're retarded sometimes. Costas specifically referred to "gun culture", not gun control. I know nuance is difficult for people on the extreme right, but there's a difference,

I'd like to return the compliment, but I don't use that term.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uOi7If0zW9s]Bob Costas on Gun Control following Jovan Belcher tragedy Sunday Night Half-Time Show Tribute - YouTube[/ame]

At :44, Costas: "Today, Jason Whitlock said it so well...".(that's 44 seconds, not .44 caliber)

At 1:09 'handguns do not enhance our safety, they exacerbate our flaws (then goes on to explain how they encourage shooting)'

he's right. but where did he use the term "control" or talk about legal limitations? are you people so wacked that you don't understand the yahoos are problematic?

Jillian
what exactly did costas mean when he said this?
“If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”

 

[Pogo]

WoW...the newbie Pogo totally and completely PWNED Politichic.

You're right brok, the term "Gun fanatism" is apropos with these freaks.

Thanks, but to be fair it was low-hanging fruit.

I don't mean to beat up on anyone but when you post inane fallacies, you're going to get called on them.

::chomp::