7 comments Guns Don't Kill People, the Olympic Shooting Events Do

I have created a BotB Yahoo Fantasy Football League if anyone cares to join. There should be some rule changes this year as compared to last year's league. Either way, the league ID is 250429 and the password is "eckstein." I have also created a College Football Yahoo Pick 'Em league if anyone cares to join that league. The league ID is 5656 and the password is "asu."

Filip Bondy is on fire right now in discussing the Olympics. He has accused NBC of whoring out the women's volleyball players, blamed Ryan Lochte for costing the United States a gold medal, and cried out for a male swimming star. Today, Bondy has an issue with the shooting events at the Olympics. He doesn't have an issue with the shooting events because of the shooting in Aurora, but mostly he has an issue with the Olympic shooting events because it constantly reminds us of the shooting in Aurora. In related news, Filip Bondy should also want to ban violent movies or any movie that where a character uses a gun if he is afraid any use of firearms will remind the United States of the Aurora shootings.

I’m not quite knee-jerk enough to think there is some direct correlation between the guns employed by James Holmes in Colorado and the ones used by sharpshooting Olympians here in London.

Bondy isn't knee-jerk enough to believe there is a direct correlation, but he believes there is enough of a direct correlation that shooting events send the wrong message to the world about gun violence. So he isn't knee-jerk enough to believe there is a direct correlation, except he sort of is.

But long before those terrible shootings in Aurora, and thousands of other terrible shootings around the world, I have felt there is no place for such competitions at the Olympics.

See Filip Bondy has always felt this way, he just forgot to mention it. By the way, I always knew the St. Louis Cardinals would win the World Series last year, but I just didn't tell anyone I knew this.

There are three very different reasons for this, all compelling.

These are all compelling reasons, if Filip doesn't say so himself. He's the one creating the reasons so I would hope he finds them compelling.

First, it sends the wrong message.

Absolutely true. Guns are illegal throughout the world, aren't they? What if the Olympics had a Cocaine Cutting event? Or a Drunk Driving Challenge? Having a shooting competition where the competitors shoot at humans using illegal firearms is absolutely reprehensible. Because, that's what the shooting competition involving illegal firearms consists of right? Otherwise, a competition featuring legal guns shooting at targets in a controlled environment doesn't seem like it sends a bad message.

While the Olympics may have been founded originally around competitions based on soldiering, it is not what they now represent. They are supposed to be a respite from war, not a symbol or depiction of battle.

I never realized that skeet shooting presented such a strong depiction of battle. I must have missed the part of World War II where soldiers would use rifles to shoot at opposing soldiers as they lift off from the ground into the air as if they were Superman.

Furthermore, shooting is simply not enough of a sport to be included as a sport.

This isn't a compelling reason. This is an opinion. Simply saying "shooting isn't a sport" doesn't compel me to get rid of shooting as a sport in the Summer Olympics. It's an opinion. An opinion isn't a compelling reason unless it is backed up with compelling evidence. Filip has no such compelling evidence.

It is a very difficult skill to hold a rifle steady under the weight and pressure of competition. But then it is also a very difficult skill to win a staring contest without blinking.

Because holding a gun and shooting it during a competition is apparently the same thing as having a staring contest. They are synonymous in the mind of Filip Bondy. Perhaps Filip has it all backwards and staring contests could be an Olympic event.

Any sport that does not really fit into a category of the Games’ Latin motto: Citius, Altius, Fortius (Faster, Higher, Stronger) has no place in the Olympics.

Wouldn't this mean that diving could not be an Olympic sport either? Even parts of the gymnastics competition could possibly not qualify if the Games' Latin motto of Faster, Higher, Stronger is the threshold a sport must meet.

Finally, the Summer Games are too crowded with events.

Not really. There are enough events to please fans who enjoy niche competitive sports or enjoy mainstream competitive sports.

The International Olympic Committee used that excuse, among others, to eliminate baseball and softball.

So Filip Bondy claims the IOC used this an excuse to get rid of baseball and softball and now he wants to use this same "compelling" reason to get rid of shooting events? The claim the Summer Olympics are too crowded is an excuse until it is a compelling reason, I guess.

If there must be cuts, then surely shooting events should be on the top of the list.

So one of the "compelling" reasons the shooting events must be eliminated is because it has to be cut? I'm not sure a compelling reason for why an Olympic event should be eliminated is because it should be eliminated. This seems like some sort of circular reasoning.

Unfortunately, there is almost no chance the shooting events will be eliminated soon. Too many countries are good at them, the only real argument on their behalf.

Well, that and the fact Filip Bondy may be the only person who wants to eliminate the shooting events. Most people, if they don't like the shooting events, simply don't watch them.

Meanwhile, the U.S.shooting team here continues to aggressively defend its sport — and the right to bear arms — in light of the Colorado shootings.

Yes, the U.S. shooting team continues to defend its sports in light of the Colorado shootings...even though Filip Bondy is:

not quite knee-jerk enough to think there is some direct correlation between the guns employed by James Holmes in Colorado and the ones used by sharpshooting Olympians here in London.

Filip Bondy would NEVER be knee-jerk enough to think there is a correlation between the guns James Holmes used and the sharpshooting Olympians. There is no correlation, except for the fact it appears Bondy really does believe there is a correlation. Otherwise, why would it matter if Bondy is upset the U.S. shooting team defended its sport in light of the Colorado shootings? The sport of shooting and the Aurora shootings aren't directly correlated to each other.

“I learned a long time ago that it’s not the gun that kills, it’s the person,” said Emil Milev, a new U.S. citizen by way of Bulgaria. “(Holmes) was wrong in the head. He would have found a way to do harm if he wasn’t able to get his hands on firearms. If a person wants to harm somebody, he will do it.

Why is Emil Miley even explaining this to Filip Bondy? He knows there isn't a correlation between James Holmes and the shooting events at the Olympics.

Nobody is connecting the Colorado slaughter with what Milev and his teammates are doing here.

Except for Filip Bondy, who is connecting the Colorado shootings ("slaughter" sounds like the people in the theater were cattle. I don't like using the word "slaughter.") with Miley and his teammates in this very column. Because keeping the shooting events in the Olympics "sends the wrong message." What wrong message is that? Would it be a wrong message that has something to do with James Holmes and the Colorado shootings?

They just should be doing it somewhere else.

Where else, besides a competitive setting where every person shooting the gun is a world-class expert at handling the gun, should shooting events take place? Is there a better environment to shoot guns competitively that I am not aware of? The Olympics are a controlled environment with some of the best shooters in the world participating in the competition. These are the people you want shooting guns in one of the very best places for them to be shooting guns.

I don't like nor do I watch the shooting events. I just don't see them as a threat to society and see no reason to eliminate them.