Major League Baseball’s gun ban reveals how some sports reporters are clueless about real issues
Most sports reporters live in privileged sanctuaries where the world’s realities are but a hazy background to games, scores, statistics and players. And let’s be honest: Most of us would happily live such a life, if we could.
But sports reporters are still journalists. As such, they should be held to the same standards as all journalists and take the time to understand issues before commenting on them.
Case in point: Gabe Lacques of USA Today.
Lacques called Major League Baseballs reiteration of its no-gun policy a “no-brainer” in his Feb. 23 “Daily Pitch” column about how St. Louis Cardinals closer Ryan Franklin disagrees with the ban on firearms.
Lacques exposes his ignorance of the issue in this paragraph: “While Franklin clearly stated he uses guns in the sportsman’s sense and not for self-defense, here’s guessing his comment will draw the ire of anti-gun activists, particularly given the St. Louis and Missouri areas’ rank in various homicide rates.”
First: The policy is not a “no-brainer.” It says, “Individuals are prohibited from possessing deadly weapons while performing any services for MLB.” Does that mean the ban extends beyond locker rooms? If so, it is unconstitutional.
Second: What does using guns “in the sportsman’s sense and not for self-defense” have to do with a MLB players’ 2nd Amendment right to own firearms?
Third: Despite the abundance of statistical evidence, numerous articles, television documentaries, published studies, Lacques doesn’t understand that when you have more law-abiding citizens who own firearms, violent gun crime goes down. Saying Franklin’s comments “will draw the ire of anti-gun activists, particularly given the St. Louis and Missouri areas’ rank in various homicide rates” reveals he has no understanding of this issue at all.
The information is out there: Look it up.
As Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea wrote in his Feb. 23 blog, gun rights activists can point to the same high homicide rates as a direct consequence of gun bans and a justification for gun ownership – and back it up with statistics time after time, place after place.
“But then again,” Codrea writes, “we’re dealing with people who think mandated defenselessness is ‘smart.'”