Gun control conversation on last segment of WTF

OK, I know this is a REALLY divisive subject , and i am certainly not gonna say that Anyone is "wrong" for there Opinion, I just think the last segment was COMPLETELY unbalanced.

I've thought about this most of the day, even felt compelled to do a little post on Facebook about it. so , since i don't feel like rewriting the same point with slightly different wording, I guess i'll re-post what i put up on FB, as i feel it was something that i will be able to stand by pretty easily . But for the record, i'm not trying to start an argument or flame war, just offer another perspective.

Initial Post:

"kinda gritting my teeth with a stance taken by one of my favorite shows, "What the Fuck" last night. not sure what to do about it, but i venomously disagree with the last part of the show, and i don't even own a gun. however i still respect both gentlemen for there opinion , and will defend there right to say that opinion openly ........I just wish i , or someone, could have offered another side to the spectrum of the conversation...way too heavy on one end for me to think it was fair, at all ."

....and what would i add?

" It's an inanimate tool, i don't think taking away said tool legally would solve any problems with violence, that would only be paying attention to a symptom rather than trying cure the actual problem

"for example, look at Iceland...if the argument for taking away guns to solve the problem is true, then what happened there? :
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/iceland "

I also Added :
"the difference between Iceland, and anywhere else where guns are a problem? education in general : http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/Iceland/United-States/Education , just pointing out that, in America, there are places where creationism is taught as a standard...in PUBLIC school"

with my final point being :
"we are raising a nation of "worst case scenarios". then we blame inanimate objects they use in half-baked schemes . if we can't even come together on a high standard for education in this country, and tell the creationist to CREATE there own private school they could choose to go to , instead of indoctrinating kids to crazy left field regional influences during very crucial years , then we are fuct as an organized country. I WANT to be libertarian about education, but honestly, i don't trust states in this country to educate kids with common fucking sense, they keep a low standard now, what would they do with total state power over education? it scares me. but it is PEOPLE who scare me, which is the real problem, not inanimate tools . gun violence is just a symptom of a much larger problem. responsible people should not suffer for the idiots in this country . if they committed acts of violence with ANY other tool, would we outlaw that? would it really help? I'm sure that it would not , Just as Suicidal people obviously would still commit suicide, Gun or not, in fact, the gun only made it quicker, but if they were so distressed that they decided to make that personal decision, they would have found any plethora of avenues to complete that act, without any kind of firearm ."

Let me say again, that i am not trying to start an angry argument, or trying to promote some Pro gun Agenda, I just think that , if your gonna have an honest conversation about something of this magnitude, you should really have it be a full spectrum analysis of both sides, not just 2 people agreeing on the same stance. and again, I respect the Hell out of Josh Hadley, and Charley McMullen, and do not think they should have a different opinion. My biggest complaint is that the conversation was completely one sided ,and seemingly unfair in that sense . I'm not trying to say that MY argument is the "correct" one either , i just think there is a Yin to this Yang, it is NOT a B/W argument, and it is not something you can just chalk up to being either a strictly Conservative vs Liberal stance.

but besides this one Grip of mine, keep up the fantastic radio! and i will still look forward to every episode!

Haven't heard it yet, but I have a feeling I'm going to be agreeing with you (Josh has brought up the subject before and I found myself on the other side of it from him). I really like what you said about education - I believe that is at the heart of our problem with gun violence in the US; you almost can't discuss the one issue without bringing up the other.

I'm curious to hear this before I really chime in, though.

The plan when recording that segment was to talk about the people calling for the head of Bob Costas and not gun control outright, otherwise I would have attempted to get someone I was sure was on the other side, but I don't think that anyone here would be for firing Bob Costas for what he said on Sunday Night Football. I stand by what I said about guns and gun control and the gun nut culture that our nation (amongst others) proliferates. In all honesty though, I can't see how the debate would have gone any different had we had a gun nut on the show (and yes, that is the term I choose to use for good or ill). They would have attempted to refute the claims of McMullen and myself while not really moving the conversation anywhere, we would have refuted them and it would have been a standoff (a Mexican standoff to use an image from movies including guns).

This was not a debate about guns, when we moved into that discussion there was no debate intended, it was us giving our opinions, as I stated earlier, if I intended a debate, I would have attempted to balance out the panel as I have done in the past when a debate is likely to occur. This was about Bob Costas and the fallout from his remarks and nothing more... at least nothing more intended.

So, take that as you may, but I stand by what I said and I respect your dissenting opinion more then you will know, I just think it was misunderstood what that segment was actually about, it was about calling for the firing of a man that exercised his opinion on guns and those that wanted his head for it, I just felt we needed to discuss the gun nut culture of America to put it in perspective.

There were actually people wanting Costas fired? Wow, that's sad. He's a legend. Probably not the best topic to try to tackle in a short segment during a national football broadcast, but given the context of the weeks events, I understand why he wanted to talk about it.

Right off the bat, I DO NOT think Bob Costas should be fired. He gives a personal opinion on something he feels strongly about, and i think he should have that freedom, and it is not like anyone has complained about his Opinions before. Do i agree with his Opinion, especially about the Suicide? NOT AT ALL...But, that does not mean i want his opinion to be censored for those who are less tolerant of other peoples opinions. I personally think that saying a suicide would not happen if they did not have firearms is just cartoonishly silly, and people who would feel the need to take there own life will do it with or without a gun. but even as I completely disagree with him , i don't think he should be fired, or his employers stop giving him a chance to give his personal take on something ( he has been doing it for years anyway). perhaps the real issue here is how the Public seems to react so badly to things they disagree with? where as we can all have a nice conversation about these things without anyone getting mad, it seems most of America is not as reserved , and certainly not as tolerant .

Finally heard this. I don't agree with the constitutional argument that "gun nuts" like to throw around - it's weak. Unfortunately, it IS part of said constitution.

In the first segment, Charley says "I agree with freedom of religion 100% - it's a constitutional right."

Then, fifteen minutes later, "I don't think anyone should be allowed to own them."

I'm not trying to stir up any shit, especially considering what just happened. But I think that needed to be pointed out.

Living in Canada I can't comment too much on gun culture in America since I don't live there. But as someone who has used guns in the past (I don't own any now, we used to hunt moose and deer regularly), I lean more towards the more gun control needed side. Gun control is pretty well done here in Canada, and we have to go through several steps to get, own, and have a license for a gun. On one hand I think it does keep some people in check. On the other hand, I don't think it will cut down significantly on murders or killings. People are ruthless and they will find a way to get something, whether it's illegal or not.

However, I do agree with Iason that people who want to commit suicide will find a way regardless. Speaking as someone who has dealt with depression, I know that you don't need a gun to contemplate offing yourself.

It seems obvious that you need to make less guns and have less available options that people can use to kill each other. But then, how do you do that? I know it's an unrealistic concept, because once a human is given something, they don't want to part with it.

On the Bob Costas front, isn't that his job to give his opinion? He's a sport commentator, not a play by play guy.