Two Dolphins Talk About a Giant: Joey Porter, Jay Williams, Plaxico Burress, and Guns in Sports

Following up on my last post, I watched an interview broadcast recently on ESPN2, where Miami Dolphins linebacker Joey Porter defended gun possession by professional athletes in the wake of the Plaxico Burress shooting accident.

Porter spoke to ESPN about professional athletes who have been victims of crime, and he said that Plaxico Burress is "not carrying a gun to, 'Oh, I'm just carrying a gun because I'm tough.' It's safety. It's nothing but safety." Porter continued, "It's a tough situation. I mean, we're always in the spotlight. So you can't tell a person to stop living your normal life. [Burress has] got to live his life," Porter said. "You're going to go out, you're going to do these things."

Later in the interview Porter said,

"Am I saying it was right by [Burress] having his gun with him in a club? No, that probably wasn't the smartest situation. But at the end of the day, obviously he was nervous about something. Something probably had happened in the past. I mean, should he have brought it? No. But is he the only one to ever do that? No."

I understand that some professional athletes feel threatened at times. But that doesn't mean those athletes should purposely go to places where they feel threatened enough to carry an illegally concealed handgun, drink alcohol, and accidentally fire their weapon.

When Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg after allegedly carrying an unlicensed, semi-automatic pistol in his sweatpants while drinking alcohol in a New York City bar, Mr. Burress clearly showed disregard for gun safety and for the law.

Throughout his ESPN interview, Mr. Porter failed to make an important distinction. Keeping a gun at home lawfully for self-defense is one thing. It's his right to do that. But there is no Constitutional right to illegally carry a concealed handgun into a bar. That's dangerous and it clearly puts the public at risk.

Former Miami Dolphins defensive end Jay Williams, who is now a gun dealer according to reports, also appears to differ with Joey Porter's assessment of the Burress incident. According to an Associated Press interview conducted before Joey Porter made his comments, Williams said that Burress ignored some of the most basic rules for handling a gun.

"Do everything that you can possibly do to know your weapon and to know the laws of your locale," Williams said. "You have to know the laws concerning firearms where you live. You have to obey those laws to the fullest. If you can't carry [a gun] in that locale, don't carry."

Joey Porter told ESPN that he owns a handgun, indicates that he carries it (calling it "my little buddy that I keep with me"), and that he has a concealed weapons license from the state of California. However, California and the state of Florida do not recognize each other's concealed carry licenses.

I agree with Jay Williams. With rights come responsibilities. Responsible gun owners, whether or not they are professional athletes, must understand and follow the laws wherever they are. As we see in incidents like the Plaxico Burress accident, breaking America's gun laws puts gun owners and the public at risk of serious injury, even death.

Watch Joey Porter's interview, followed by Mr. Williams's comments here:

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

Comments

[molonlabe]

"SPCA OFFICERS TO START CARRYING GUNS IN 2009 | The Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals approved the decision recently and officers will be armed starting in January, chief executive Howard Nelson told the Pocono Record.

''The animal abusers are already armed,'' Nelson said. He said two Stroudsburg-based humane officers will be the first to carry guns. The officers will receive training before being armed and Nelson said the guns are only for self-protection -- not to euthanize animals."

Paul,

When will the Brady Campaign issue the press-release criticizing the SPCA for carrying wepons for protection? Shouldn't they just "give the criminal what they want" instead of putting up a resistence?

Or is the SPCA now included in the "Only Ones" category?

Do tell.

[shedances]

Every weekday for the past few years, anyone can read news from either the Brady Campaign website &/or blog or the Gun Guys website &/or blog (both are excellent online resources, BTW) on incidents & accidents involving guns ... like Mr. Burress & situations involving drinking & handling guns, or hunting accidents, or those accidental police shootings, or wrongly judging/misidentifying a situation as 'self-defense' shootings, or the catch-all excuse of not knowing the gun was actually loaded, & so on. Certainly, some of the most tragic incidents, listed on both sites, this year involve minors ... for example, the 12-year-old Arizona youth, who was charged with 1st-degree murder after (allegedly) shooting his mother, as well as the Arizona 8-year-old boy who faces 2 counts of alleged premeditated murder, after the shootings of his 29-year-old divorced father & another male. As far as burden of responsibility for such incidents & gun use are concerned ... I think gun-owning & non-gun owning parents should ask themselves if these tragedies (involving kids & guns) were avoidable, or possibly foreseeable by those responsible for their welfare and activities?

Particularly in the case of the 8-year-old (a rare age to be charged with such a crime) ... why would any responsible parent teach a child of such a tender age to use a .22-caliber rifle & then possibly not even store it, in such a way, that it would not be easily accessed or used without the father's permission?

[molonlabe]

These accidents still constitute a lesser percentage of accidental deaths than swimming pools.

Kell,

If safety is such a concern for Paul and the BC, why don't they provide any gun safety education classes in order to raise awareness of proper use of firearms?

[mike102]

"Just about every single day in the news, we hear of more incidents & more (sometimes, incredibly stupid) gunshot accidents involving apparent 'law-abiding gun owners' like Burress."

No Kelli, we don't. You're grossly exaggerating the situation, but that is in strict keeping with your tradition (and the BC's) of scare-mongering and alarmism. Nothing new there.

I watch the news every day (even weekends), and I don't hear about nearly that many incidents. Look at the numbers, for crying out loud.

[djkrlsn]

Then why don't the BC and the NOTgunguys actually follow the NRA's lead and start teaching kids firearm safety, conflict resolution and actually support keeping violent criminals IN PRISON

[Thirdpower]

"those accidental police shootings"

So Kelli feels the police should be disarmed .

Good to know.

[benEzra]

Ummm, gun accidents are at an all time low. AFAIK, child gun-accidents have declined 89 percent since 1975, and accidents involving all ages have declined ~61 percent. As others have pointed out, a child is one hundred times more likely to die in a swimming pool accident than a gun accident, on a per-owning-household basis.

More children and adults die every year from bicycle accidents than gun accidents. Somehow I suspect that you don't particularly care.

[Thirdpower]

Another fine anti-gunner:

Sen.-elect Hiram Monserrate: "New York and particularly the city has some of the toughest gun restrictions in the country. I would like to emulate what we have in the city to the state. We should be the society that no one has guns. I"m a firm supporter of gun control, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that we have the toughest laws against trafficking in illegal guns and supporting litigation against companies who bring cheap handguns into our city."

Why does he support 'gun control'? So his girlfriend can't shoot him as he's beating her:

"Karla Giraldo, 30, needed 20 stitches to close a gash by her left eye, inflicted when Monserrate broke a drinking glass and struck her in the face, Queens prosecutors said."

Can we say 'projection' boys and girls?

[mike102]

"There is no dispute among rational people that CCW has lead to more crime and more accidents. " Jade Gold (aka Casey Tool)

I love these little (and false) proclaimations of yours. No dispute, Jade? Then what are all these blogs for? Or are you saying that the 80,000,000 law-abiding gun owners in this country are irrational?

The fact is that most places with more stringent gun carry laws have more crime, like DC, Chicago, and NJ.

Readers, if you were a mugger, where do you think you would have greater success, and a longer life expectancy; Chicago, where guns are denied to the law-abiding, or Dallas, where there's a 50/50 chance that your potential victim is at least as well armed as you are?

There's really no dispute on this issue.

[Thirdpower]

"As it turns out, we"ve not had any trouble with our gun permit holders" they"ve got a near perfect behavior record," Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains, told a House committee last week.

Still, he defends his characterization of "a near-perfect record."

"Their behavior records is better than our uniformed police," Niceley tells NewsChannel 5"s chief investigative reporter Phil Williams. "We"ve had no problems. We"ve not had shoot-outs at the OK Corral, like some of these people predicted."

It"s a sentiment echoed by state Rep. Eddie Bass, D-Prospect.

"From a law enforcement perspective and with 20 years, I"ve never, never had a problem with a gun permit holder," the former sheriff says.

[CaseyTool]

There is no dispute among rational people that CCW has lead to more crime and more accidents. Just as gun ownership, in general, has lead to more crime and accidents.

There's really no dispute on this issue.

[benEzra]

I don't see how that can be undisputed, when crime and accidents have both trended DOWN since CHL reform swept the nation in the early '90s.

I'm not arguing that CHL reform caused the decline (that would be post hoc, ergo prompter hoc), but it certainly didn't correlate with an increase in either crime OR accidents.

[1will]

CCW has not led to more crime or accidents. Holders of CCW permits are the most law abiding demographic in America and if you have a link to stats about high or even significant crime rates among CCW holders then please list it.

[Thirdpower]

That's nice Jade. Care to prove it? Of course you don't.

[djkrlsn]

Except of course for the LITTLE FACT that SHALL ISSUE CCW reduces crime (because criminals don't like empowered victims), CCW holders are more law abiding/are better shots/have fewer accidents-negligent discharges than the police. Of course Mistress Cabot we all know that you couldn't bother to tell the truth if an Orca bit you in the buttocks.

[mike102]

This is from the BC website (Paul's blog immediately following this one).

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/print_602761.html

Pennsyvania has the highest per capita NRA membership in the country, and is a 'shall issue' state. Allegheny County has issued the highest number of carry permits, among voters (20%), in PA.

If what Jade says is true, Allegheny County should be a hot bed of "crime and accidents".

It isn't.

[molonlabe]

""When people go to our national parks, they don"t want to worry about who is packing a picnic and who is packing heat," said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "This new rule will make our parks less safe, and it should be rescinded."

http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/release.php?release=1093

Paul,

Maybe instead of cute little catch phrases, your position would be stronger if you cited the statistical evidence which shows that CCW has caused an increase in crime and incidents of gun accidents.

Oh, wait. You can't.

Poor Paul.

[ProGunAmerican]

Paul mentions that Burress had a blatant dis-regard for the law, well guess what, so do all the criminals. This is why gun control will always be a fundamental failure, it only targets legal activites of citizens and tries to make it very difficult and/or costly to buy guns. This is their strategy, regulate guns out of existence. If outright gun bans worked, Chicago would not see 488 homicides this year, I'm sure this number is far and above the rest of the state.

On a different topic, Paul mentions that 200 Tennessee concealed permit holders had their permits revoked because of restraining orders issued on them. What they don't tell you is the total number of permits issued, which I'm guessing is over 100,000. 200 into 100,000 works out to .002% revocation. So according to Paul's logic, right to carry should be eliminated because .002% slipped through the system, lol at that logic. Lets say 10% of people get drunk and drive, resulting in 17,000 traffic fatalities every year, which is the actual number, do we then ban beer? How about the 10% of the population that can't drive worth a darn, killing 40,000 people every year in accidents, do we ban cars? See where you're logic fails Paul?

[Thirdpower]

NY Times on the issue:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/us/politics/03corrupt.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/G/Green,%20Mark&pagewanted=all

Note the photo in the left hand column.

[shedances]

Well stated and good advice, Brady/Paul Helmke.

Moreover, I hear too many people talk the talk, when it comes to asserting their high level of responsibility with guns ... but do they always 'walk the walk'? No, not always (as Burress's example obviously reveals).

Part of being responsible also means thoroughly understanding & appreciating the fact that guns can be dangerous in just about anyone's possession ~ or tucked away in anyone's sweat pants ... sports celebs or just your average Joe The Gunowner.

[djkrlsn]

2ND posting--in this incident there are 3 wrongs being committed:first, Plaxico Burress for ignoring an unconstitutional New York law and having a negligent discharge; second, New York and New Jersey for having the draconian gun laws in place they do; and third, you,Paul Helmke ad BC for advocating these laws in the first place.

[benEzra]

Dangerous if handled negligently or misused.

Fortunately, licensed citizens have a better track record than even the police when it comes to negligent discharges and violent crimes committed while carrying.

Burress, on the other hand, was NOT carrying on a CHL, was NOT using a holster, and was apparently drunk.

Using Plaxico Burress as a brush to smear those of us who carry lawfully, responsibly, and sober is no less dishonest than using Barbara Graham of the Million Mom March to smear you.

[Tao21Zen]

"Using Plaxico Burress as a brush to smear those of us who carry lawfully, responsibly, and sober is no less dishonest than using Barbara Graham of the Million Mom March to smear you."

Isn't it funny how the anti-gun side have to present the American public extreme examples that are, in fact, statistical outliers and try to deceive them into believing these rare incidents are "the norm" (like presenting semi automatic military look-a-likes "the weapon of choice" for criminals when these weapons are used in less than 2%-3% of a gun related crimes)?

[Thirdpower]

Or Annette Stevens, NY gov. Spitzer, IL Gov Blago, or Larry Langford, Samuel Rivera, Kwame Kilpatrick, Frank Melton, and Sheila Dickson of MAIG.

[mike102]

Burress is in the NFL, and therefore a 'public figure'. I thought you were all for "public figures" being able to carry guns.

That's what you said, isn't it?

[Tao21Zen]

Yes Kelli and the same can be said for automobiles. Reckless and careless us of automobiles results in accidents too. In fact, there are far more auto accidents than there are gun accidents, including far more auto accident fatalities than gun accidents fatalities. However, the anti-gun side wants to use accidents involving firearms as a justification for banning the ownership of firearms.

This is the fundamental problem with gun-control, it lacks any logical and reasonable foundation. Perhaps this is because gun-control is not actually a method for solving problems in society. Instead, gun-control is the fundamental desired outcome and gun-banners try to find anything they can (e.g. "gun violence", "gun accidents", etc.) to site as a justification for achieving their desired gun control laws.

[Sneaky]

Good on Joey Porter. Excellent interview and excellent response to a couple inappropriately-pointed questions. Good on the Associated Press, too, for demonstrating in that brief two minutes what fair and balanced actually means.

Man, thanks Paul. Those two videos made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. They don't do much to help your cause, though, unless you're finally coming around to the notion of keeping and bearing arms.

[twogunmojo]

lets state a fact...if you reduce the number of guns you reduce the amount of gun related violence...but the vpc/brady bunch fails to realize that this does nothing to reduce overall violence...i am curious to hear shedances tell me how not owning a gun will lower date rape or child molestation...as usual their logic stops well short of where it should begin....

[Tao21Zen]

Here is the thing with argument.

There are (for our discussion) 2 categories of guns to consider, illegal guns (in this context, guns possessed by criminal) and legal guns (guns possessed by law abiding citizens).

Simply 'reducing the number of guns' (without targeting a particular class to reduce), in and of itself, doesn't differentiate between the these two classes. It is possible that all guns reduced come only from one of these classes or are made up of a mix of these classes.

Ideally, we would like only the illegal guns to be reduced. If this isn't realistic, we can at least work to try to ensure that it is more of the illegal class than the legal class that are reduced. This is why we want laws and punishments targeted towards criminals that possess and use these 'illegal guns' rather than the law abiding gun owners.

Paul and the BC don't seem to care which class is reduced, as long as they get some guns are reduced. The problem with this is that their efforts tend to reduce the legal guns far more than the illegal ones, thus giving the criminal a powerful advantage over the law abiding citizen stripped of his (or her) means of self defense.

[Tao21Zen]

Here is the thing with argument.

There are (for our discussion) 2 categories of guns to consider, illegal guns (in this context, guns possessed by criminal) and legal guns (guns possessed by law abiding citizens).

Simply 'reducing the number of guns' (without targeting a particular class to reduce), in and of itself, doesn't differentiate between the these two classes. It is possible that all guns reduced come only from one of these classes or are made up of a mix of these classes.

Ideally, we would like only the illegal guns to be reduced. If this isn't realistic, we can at least work to try to ensure that it is more of the illegal class than the legal class that are reduced. This is why we want laws and punishments targeted towards criminals that possess and use these 'illegal guns' rather than the law abiding gun owners.

Paul and the BC don't seem to care which class is reduced, as long as they get some guns reduced. The problem with this is that their efforts tend to reduce the legal guns far more than the illegal ones, thus giving the criminal a powerful advantage over the law abiding citizen stripped of his (or her) means of self defense.

[djkrlsn]

And Kellidances/Paul/VPC/BC forget that by disarming the law abiding Americans, it makes it easier for criminals to commit crimes. To do a Toonadude--how many people would Colin Ferguson been able to shoot on that train if there were there were people in each car that were well armed, or do the same thing with Cho--if there were a few people in each class with a CCW-how many would have died (and one advantage there--the armed students know who their classmates are and would be able to focuss on the outsider)

[mike102]

I don't know how you reduce the number of guns in criminal hands. Chicago and DC show us that outright gun bans don't even make a dent. So called "turn in your guns, no questions asked", and 'guns for food stamps' programs run by the police net nothing but junk that no self-respecting street thug would be caught dead with.

I think the only real answer is to keep violent felons in jail for a serious length of time. How else do you deter violent crime?

Our opposition here is generally more concerned about prison overcrowding, than they are about really preventing violence.

[djkrlsn]

Mike--I have a suspicion the only thing that will work is for criminals that use a gun--go to jail and stay there. The ones that are willing to work hard in prison get to live in climate controlled conditions, comfortable bunks, basic books/tv/radio--those that want to continue to act up--get to live in tents and brown rice congee supplemented with nonfat dry milk, collard/mustard/assorted greens and kudzu leaves (as very cheap vegetable source)-and if they kill each other or are uncomfortable--they may decide to behave in a civilized fashion. And you are right--I do find Kelli's response here unusual/irrational--she claims to be so concerned about the victims of violence, and yet she is opposed to self defense (at least armed and effective selfdefense) and even more concerned that felons must not be inconvenienced or uncomfortable

[Tao21Zen]

"Responsible gun owners, whether or not they are professional athletes, must understand and follow the laws wherever they are."

Keep in mind Paul, the only things that makes a law abiding citizen carrying a gun in these places illegal are the anti-gun law you push. Of course you want law abiding citizens to obey these laws, how else are you going to disarm them.

But here's a novel idea, why not focus on the real criminals that are actually the ones breaking the real (not the laws that you don't push on gun owners)? You know, the revolving door felons that can't even legally own a gun but still carry one into a "gun free zone" to victimize others? Are your afraid that the public might see that crime prevention can be accomplished (and even be more successful) if without you using the rule of law to disarm the law aiding public?

[djkrlsn]

I have noticed the same failing among the Brady Campaign/VPC supporters that you have--namely they focus 99% of their attention on lawabiding citizens and the firearms they own and almost none of the attention on violent felons (except to cry great crocodile tears about how the rights of the "poor widdle misunderstood violent felons" are being violated)

[Tao21Zen]

Paul is still trying to push the notion that being prepared for self-defense requires one being afraid of some danger and that the need to protect one's self only happens in areas that provoke fear of danger.

This is simply ridiculous. Do you buckle a seat belt to drive to the supermarket because you fear traffic? Do you keep a fire extinguisher in your house out of fear it will burst into flames? These are called, "being prepared" not "being paranoid".

[djkrlsn]

What is just as absurd is the idea that Plaxico Burress/Rosiee O'Donell/Jane Fonda/Ted Turner/ Gov Blago/Diane Feinstein have a right to own firearm and the average law abiding American does not. Also absurd is the Kelli/BC supported bans on common semiautomatic (1 round per trigger pull) carbines in 223 Remington and 7.62X39 because of COSMETICS/APPEARANCE, as well as the demonization of self defense by the average citizen (Kelli--your claim that an average citizen needs to be a cop to defend his/her life and family is truly FREAKYBIZARRE)

[benEzra]

"Do everything that you can possibly do to know your weapon and to know the laws of your locale," Williams said. "You have to know the laws concerning firearms where you live. You have to obey those laws to the fullest. If you can't carry [a gun] in that locale, don't carry."

"Joey Porter told ESPN that he owns a handgun, indicates that he carries it (calling it "my little buddy that I keep with me"), and that he has a concealed weapons license from the state of California. However, California and the state of Florida do not recognize each other's concealed carry licenses.

"I agree with Jay Williams. With rights come responsibilities. Responsible gun owners, whether or not they are professional athletes, must understand and follow the laws wherever they are. As we see in incidents like the Plaxico Burress accident, breaking America's gun laws puts gun owners and the public at risk of serious injury, even death."

Thank you, I actually agree with most of that. FWIW, I hold an NC CHL (valid in around 33 states), study the law, and carry responsibly. And thankfully, I live in a state that doesn't give preferential treatment to celebrities with regard to CHL's; NC's carry licensing system is based on statuatory criteria, not wealth or celebrity status.