This was tone-deaf for many different reasons, but the one thing that stood out to me was its lack of common sense. I don’t know what kind of gun Belcher used - I assume it was a handgun. Few gun-control advocates think all guns should be banned, i.e., hunting rifles/shotguns are okay, it’s mainly assault weapons or concealable weapons…etc.
Well, even if gun control advocates had gotten their wish, the tragedy wouldn’t have been prevented. The murder wasn’t dependent on the concealability of the weapon or it’s ability to rapid fire: Belcher could have achieved the same ends with the kinds of guns pretty much everyone agrees should be legal - i.e., a basic hunting firearm.
Since that is the case, why make the tragedy out to be a case for gun control when the nature of the gun had nothing to do with it? And if Costas thinks that the issue is the availability of any kind of gun, which is the only way his diatribe makes sense, well, [b]come out and say so[/b]. Notably, he did not, because he knows how absurd it sounds.
In any event, Costas has always appeared to have an inferiority complex over his place in journalism and he has always wanted to validate himself as someone doing something more than covering touchdowns and interceptions. Let it go, Costas - you’ve proven you don’t have the timing, sense or gravitas to handle the job. Let someone else do it, and let’s get back to football.