You can use your free speech and purchasing power to limit movies with violence.
It's even ok with me if you try to regulate them.But it
won't keep us from talking about gun regulation when you try to change the
"Yet somehow Tarantino doesn't grasp the connection between a culture
that produced the Sandy Hook Elementary school tragedy in Connecticut and his
own contributions to it. "Wouldn't it be appropriate to
then cite the research that proves this "connection?"You
can't - because it doesn't exist. Anecdotes and personal feelings
aren't the same thing as valid, reliable, replicable research.Yes, I am turned off by gratuitous movie violence. That's not the same,
however, as proving a causal link between depictions of violence in films and
Guns don't kill people, but fictional guns do?
I have found the silence by Hollywood stars on this issue to be rather
deafening. Such stars frequently come out in loud voice supporting a variety of
"liberal" issues but are notably silent on this one.To Blue,
simply go to Google Scholar where you will find multiple articles evidencing the
connection between violence and the media. I was particularly impressed by the
meta-analysis on the link between violent video games and actual violence.
Studies have shown that excessive media coverage about a shooting, including
naming the suspects/perpetrators, dramatizing the events and repeating the
numbers lead to more shootings.
and "Saving Private Ryan" is probably OK with you because it's
based in reality?We've been at war for over ten years, and your
blaming fictional movies?@ atl134 - Excellent Observation!Does life imitate art or does art imitate life?
I'm glad this article was written. How anyone could deny the connection
between violent movies, TV, games, etc is beyond me. And @Blue--the connection
between violence in movies and TV and its negative effect on people has been
proven in a number of studies. That is not conjecture---it's fact.
They have violent films and video games in other countries, but nowhere near the
number of gun murders. They have mental illness in other countries, but still
little to no mass shootings. Two things come to mind that separate us from them:
gun control and universal access to health care. I don't like
violent movies or video games. And I'm sure they play a role, but
it's not a leading role. I'm much more interested in looking at a
culture where Dad reinforces these violent messages by tying a kid's
manhood into a gun.
Lets just use statistics.How many millions of people have seen
Tarantino's films either at the movies or on video?How many of those
have committed murder directly because of one or more of his films, either by
confession or even inuendo?How many people own guns in America?How many of those have directly used a gun to kill or murder?I
think you'll find owning a gun statistically far more dangerous than
watching fictional violence on film.
Based on this logic, we might as well crack down on both the Bible and the Book
of Mormon. The bloodshed and body count there makes anything Tarantino has done
look like a Disney movie in comparison.Moving on from Sandy Hook is
going to require that Americans have a honest discussion about how both guns and
mental illness are thought of in our society. Anything else is just making
excuses and beating around the bush.
[Movies, video games, and any entertainment glamorizing extreme human suffering
certainly aren't helping the efforts to create a safer society.]Like the Bible? There was a study out of BYU a few years ago that demonstrated
a connection between exposing people to violent passages from the bible and
increased aggression. It tried to cover its tracks by adding unscientific
excuses about "the good parts making up for the bad".Human
being are violent and aggressive by nature. Only a few generations ago most
young men would hunt and kill, both for sport and pleasure. Certainly evolution
made it fun to kill, as individuals who hunt for fun and survival will probably
have a surplus of food and skill.Most people don't hunt these
days, but they're still genetically designed to take pleasure in violence.
Some people play sports and inflict usually minor, although not always, violence
on one another. Some still go hunting for sport (there are cheaper ways to get
meat).I play violent video games and watch violent movies for fun. I
refuse to give up my real guns or my fake guns because some lunatic
couldn't handle life.
The solution to gun violence must include serious examination of literally
hundreds, if not thousands, of societal factors.It will not be
easy.It can be done.It must be done.And the
extremists on both sides must be willing to listen to the other side and then do
some very serious thinking before speaking again.
What - Hollywood too violent? Hollywood promoting and glorifying murder and
making millions in the process? Nah - not Hollywood. Sean Penn and Matt Damaon
and the other far left crowd are all about a gun-less America and non-violence.
American Gangsters with Sean Penn is just a fun light hearted little movie. Yes
do what I say and not what I do ...the Hollywood motto. The Bourne Sage with
Matt Damon is all about promoting peace. Liberalism and hypocrisy are kissen
cousins. The only people that the lefties want to be gun-less is the 9-5 middle
class of people in this country - the hunters and those that actually obey the
law because that is how Communism works. Disarm the masses and empower big
brother government and life will be bliss.
patriot said: What - Hollywood too violent? Hollywood promoting and glorifying
murder and making millions in the process? Nah - not Hollywood. = Fictional
reality for entertainmentWhat - Republican president too violent?
Republican president and a vice president who happens to own a defense business
promoting and glorifying war for as long as possible and making millions in the
process? Nah - not the republicans.= Reality The commies are coming,
the red menace is us, oh no mr. bill - what are, things people thought in the
The fact is, violent crime in the US is at all time lows. Sandy Hook and
Webster NY are statistical anomalies whose significance is magnified by the news
media. We're still safer at home in the US than we ever have been. The
right thing to do is nothing. And if I may make an observation, why
is no one horrified when Obama drops bombs on dozens of innocent children and
lies and says they are militants? We should be far, far more concerned about
our culture of militarism than our culture of domestic gun ownership. One or
two lone gunmen is an isolated tragedy. A whole country that doesn't care
about the slaughter of muslim children is barbaric.
We have an entire industry built on influencing people’s behaviors.
It’s called advertising. Those professionals study and analyze these
things to the molecular level. They clearly believe that there is a connection
between their short advertisements and human behavior. But, we posit that there
is absolutely no relationship between much longer films or video games played
for endless hours? There is a disconnect here.I am not saying that
any movie or video game turns a non-violent kid into a maniac. Also, there are
clearly other issues that need to be part of the violence discussion. But
excessive violence in entertainment also needs to be a part.When I
was a kid (millennia ago) guns were more common in American households and
almost nobody locked them up. Yet we had few mass killings (at least that I
recall). What has changed in America? I think how violence is portrayed is
part (the “hero” is often extremely violent). I think the
availability of mental health and specifically housing programs is also at
play.None of this says there should not be a conversation about
guns. But they are the means, not the motive.
There is a way to keep people like Tarantino from making these type of movies.
That is to vote with your feet. Don't go to his movies. They are trash and
frankly stupid. The only one of his movies I've seen is Pulp Fiction. That
was so bad, from a violence standpoint, and just the absurd stupidity of the
movie made me decide that I'm not going to waste my money any more.He gets no money, he makes no movies.I recommend Les
Miserables. 5 out of 4 stars for that one. Lincoln also. 6 out of 4 stars.
atl134, actually holographic bullets can kill when the safety protocols on the
Holo Deck are disengaged.
A glaring problem being overlooked is young white males. All these horrific
attacks were committed by young, white, suburban males.
A 2009 survey by Republican pollster Frank Luntz found 85 percent of all gun
owners and 69 percent of NRA members supporting mandatory background checks at
gun shows. Though the NRA has opposed efforts to prevent anyone on the FBIs
terrorist watch list from purchasing a gun, 86 percent of gun owners and 82
percent of NRA members said that those on the list should be banned from
purchasing guns.A CBS/New York Times poll in January 2011 found 63
percent of respondents favoring a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons,
almost unchanged from the 67 percent that favored such a ban in March 2000 (and
even a majority of gun owners favored an assault weapons ban). A detailed CNN
poll on guns in 2008 found two-thirds of Americans believing the Second
Amendment guaranteed an individual right to own guns, but also found 86 percent
supporting waiting periods, 79 percent supporting registration of guns with
local government, and 51 percent even supporting limits on the number of guns a
person can own, an idea that is rarely suggested anywhere.
This is one more piece of a complex puzzle that should be discussed, but I fear
it won’t be because our loudest citizens tend to be the ones at the
extremes who seem only interested (when we get down to brass tax) in protecting
their sacred cows (guns for the Right and Hollywood for the Left).Regarding excessive movie violence, any political pressure will need to come
from a Democrat (ala Nixon going to China), otherwise it will just be seen as a
right-wing attack and heels will be dug in. Sadly, the same may be the case for
guns as evidenced by all the caterwauling on the Right preemptively directed at
Obama. @Blue – just because a causal link has not been
established doesn’t mean one does not exist (oh wait, maybe there is
evidence… thanks Richard). Even so, the difficulty in trying to isolate a
variable like “violence in the culture,” and its impact on a certain
segment of the population may prove so difficult that demonstrating statistical
change may be beyond science’s current experimental abilities.
The Hollywood left makes their money off of violent movies; not gun
manufacturing (or hunting, etc.).therefore the lack of outrage is
comprehensible, although still indefensibly hypocriticalBTW - I
think there is a vast difference between the violence in "Saving Private
Ryan" and "Kill Bill"@Truthseeker: Perhaps American
feminists should spend less time claiming the passive-aggressive power of
feigned victimhood and pay some attention to the systematic brutalization of
their own sons.
Tarantino is trying to incite a race war. Thats what all of these films are.
they are propoganda designed to create unrest and hatred of some kind.
Counter Intelligence. "The Hollywood left makes their money off
of violent movies; not gun manufacturing (or hunting, etc.).therefore the
lack of outrage is comprehensible, although still indefensibly
hypocritical"Actually most of hollywood is in favor of a total
gun ban nation wide.
Counter Intelligence said: BTW - I think there is a vast difference between the
violence in "Saving Private Ryan" and "Kill Bill"Please do explain? Because there is no difference in the violence portrayed,
just in your perspective of the reason for the violence. Saving Private Ryan
could have just shown guys falling down, right? Glorifying war is OK too?Seems like the right has a hard time with reality vs fantasy.
Counter Intelligence - I think so, too. Because the violence in "Saving
Private Ryan" is supposed to be real. "Kill Bill" is fiction. I
think watching real people die would be a lot more traumatic.
@Happy Valley Heretic"Seems like the right has a hard time with
reality vs fantasy"Actually it seems like it is you who has the
hard time distinguishing between reality and fantasySaving Private
Ryan was an attempt at being historically accurate - war IS brutal -
romanticizing it trivializes the horror of that brutality. Tarantino
simply has violence for violence sake - which glorifies brutality Yes; it is all in the perspective. Identical actions can have completely
opposite meanings and effects, depending on intent (intent in a sex scene makes
all the difference too: love v. violation) - I distrust those who cannot tell
(or refuse to see) the difference.@Anti Bush-Obama"Actually most of hollywood is in favor of a total gun ban nation
wide."That was my point: It is easier for Hollywood to point the
finger at others, rather than to introspect about their own contribution to the
Halloween pasrts 1 thru eleventeenTexas ChainsawFreddie KruegerChuckyall Hollywood.all slasher/horroe movies.all
fiction.-------Columbine High School,Aurora
Colodrado,Viginia Tech, Partland Mall,Newtown CT,All American, all assualt guns, all real.I'll
stick with Facts, AND Reality.
We can't have a conversation about things like this if 1) we simplify too
much (the issue is far more complex than the comments suggest) or 2) we
politicize the issue (whether or not someone has been killed has nothing to do
with which party is in power).There have been brutal killings of
innocents for millenia (as the citations above of the Bible and the Book of
Mormon suggest), and there are several motifs that suggest themselves:1. In each case someone with a serious mental or emotional disturbance
achieves the power to kill that corresponds with their desire to hurt. (Herod,
Caligula, Hitler, and various latter-day shooters in America, stabbers in China,
bombers in England and Ireland.)2. The prospective killer is given
the means to do it (some sort of weapon: lately, guns; previously, bombs, gas,
swords, chemicals).3. Society somehow gives permission for the
killing to happen. (Free access to weapons, societal acceptance or even
encouragement of violence, loss of conscience.)If we're going
to control the human urge to kill, we need to have a reasoned, educated, adult
conversation about it. It is complex and difficult--and non-partisan.
You can continue to dodge the gun issue by presenting a long list of other
excuses. Guns are a major problem in America and it should not be watered down
with excuses like movies, etc. It is clear that western countries, like ours,
have very little gun violence. Canada, Australia, Germany, have less than 100
gun murders each year. We have over 10,000. We can't keep looking for
excuses for the horrible gun deaths in America. Please think this through. More
people are murdered with guns in the United States, each year, than the number
of soldiers killed in all the years we have been at war in the Iraq War and the
Afgan War combined. We need to do something other than look for excuses.
Would the Sandy Hook incident not have happened if Nancy Lanza had not had guns?
According to what we've heard reported about Adam Lanza, it
would've taken quite some work for him to procure the weapons on his own.
But how many parents have had to bury their own children as a result
of the guns that they had in their homes?
@BeverlyThat’s fine Beverly but simply naming other countries
does not identify causes. Even Michael Moore (as liberal and as anti-gun as
anyone) in his movie Bowling For Columbine suggests that the issue is not guns
per se. He notes that Canada (with a tiny fraction of the gun deaths that we
have in the US) has as much of a gun culture with as many guns per person as we
do. Gun restrictions may be part of the answer, but don’t let
a visceral aversion to guns lead you to the false conclusion that something like
“an assault weapons ban” is going to solve this. The problem is
complex and we need to have an adult and sober conversation about it.
I grew up well BEFORE video games.We watched Cowboys and Indians,
Cop and Robber shows, and the 3 stooges.And when we went
outside to play -- We shot at EACH other.So I don't but into
the whole "violent media" garbage.Later, many of us went to
Vietnam, and the Gulf, ect...None of play with guns anymore.BTW - The guns I DO have now -- I keep in a SAFE, where they belong.Just like I was taught in the Military.If you don't
"restrict them" youself -- i.e., a good solid safe, The Government
will have no other option but to "restrict" them for you.You
can't let idiots who think freedom is a pickup truck and gun rack in the
rear window and the government can't do anything to restrict us.They
should not posses guns and bullets, for the same reason babies
shouldn't.Someone innocent is Always going to get killed --- ALWAYS.
The video game company Electronic Arts has created a Web site that promotes the
manufacturers of guns, knives and combat-style gear depicted in the latest
version of its top-selling game, Medal of Honor Warfighter,While
studies have found no connection between video games and gun violence, the case
of Medal of Honor Warfighter illustrates how the firearms and video game
industries have quietly forged a mutually beneficial marketing relationship.Many of the same producers of firearms and related equipment are also
financial backers of the N.R.A.
My wife and I saw The Hobbit the other night. Good movie. The unfortunate part
of the evening came before the movie stared when we had to sit through 15
minutes of coming movie trailers packed full of sex and gun violence...Hollywood
hypocrisy. Fantasy is one thing but real life drama full of guys and gals
pumping bullets into other guys and gals is sickening. Actually you don't
have to go to the movies to see this garbage...just turn on ABC, CBS or NBC at
prime time night and you see the same stuff. America has become Pottersville!!
patriotCedar Hills, UTMy wife and I saw The Hobbit the other night.
Good movie. ============== Did we see the same Hobbit
that you saw patriot?Holy Cow!the Ork battles, loping off Thairan's Father's head?The dwarfs battling
the Goblins in the mountain?That was one the most violent movies
I've seen in years!It was PG-13 for very good reasons?But I've noticed from your posts, you twist, and contort reality to
suit your opinions and justify yourself...Try being honest...with
yourself.But I will agree, The Hobbit was a good movie.Did you catch the phrase When Gandalf gives Bilbo a weapon (a
sword in this case) to arm himself? He warns him of the temptation to rely
on it too often. “True courage," he tells Bilbo, "is about
knowing not when to take a life, but when to spare one.”The
same applies with guns.
"He notes that Canada (with a tiny fraction of the gun deaths that we have
in the US) has as much of a gun culture with as many guns per person as we do.
"Tyler, I don't remember if Moore made this claim or not.
If he did he is very wrong. The USA leads the world in gun ownership, both per
capita and total guns. By far. The USA has 88.8 guns for every 100 people,
Canada is far down the list with 30.8 guns per 100 people. (That is 2007 numbers
from The Small Arms Survey.)This editorial trying to blame Terintino
for gun violence in this country is absolute nonsense. Gun nuts want to blame
everything except the gun. There is zero use for assault rifles and large
capacity magazines except to kill large numbers of people. I heard insane people
on talk radio saying we need them to stop the Chinese from invading, and the
host agreed. Insanity. Tell you what, lets get gun ownership down to
where Canada has theirs and then we can have this conversation.
Airnaut,Whoa, SPOILERS!I agree with you, though. Once
again, Tolkien's ample violence, which is in the books too, is given a free
pass by conservative Christians. The action/violence gore in the Hobbit is also
heightened by the 3D and the crispness of the 48p high frame rate.I
also promise that the ratio of kids seeing The Hobbit versus kids seeing Django
Unleashed is pretty lopsided in The Hobbit's favor.Once again,
its all about blaming the things people don't like or care for:If you
like guns, it's violent video games, tv, and movies fault.If you like
violent media, it's guns fault.It's a childish insistence
that something can be done, must be done, and that it only effect activities
that people don't personally care for.Well, I don't like
people shooting up schools, so I blame people shooting up schools.
So let me get this straight - guns don't kill people, Quentin Tarantino
Nobody ever walked into a school with a copy of Call of Duty and killed 20 kids.
@Schwa – “So let me get this straight - guns don't kill people,
Quentin Tarantino does?”And the even more brilliant - “Nobody
ever walked into a school with a copy of Call of Duty and killed 20
kids.”Please… enough with this bumper sticker nonsense.
Not only are you NOT saying anything profound, you’re demonstrating a
complete lack of ability to follow a causal chain of events and connect the dots
in anyway.By your logic, the correct conclusion after 9-11 should
have been “planes kill people.” Not mental states, not religious
derangement, not any of the other factors that turn people into murderers…
None of this would matter if people did not bring this stuff into their homes or
pay to watch it in theaters. Self-control is what's needed. How the gun industry must laugh at its consumers. Alcohol, tobacco and
firearms. They belong together in the ways they kill, enslave and damage
society. Self-control is what is needed.
Not surprised at all to see a fair amount of comments defending violent movies
and Hollywood - many I'm sure from the "guns are evil" crowd. After
all, an attack on violent movies takes away THEIR right to participate in an
activity that THEY'VE found a way to do peacefully and without harming
others. How hypocritical. If media doesn't doesn't have the power to
negatively affect people then by logic, media has no ability or power to
positively influence anyone either. You can't have it both ways but by
golly, Hollywood sure tries. When they come out with a movie that inspires,
instructs, lifts, and edifies, the producers and actors can't accept praise
and accolades fast enough. But when it's crass, vulgar, violent, nasty,
horrible, "its just entertainment" and no one could possibly be
negatively affected. What moronic and twisted reasoning that is.
I've said it before, I'll say it again...What is the harm
or violation of the 2nd Amendment gun nuts, to simply require -- A
gun owner must provide proof of ownership of a gun SAFE, gun locks and
licenses?Having seat belts, locks, bumpers and safety glass
doesn't take away my right to own a car, and holding a valid
driver's license doesn't take away my right to drive it either.BUT - Not having any of those restrictions, regulations, or
requirements DOES effect the safety of me and eveyone else on the roads!But - I see the very same people refusing to complomise on the
budget, just as reluctant to compromise on Gun safety as well.
LDS Liberal,Gun safes are expensive, unsightly, unnecessary, and
heavy. One cheap rifle equals an expensive, over-sized safe? How will we define
what a regulation safe is? Plus, just 'cause you have one doesn't mean
you have to lock it.Gun locks defeat the purpose of self defense,
"Let me find the key an unlock my gun before I snap into action." Which
means I would probably just keep my key near the gun, which would defeat the
point. So will we mandate the key be kept a certain distance away?And licenses are just another tracking document and revenue generator for the
government. Which means some nosy journalist/activist can file a freedom of
information request and post your name all over the internet, like just happened
recently.All of these are just feel good suggestions. Really only
useful for keeping a 5 year old out of you guns, but wouldn't have stopped
the shooting recently, or any other mass shooting, since all of the shooters had
full access to their guns anyway. They would have just opened the safe and
unlocked the triggers.The right to an automobile isn't in the
"Really only useful for keeping a 5 year old out of you guns,"Wow. That seems like reason enough to me. "The right to an
automobile isn't in the Constitution."There is a silly
comment. Neither is brushing your teeth. Do you have a right to brush your
teeth? You need to read your constitution a bit better: The enumeration in the
Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage
others retained by the people. (You probably don't know, but that is from
the Constitution.) Biff, can you show me any study that shows that
media violence causes real life violence? And, what do you people
that are critical of movie violence suggest? Do we need a new government agency
that would censor all depictions of violence in media?
mark:["Really only useful for keeping a 5 year old out of you
guns,"Wow. That seems like reason enough to me. ]Well, I, and plenty of others, don't have a 5 year old, so its really
rather worthless to force it on the rest of us. Just like child proofing
anything else in my home. People with kids also have to keep the cutlery, power
tools, alcohol, prescription medicine, etc. out of little arm's reach. Me,
all that stuff is kept where ever is the most convenient (alcohol in the fridge
and pills on the bathroom counter), just like the guns.["The
right to an automobile isn't in the Constitution."There is
a silly comment.]It was meant to be silly, to counter the silliness
of comparing automobile regulations to gun regulations. Luckily the Constitution
gives us the right to speech, religion, and weapons in the first 2 amendments.
You change a lot of things you said when someone calls you out on them. It
sounds like, from what you wrote, that you are rather careless with your guns.
It's strange, people I know that have guns, and no kids, also have gun
safes. Mainly so when they are not home someone can't steal their guns. But
then, that is being responsible. I have a gun sitting on the counter right now.
But when I leave it will be locked up. But I'm sure you will
change what you wrote. The only reason I wrote "silly" is
because the monitors would not have let me write what I wanted to. You
didn't mean that to be a "silly" argument. You thought it was a
legitimate point. Don't try to say now otherwise. Own what you say. If you
were wrong admit it.
Hollywood does glamorize violence! and our permissiveness as a culture to
nudity, profanity, etc., has opened up a terrible Pandora's Box that is
leading to the moral decay of our society.As for Gun Control being an
answer: I'd say, No Thing is intrinsically evil beyond the use to which we
put it. A gun can protect or kill; a phone can convey positive information or
gossip which can ruin someone's life, yet who would call for a ban on
telephones?!Most of us are reasonable, rational people who'd never
train a gun on anyone, let alone shoot; but every age has its Jack the Ripper,
Al Capone, or John Wayne Gacy. How we weather these is the mark of who we are as
a society. To over-legislate individual responsibility is death to Democracy.Our rights and freedoms are precious and must be "protected from enemies
foreign and domestic." Gun Control would simply ensure the emergence of a
black market for weapons. Beside law enforcement, only criminals would have
guns. That is a scary thought!Instead of Gun Control, let us allow GOD and
PRAYER, back into our schools, Court Rooms, and lives.
@ AskmeAgainLater 9:50 a.m. Dec. 30"To over-legislate individual
responsibility is death to Democracy."What about legislating
Wally,I never suggested legislating anything. Individual responsibility is
a natural result of living by sound principles. Those principles should be
taught at home, but barring that, need to be followed through in all other areas
of our lives. I believe, we would not have to legislate tolerance if we returned
to living in accord with the more wholesome (neighborly) (biblical) precepts
upon which our forefathers founded this nation. I would certainly NOT suggest
legislation; we already legislate everything to death, which abdicates personal
responsibility in favor of mandating behavior, which (won't work carte
blanche) clogs up our courts. I certainly do not suggest legislating morality...
however, logic would dictate that a return to healthier, more spiritual living
(found in the aforementioned biblical precepts) would see a return to a
healthier, saner populace, and how could that be a bad thing???I suggest
that all atheists, non-believers and amoral people can carry on status quo; it
is their God-granted privilege. However, there's always a boat or plane
bound elsewhere, for those who are intolerant enough to be offended by prayer,
and God, in general. If you have a better way, pray, share your vision with us.