The NRA says and does a lot of reprehensible things, but this is just nonsensical.
NBC sports anchor Bob Costas believes that Kasandra Perkins’ life could have been saved had her boyfriend, Kansas City Chiefs Linebacker Javon Belcher, not had access to a firearm. The CEO of the National Rifle Association, on the other hand, thinks the situation might have resolved itself had both Belcher and Perkins had guns.
CEO Wayne LaPierre made the case on NRA News, arguing that Costas, “wouldn’t have said a thing [after the shooting] if this woman had saved her life by having a firearm available from Jovan Belcher. He wouldn’t have said anything about it.”
LaPierre said “the one thing missing in that equation is that woman owning a gun so she could have saved her life from that murderer,” which is absurd when you consider that the “murderer” was her boyfriend and the father of her baby.
Is LaPierre implying that Perkins should have been holding a gun in her hands when the altercation took place? Should she have anticipated that she would need a gun? Should she have preemptively stuck a gun in Belcher’s face? How would she know a gun would save her from the father of their child?
Should we all be carrying at all times in fear that, at any moment, even in the presence of family, we might need it?