We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Bob Costas gun control

The issue isn't really about gun control though. The issue is an on air personality abusing their position to present their opinions on matters not related to what they were hired to do.
 
RonInThornton said:
The issue isn't really about gun control though. The issue is an on air personality abusing their position to present their opinions on matters not related to what they were hired to do.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
RonInThornton said:
The issue isn't really about gun control though. The issue is an on air personality abusing their position to present their opinions on matters not related to what they were hired to do.
Click to expand...

My feelings on Bob Costas have already been put out there. I can't stand him and it was way out of line in my opinion.
 
Rush Limbaugh does have his place for giving his views but so does Costas. Like it or not, NBC pays him to give his opinion just like Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman, Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, and any other talking head. Granted, they are mostly sports related but Costas has the medium and reasonable opinion to share whatever fits his time slot.

Again, people attack anything that differs from the opinion they happen to share, which is, in my opinion, what is happening here. I don't care about how painstaking yours or anyone else's process is for purchasing a gun. It's not my thing. Place those restrictions on purchasing golf equipment, maybe I become what I so desperately despise.

Just because you are adamant that you should be able to own a firearm and you want to voice your opinion supporting the fact that you have that right, don't oppress someone else's right to have a differing opinion.

It goes both ways!
 
Bob Costas is a sports broadcaster and should stick to that while doing a sports broadcast. What's next? Troy Aikman talking about abortion during the game? It would be the same thing no?
 
I wonder if NBC is asking Costas for money back from last night then because he essentially gave Jason Whitlock's opinion:alien:
 
sixcat said:
Rush Limbaugh does have his place for giving his views but so does Costas. Like it or not, NBC pays him to give his opinion just like Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman, Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, and any other talking head. Granted, they are mostly sports related but Costas has the medium and reasonable opinion to share whatever fits his time slot.

Again, people attack anything that differs from the opinion they happen to share, which is, in my opinion, what is happening here. I don't care about how painstaking yours or anyone else's process is for purchasing a gun. It's not my thing. Place those restrictions on purchasing golf equipment, maybe I become what I so desperately despise.

Just because you are adamant that you should be able to own a firearm and you want to voice your opinion supporting the fact that you have that right, don't oppress someone else's right to have a differing opinion.

It goes both ways!
Click to expand...

For the record, I am in favor of very stringent gun control, countries that have banned handguns have lower violent crime rates. However, that is my personal opinion and if I'm being paid to speak about Database administration I am certainly not going to go into a diatribe on gun control while lecturing on the subject.
Hannity, Limbaugh and Olberman are all paid to give their opinions on social and political issues, Costas on the other hand, was being paid to broadcast sports, not give his opinion on a social or political issue. It was halftime, not meet the press or McNeil Leher.

It isn't about "Oppressing his opinion" it's about him expressing it in an inappropriate venue.
 
RonInThornton said:
For the record, I am in favor of very stringent gun control, countries that have banned handguns have lower violent crime rates. However, that is my personal opinion and if I'm being paid to speak about Database administration I am certainly not going to go into a diatribe on gun control while lecturing on the subject.
Hannity, Limbaugh and Olberman are all paid to give their opinions on social and political issues, Costas on the other hand, was being paid to broadcast sports, not give his opinion on a social or political issue. It was halftime, not meet the press or McNeil Leher.

It isn't about "Oppressing his opinion" it's about him expressing it in an inappropriate venue.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Rep for you sir.
 
that's exactly the point Ron. There's usually a time and place for everything. but last night did not seem to be it.
 
blackjack said:
I couldn't believe what he was saying and his ignorance. Not a fan!
Click to expand...

I don't think the ignorance was from his opinion. It was from the time and place in which he chose to express that opinion.
 
DevRickus said:
Bob Costas is a sports broadcaster and should stick to that while doing a sports broadcast. What's next? Troy Aikman talking about abortion during the game? It would be the same thing no?
Click to expand...

That would certainly be Aikman's right to do so. It would also be my right to change the channel as well as Fox's right to take any disciplinary action necessary under the term's of their contract.

If you can't see the difference between Costas' position and Aikman's position within the realm of media, we can just agree to disagree.

Again, I don't understand why people are placing this squarely on Costas. He simply brought attention to a national columnist from Kansas City, with direct knowledge of the people involved, who had written an article about gun control. Costas did however, make no effort to hide his feelings about the subject. Does that make him wrong? In my opinion, no. If you choose to get angry about what he says or anyone else for that matter, that becomes a "you" problem.

You choose your own emotion! You can also choose to change the channel.
 
I'm not angry over it. I just think it was inappropriate
 
sixcat said:
That would certainly be Aikman's right to do so. It would also be my right to change the channel as well as Fox's right to take any disciplinary action necessary under the term's of their contract.

If you can't see the difference between Costas' position and Aikman's position within the realm of media, we can just agree to disagree.

Again, I don't understand why people are placing this squarely on Costas. He simply brought attention to a national columnist from Kansas City, with direct knowledge of the people involved, who had written an article about gun control. Costas did however, make no effort to hide his feelings about the subject. Does that make him wrong? In my opinion, no. If you choose to get angry about what he says or anyone else for that matter, that becomes a "you" problem.

You choose your own emotion! You can also choose to change the channel.
Click to expand...

What does changing the channel have to do with the fact that Bob Costas used his position to get on a soapbox and talk about something that he has no business talking about during a football game? He wants to talk about it on any of his shows that he has, fine. He is absolutely entitled to his opinion. I fail to see why you are missing the point that we don't have a problem with his opinion, it's where he chose to express it.
 
RonInThornton said:
For the record, I am in favor of very stringent gun control, countries that have banned handguns have lower violent crime rates. However, that is my personal opinion and if I'm being paid to speak about Database administration I am certainly not going to go into a diatribe on gun control while lecturing on the subject.
Hannity, Limbaugh and Olberman are all paid to give their opinions on social and political issues, Costas on the other hand, was being paid to broadcast sports, not give his opinion on a social or political issue. It was halftime, not meet the press or McNeil Leher.

It isn't about "Oppressing his opinion" it's about him expressing it in an inappropriate venue.
Click to expand...


I disagree completely but can respect where you may have that opinion. My wife happens to share your opinion.

Costas always gives commentary concerning happenings inside the world of sports during halftime of SNF. The topic he chose to speak about this week just happened to cross over into political waters. It is still a sports story concerning the growing trend of professional athletes and guns.

Should ESPN not be allowed to do a story concerning gay's in professional sports? Would that not be equal to the task?
 
RonInThornton said:
For the record, I am in favor of very stringent gun control, countries that have banned handguns have lower violent crime rates. However, that is my personal opinion and if I'm being paid to speak about Database administration I am certainly not going to go into a diatribe on gun control while lecturing on the subject.
Hannity, Limbaugh and Olberman are all paid to give their opinions on social and political issues, Costas on the other hand, was being paid to broadcast sports, not give his opinion on a social or political issue. It was halftime, not meet the press or McNeil Leher.

It isn't about "Oppressing his opinion" it's about him expressing it in an inappropriate venue.
Click to expand...
Ok. In the4 years after the United Kingdom banned handguns gun crimes rose by 40%..... Since 1996 Australia's laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun in defence,armed robberies rose by 51%.. Just saying.
 
Guys before this gets out of hand, let's remember this is not the debate room. If you want to debate gun control please take it up in the Debate Room.
 
sixcat said:
I disagree completely but can respect where you may have that opinion. My wife happens to share your opinion.

Costas always gives commentary concerning happenings inside the world of sports during halftime of SNF. The topic he chose to speak about this week just happened to cross over into political waters. It is still a sports story concerning the growing trend of professional athletes and guns.

Should ESPN not be allowed to do a story concerning gay's in professional sports? Would that not be equal to the task?
Click to expand...

They can absolutely report the story and discuss it. Where I would have a problem is if one of the anchors went off on a soapbox on how he hates gay people and thinks they ruined the sanctity of marriage or vice versa.
 
ddec said:
Guys before this gets out of hand, let's remember this is not the debate room. If you want to debate gun control please take it up in the Debate Room.
Click to expand...
Yep. I will no longer comment on gun control in here. Sorry guys.
 
1.Wrong place & time to express his opinion
2.People kill has always happened will continue to happen weather it is guns,knifes,bats rocks etc.
don't own a gun don't plan to but it still is my right to protect my self don't take that away from me jmo...
 
sixcat said:
I disagree completely but can respect where you may have that opinion. My wife happens to share your opinion.

Costas always gives commentary concerning happenings inside the world of sports during halftime of SNF. The topic he chose to speak about this week just happened to cross over into political waters. It is still a sports story concerning the growing trend of professional athletes and guns.

Should ESPN not be allowed to do a story concerning gay's in professional sports? Would that not be equal to the task?
Click to expand...

Depends on the circumstances. If they are doing a show about gay athletes fine, it's the topic of the show. If however, a commentator comes out in the middle of a sporting event and gives his opinion pro or con on the issue, then yes, I think it would be inappropriate.
 
DevRickus said:
What does changing the channel have to do with the fact that Bob Costas used his position to get on a soapbox and talk about something that he has no business talking about during a football game? He wants to talk about it on any of his shows that he has, fine. He is absolutely entitled to his opinion. I fail to see why you are missing the point that we don't have a problem with his opinion, it's where he chose to express it.
Click to expand...

Let me make sure I understand since you are choosing to get angry over my differing opinion. In no way shape or form do I have an issue with what Mr. Costas said, nor do I have issue with where or when he chose to state his opinion. It is his opinion. I am afforded the opportunity to get on this forum and state my opinion just the same way you have the right to do the same. He happens to have a larger, more visible forum.

Does that make him wrong? In my opinion, no!
 
sixcat said:
Let me make sure I understand since you are choosing to get angry over my differing opinion. In no way shape or form do I have an issue with what Mr. Costas said, nor do I have issue with where or when he chose to state his opinion. It is his opinion. I am afforded the opportunity to get on this forum and state my opinion just the same way you have the right to do the same. He happens to have a larger, more visible forum.

Does that make him wrong? In my opinion, no!
Click to expand...

Who is angry out of curiosity? Dont be the internet guy that claims everyone that differs in opinion on angry. And maybe go back and read what I said. He absolutely has the right to his opinion. I am allowed to disagree with it right? I, and most people in the this thread, disagree with where he chose to express it.
 
I don't think ANYONE is getting angry, just discussing both sides of it. Disagreeing doesn't automatically mean angry IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top