Jason Whitlock: NRA is the new KKK

[d2jlking]

Its a lot deeper than the network. From the article
That is from a "Respected Sports Journalist"

Whitlock is known for his attempts to comment on sports and social issues simultaneously. Regardless, in addition to writing for foxsports.com he also has and does write for AOL, the Kansas City Star and ESPN. So attributing his work simply to one network, be it FOX, or ESPN, is probably not accurate.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[BigJon10125]

It may come out that it was, as the moron author said, as something with head trama. Seems kind of young compared to other players with this correlation though.

[rigel42]

Originally Posted by rigel42
Its a lot deeper than the network. From the article
That is from a "Respected Sports Journalist"

Whitlock is known for his attempts to comment on sports and social issues simultaneously. Regardless, in addition to writing for foxsports.com he also has and does write for AOL, the Kansas City Star and ESPN. So attributing his work simply to one network, be it FOX, or ESPN, is probably not accurate.

I didn't imply one network, more journalist as a whole. The majority try to "open peoples eyes" and advance their own agendas disguised as just the facts journalism.

[shadowwalker]

I guess this person has really never traveled abroad and in the 50s when I was in the middle east and many other countries I have seen his so called gun laws and I think he should read more history and give jaws a rest or maybe get a assignment to one of the countries that he says gun laws are so wonderful

[JoJoGunn]

I think that Jason should be asked the question of how many folks other than white people" belong to the NRA? I suppose all those black fellows who may be members should surrender their membership post haste, they certainly do not want to be associated with a "KKK-like" group now would they?

Whitlock is just another tool spouting off drivel that most of the uninformed and less intelligent people can understand. It's the never-ending-blame-the-object thing for all that is wrong with society these days, however, the statistics show otherwise. Chicago for instance. Most restrictive city for guns west of the Mississippi River and they have just as much gun violence as their Detroit and Washington,DC counterparts. So how well is the NRA doing in those places? Apparently rather well according to his theory. If they had a lock on the NRA in those places just think of the Utopia we'd see now.

[OldVet]

I agree. The "blame the white man" mentality is played-out at this point.

Not if you ask Al Sharpton. He's up for it any time.

[Secret Spuk]

WOW!... The NRA is the new kkk? I guess that makes me a black Klansman. The truth is the NRA has absoloutly nothing to do with the KKK. This is irrisponsible journalism. Yellow journalism. Shock Journalism. During the 60's I used to read the American Rifleman in the public library. For those who were not there, this was a very difficult time for race relations in the U.S. I remember an artical in a issue if the American Rifleman titled "The negro, and the NRA". In sum and substance the NRA took a stand on inclusion when it wasnt so popular. It may have cost them some membership... but they took a stand.

For those who dont know... Gun control is, and was Jim Crow law. A law designed to deny black Americans their constitutional right to bear arms and protect themselves. Just as there were laws to deny blacks the right to vote, own property, use public facilities. All these laws are horrible examples of an ugly past most of us would like to only read about in history books. Well all but GUN CONTROL. GUN CONTROL was wrong then and just because it's now all inclusive it's still wrong now. So pretty much Gun Control is the last vestage of Jim Crow.

The operative word in gun control is NOT gun... it's all about control.

[mprp]

I hate Pot-Stirring. Oh sorry, I thought I was in the Random Thoughts thread. Woopsie

[Bill340]

I think the Banning of automobiles would be a better Idea, there are more people killed with autos every year than with guns, And a lot of them were intentional.

[Cold Shot]

Of course it makes sense! 2 separate cases of professional football players murdering their significant other in a fit of rage. The point being that a gun wasn't needed in the first case, and therefore, shouldn't be blamed in the second case.

But then again, O.J. didn't get commit suicide. One of Whitlock's original statements was that without a gun present, both the player and the victim would be alive. Well, if you think the two cases are comparable, Whitlock would be half right.

Ok, I get what you're saying , but who cares? No one cares about banning knives. Knives are everywhere. There are tens of millions of people in this country that want to restrict gun rights, however. My point is, when people come up with the argument, "well O.J. killed a guy with a knife, so blah blah blah," it doesn't help the pro gun argument, in my opinion. Guns are much more effective killing tools than knives. Someone will probably argue this, but it's undoubtedly true. That's why people want greater restrictions, and this Kansas City incident just put guns back in the spotlight, and presented a forum for a bunch of public figures who don't generally have a reason to talk about.

[ksholder]

He shot her nine times too. As QKS pointed out, sounds like some anger management and steroid use issues? Give him a knife, poker, baseball bat...........same result?

No, different result. With the bat or poker, she would not likely have an open casket.

[d2jlking]

But then again, O.J. didn't get commit suicide. One of Whitlock's original statements was that without a gun present, both the player and the victim would be alive. Well, if you think the two cases are comparable, Whitlock would be half right.

Ok, I get what you're saying , but who cares? No one cares about banning knives. Knives are everywhere. There are tens of millions of people in this country that want to restrict gun rights, however. My point is, when people come up with the argument, "well O.J. killed a guy with a knife, so blah blah blah," it doesn't help the pro gun argument, in my opinion. Guns are much more effective killing tools than knives. Someone will probably argue this, but it's undoubtedly true. That's why people want greater restrictions, and this Kansas City incident just put guns back in the spotlight, and presented a forum for a bunch of public figures who don't generally have a reason to talk about.

We are clearly on different wavelengths. My one and only point is that the argument Whitlock makes (that they would both be alive if he didn't have a gun) is unfounded. The OJ comparison is valid IMO. I certainly don't advocate banning knives. Guns are more efficient killing tools, as for which weapon is more effective....well, dead is dead. Youre right that there are millions of people who want to ban guns. Whitlock's argument inflames those sentiments. It's a nonsense argument, but if a person is anti-gun and they hear his story it makes perfect sense to them. As for Whitlock being half-right. Not really, OJ didn't commit suicide, but that isn't because he used a knife to commit murder. He could have offed himself with that knife. He just didn't. People want greater restrictions on guns because they mistakenly place the blame for horrible crimes on the gun. That's a symptom of our biggest problem (IMO) as a society. No personal accountability. We don't blame the guy who murders his girlfriend. We blame the gun, have a moment of silence for him and his victim, then we get on with the football game.

Bottom line.....any argument that points out the stupidity of Whitlock and Costas using their position as journalists to advocate for restrictive gun laws is in MY OPINION a good argument.