"Demand Celebrities Go Fuck Themselves"

[Kulindahr]

For the record, all the films presented in the video have been released to international markets, including nations such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia.

Attachment 912966
Deaths per 100,000 citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate


If Hollywood gun violence is a significant factor in the gun violence present within US culture, why does it have such a significantly lesser effect in other nations?

Therein lies the real question. I highly suspect that if a study were done of a hundred nations on how people look at violence as a legitimate way to deal with problems, the US would be in the top five -- and the others would be places like Somalia and Uganda. If Europe had the same number of firearms per capita as the US, my guess is the US murder by firearms rate would still be at least three times as high.

It all goes down to "winning". In movies like the Die Hard collection, the guns aren't the big thing -- winning is, because Americans have a notion that we have to win... at all costs. It comes from a number of strands in history, but the worst is where it is married to the Puritan moral streak, a place where the 'Kingdom of God' is supposed to triumph, and the Kingdom gets associated with America, and the need to triumph gets personalized -- and the Puritan streak approves of violence to win.

(thus a very brief summary of what could a a thousand-word essay)

Stir it together, and it's no surprise that Americans excel in violence of all kinds with and sorts of means.

[Kulindahr]

Does anyone ever actually have their opinion swayed one way or the other by any celebrity?

If they do an impressive TED talk, sure.

[Kulindahr]

Honestly what I found amusing was the case or two of liberal celebrities calling from the gates of their walled residences with expensive electronic security systems to deny the people they very same arms their security details are carrying to patrol those same walls.

Yes -- THAT's hypocrisy.

People make decisions based on their character on a regular basis every day xbuzzerx. I'm sure you do also.

If the actors are really serious, they would refuse to participate in violent movies.

I'm sure you refused to do something that would have put money in your pocket -- maybe a lot of money -- but refused because of the moral aspects. Why can't the actors do the same thing. Money isn't everything.

Maybe they understand that the correlation between watching violent movies and engaging in actual violence is low. Watching the nightly news when violent crimes are reported has a higher correlation.

[andysayshi]

Therein lies the real question. I highly suspect that if a study were done of a hundred nations on how people look at violence as a legitimate way to deal with problems, the US would be in the top five -- and the others would be places like Somalia and Uganda. If Europe had the same number of firearms per capita as the US, my guess is the US murder by firearms rate would still be at least three times as high.

It all goes down to "winning". In movies like the Die Hard collection, the guns aren't the big thing -- winning is, because Americans have a notion that we have to win... at all costs. It comes from a number of strands in history, but the worst is where it is married to the Puritan moral streak, a place where the 'Kingdom of God' is supposed to triumph, and the Kingdom gets associated with America, and the need to triumph gets personalized -- and the Puritan streak approves of violence to win.

(thus a very brief summary of what could a a thousand-word essay)

Stir it together, and it's no surprise that Americans excel in violence of all kinds with and sorts of means.

If what you say is true, and violence is indeed an ingrained reality within US culture, do you not think that a more regulated management of lethal weapons within the community might make sense?

[Kulindahr]

If what you say is true, and violence is indeed an ingrained reality within US culture, do you not think that a more regulated management of lethal weapons within the community might make sense?

I don't believe in treating symptoms instead of problems. Most gun owners are more responsible and less violent than the norm in the population, so I see them as part of the solution. For firearms, the right approach would be one to teach other people to be as safe and responsible as the vast population of gun owners, who rarely even get traffic tickets. That means education, especially in a way that imparts the understanding of what it means to be part of the militia: it's not a license to do as you please, but a call to responsibility.

[xbuzzerx]

Yes -- THAT's hypocrisy.



Maybe they understand that the correlation between watching violent movies and engaging in actual violence is low. Watching the nightly news when violent crimes are reported has a higher correlation.

I knew we could agree on something about guns Kul. I get so tired of people blaming videogames and movies. At one point people were making a big fuss about how the Newtown shooter played Call of Duty. Guess what old people who are out of touch-- so did probably 75% of his victims! It had nothing to do with it.

[andysayshi]

I don't believe in treating symptoms instead of problems. Most gun owners are more responsible and less violent than the norm in the population, so I see them as part of the solution. For firearms, the right approach would be one to teach other people to be as safe and responsible as the vast population of gun owners, who rarely even get traffic tickets. That means education, especially in a way that imparts the understanding of what it means to be part of the militia: it's not a license to do as you please, but a call to responsibility.

I would argue that adding additional guns to a volatile situation IS treating the symptom, rather than the problem. The majority of almost any group within a society are responsible, competent, ethical people. We do not create laws to protect ourselves from the competent and responsible majority. We create laws to protect ourselves from the incompetent or irresponsible minority.

[Kulindahr]

I knew we could agree on something about guns Kul. I get so tired of people blaming videogames and movies. At one point people were making a big fuss about how the Newtown shooter played Call of Duty. Guess what old people who are out of touch-- so did probably 75% of his victims! It had nothing to do with it.

Yes. And better than 90% of people involved in auto accidents drive on roads.


DO AWAY WITH ROADS!!!!

[Kulindahr]

I would argue that adding additional guns to a volatile situation IS treating the symptom, rather than the problem. The majority of almost any group within a society are responsible, competent, ethical people. We do not create laws to protect ourselves from the competent and responsible majority. We create laws to protect ourselves from the incompetent or irresponsible minority.

But the moment those laws also negatively impact the responsible majority, they're improper.

Allowing people to own guns is not treating the symptom, it's allowing people to enjoy their freedom and inherent rights.

[Kulindahr]

It occurred to me that the government may have unwittingly had a hand in this, by promoting violent propaganda films in the past, such as during World War II. The wars ended, the propaganda went to Hollywood, and when Hollywood had milked the war bit for all they could, they did away with the war but kept the violence.

[andysayshi]

But the moment those laws also negatively impact the responsible majority, they're improper.

Allowing people to own guns is not treating the symptom, it's allowing people to enjoy their freedom and inherent rights.

Speed limits prevent me from getting to work on time. Building regulations made my home cost three times as much as it could have, if only I didn't need to worry about those pesky fire restrictions and safe workplace laws. My local deli costs twice as much as it should because they have to throw away all the unsold sliced meat after a few days, and they have to wash down all the workplace surfaces every day. I had some friends in town for the Sydney Fireworks the other day, and they couldn't get into the park they wanted to because it was overcrowded and the police wouldn't let them in.

There are lots of "improper" laws that make our society safer. Abridging one "right" for the safety of all is not tyranny - it is the very foundation of civilised society.

[andysayshi]

It occurred to me that the government may have unwittingly had a hand in this, by promoting violent propaganda films in the past, such as during World War II. The wars ended, the propaganda went to Hollywood, and when Hollywood had milked the war bit for all they could, they did away with the war but kept the violence.

Propaganda is not unique to the US. Some of Europe's WW2 propaganda films were particularly brutal, and Japan's even more so.

As an equally interesting side comment, steering back toward the topic, around 400BC Plato wrote that exposing the young to plays with violent content was damaging and inspired violent behaviour.

[xbuzzerx]

It occurred to me that the government may have unwittingly had a hand in this, by promoting violent propaganda films in the past, such as during World War II. The wars ended, the propaganda went to Hollywood, and when Hollywood had milked the war bit for all they could, they did away with the war but kept the violence.

Let's be careful not to say "they" like Hollywood is an amorphous industry playing up to its own secret master plan. Hollywood is a business that provides a good it tries to sell to people. The fact that violent movies and reality television are so popular is a reflection of the society in general, not of Hollywood's agenda. They make what sells.

[andysayshi]

There is one school of thought that says violence in entertainment is actually inversely proportionate to the violence within a society. In the western world we actually live in one of the most pampered, non-violent eras in history. Do we seek more violence within our entertainment to satisfy the primal instincts we all have for hunting and dominance?

[opinterph]

Do we seek more violence within our entertainment to satisfy the primal instincts we all have for hunting and dominance?

There is speculation among anthropologists that Homo sapiens neandertalensis (Neandertal) was a gentle version of the “wise man” and that his cousin (modern man) responded by annihilating him.

[xbuzzerx]

There is speculation among anthropologists that Homo sapiens neandertalensis (Neandertal) was a gentle version of the “wise man” and that his cousin (modern man) responded by annihilating him.

Have read this theory as well. It's speculated to be possible that Neanderthals actually had a more evolved brain and less warlike behavior and were eradicated as a result.

[andysayshi]

Haha, good for us! Those damn, dirty Neandertals! They were such pussies.

[Stardreamer]

There is speculation among anthropologists that Homo sapiens neandertalensis (Neandertal) was a gentle version of the “wise man” and that his cousin (modern man) responded by annihilating him.

Add it on to the theory that Human's developed ahead of the other primates and animals BECAUSE we war on each other, as well as eating meat. Some distant ancestor picked up a rock to bash in a rivals head and we have been improving our tool using abilities in response to conflicts and the threat of conflict ever since.

[xbuzzerx]

Haha, good for us! Those damn, dirty Neandertals! They were such pussies.

That'll learn them good with their fancy ass counting past 10.

[Kulindahr]

Speed limits prevent me from getting to work on time. Building regulations made my home cost three times as much as it could have, if only I didn't need to worry about those pesky fire restrictions and safe workplace laws. My local deli costs twice as much as it should because they have to throw away all the unsold sliced meat after a few days, and they have to wash down all the workplace surfaces every day. I had some friends in town for the Sydney Fireworks the other day, and they couldn't get into the park they wanted to because it was overcrowded and the police wouldn't let them in.

There are lots of "improper" laws that make our society safer. Abridging one "right" for the safety of all is not tyranny - it is the very foundation of civilised society.

What's "improper" about any of the laws/regulations you mentioned?

[Kulindahr]

Propaganda is not unique to the US. Some of Europe's WW2 propaganda films were particularly brutal, and Japan's even more so.

As an equally interesting side comment, steering back toward the topic, around 400BC Plato wrote that exposing the young to plays with violent content was damaging and inspired violent behaviour.

I know -- we laughed when we translated that one, but partly because with it we translated much the same thing in Koine Greek from the third century and Latin from the fourth.

I'm not sure that's the more common complaint, or that lawyers are ruining society -- that one dates back to ancient Egypt.

[Kulindahr]

There is one school of thought that says violence in entertainment is actually inversely proportionate to the violence within a society. In the western world we actually live in one of the most pampered, non-violent eras in history. Do we seek more violence within our entertainment to satisfy the primal instincts we all have for hunting and dominance?

That fits with the fact that psychologists working with youth used to do group therapy by running Dungeons and Dragons games. There's good research showing that engaging in play at doing things you know you can't in public in real lets off steam and balances the psyche -- kind of like the old boxing gloves thing at English boarding schools, I suspect.

[Kulindahr]

There is speculation among anthropologists that Homo sapiens neandertalensis (Neandertal) was a gentle version of the “wise man” and that his cousin (modern man) responded by annihilating him.

I've read about that. I've also read two different science fiction stories based on it. One had Neanderthal as telempathic, and so able to cooperate and work together incredibly well, but almost incapable of inflicting pain, and when a modern human found himself among them he was considered a hopeless cripple; the other has aliens rescuing an entire Neanderthal tribe from a volcanic eruption and dropping them off on another planet -- when homo sapiens finally gets to the stars, we find our supposedly extinct cousins there ahead of us as the leading citizens of a great republic of a half dozen races, holding their position due to those empathic abilities through which they have brought peace with every new race they met (the story ends with homo sapiens being desperately welcomed into the republic, because they've encountered a race which won't communicate at all... and they need the warlike capabilities....).

[JockBoy87]

There is speculation among anthropologists that Homo sapiens neandertalensis (Neandertal) was a gentle version of the “wise man” and that his cousin (modern man) responded by annihilating him.

Well we are the only ones from genus Homo. The other species came and went rather "quickly."

[chance1]

I knew we could agree on something about guns Kul. I get so tired of people blaming videogames and movies. At one point people were making a big fuss about how the Newtown shooter played Call of Duty. Guess what old people who are out of touch-- so did probably 75% of his victims! It had nothing to do with it.

it's grand to be so certain

no one is saying that videogames or violent movies/tv make people crazy - will take a sane person and make them not so

but what part of the concept of "desensitization" don't u get ?

and do games need to be so gory ? where people are shot and their body parts fly off and blood splatters? and u get points?

sorry bucko

that's sick

and it someone is already a wee bit sick ......... that can't help

sounds me to me like ur concerned about missing out some FUN

not about what might be a problem

and love your "old people are out of touch"

give lostlover a call and u can hang out together knocking old people over in the street - only the out of touch ones of course ....... the in touch ones have nothing to worry about

as for the topic:

do i really care what matt damon thinks about fracking ?

NO

i just want him to go back to being jason bourne

[palemale]

The right wing nuts love to criticize liberal celebrities who use their celebrity to advance their political point of view. Yet, these same right wing nuts are silent about extremely wealthy right wingers like the Koch brothers who use their wealth to advance their political point of view, although they are no more knowledgeable than your average celebrity. The difference, of course, is that what celebrities advocate rarely does anything to enrich them. Right wing rich people do what they do out of greed, so they can pocket billions of dollars more than they already do. I, for one, find the expenditures of the wealthy right wingers far more offensive, and to be an actual danger to our democracy.

[Zu-Mendel]

How is this any different than Ted Nugent using his popularity to go on his violence-tinged rants?

I was going to post a few of his choice quotes including calling over half of the country "sub-human varmint", but you people have heard them all before. One thing I just discovered about the man is that for all his bullshit about hunter's rights he's a convicted poacher. This man has also been praised various times by the mouth-piece of the GOP, Fox News.

What makes for the political Left in this country has it's embarrassments that it would like to sweep under the rug, but the Right parades out a figure straight out of a Yosemite Sam cartoon like they're fucking proud of it.

[Jack Springer]

The right wing nuts love to criticize liberal celebrities who use their celebrity to advance their political point of view. Yet, these same right wing nuts are silent about extremely wealthy right wingers like the Koch brothers who use their wealth to advance their political point of view, although they are no more knowledgeable than your average celebrity. The difference, of course, is that what celebrities advocate rarely does anything to enrich them. Right wing rich people do what they do out of greed, so they can pocket billions of dollars more than they already do. I, for one, find the expenditures of the wealthy right wingers far more offensive, and to be an actual danger to our democracy.

Duh --- these actors do what they do out of greed and then act offended when people copy-cat their acts.

[palemale]

Duh --- these actors do what they do out of greed and then act offended when people copy-cat their acts.

[xbuzzerx]

it's grand to be so certain

no one is saying that videogames or violent movies/tv make people crazy - will take a sane person and make them not so

but what part of the concept of "desensitization" don't u get ?

Offer proof of the correlation beyond speculation.

What part of these movies and videogames are experienced widely in every country without a public gun spree problem don't you get?

[Rolyo85]

Duh --- these actors do what they do out of greed and then act offended when people copy-cat their acts.

Insofar as any person does their job "out of greed", sure. Or are you just jealous they make more money than you and more people know their name?

[xbuzzerx]

The right wing nuts love to criticize liberal celebrities who use their celebrity to advance their political point of view. Yet, these same right wing nuts are silent about extremely wealthy right wingers like the Koch brothers who use their wealth to advance their political point of view, although they are no more knowledgeable than your average celebrity. The difference, of course, is that what celebrities advocate rarely does anything to enrich them. Right wing rich people do what they do out of greed, so they can pocket billions of dollars more than they already do. I, for one, find the expenditures of the wealthy right wingers far more offensive, and to be an actual danger to our democracy.

Well said. When celebrities throw themselves at Haitian earthquake or Japanese tsunami relief efforts, HIV fundraisers, gay marriage support or whatever else I fail to see how they're the equivalent of a huge transnational conglomerate shareholder trying to get more exploitable deregulation passed or whatever else. They're not seeking to personally benefit financially from these efforts in the case of left-wing celebs. In fact they're doing exactly what everyone, including the right, would criticize them for NOT using their celebrity to help out with. That's the hypocrisy here.

[Rolyo85]

I am sorry, did we tell Clint Eastwood to go fuck himself when he was ranting at an empty chair? No, wait, we were defending him.

[Ninja108]

I've noticed a lot of people that love the second amendment have first amendment issues when someone talks about gun control.

[Ambrocious]

LETS BAN SPOONS FOR CAUSING OBESITY TOO!

They are not trying to ban guns because of the school shooting. This is a long term demonization plan to make guns look like the problem when it reality, it is not. The plan to disarm all American citizens is part of the propaganda training as demonstrated by this video of Eric Holder in 1995, United States Attorney General:



He admits in this video that he wants to "change our minds" about guns and make guns look like a terrible thing. He says that "We must brainwash people against guns" (3:10 seconds in). He calls guns a bad thing (although they are inanimate objects, like a car, bus, hammer, knife).

Once they disarm us, it's easier to round up the resistance and kill them. Then, those who were good little boys and girls and turned in their guns (or already were brain washed and had none because they don't understand the bigger picture, nor do they have the ability to understand for some reason) will then be hurt badly by the military forces which rise up to completely destroy the United States once and for all.

1) Criminals DO NOT follow gun rules, so even if guns were banned, the only people that suffer are the ones who obeyed. Now criminals can rob houses easier without guns to protect you.

2) Guns are still inanimate objects that only work when you cause them to work. Blaming guns for shootings is like blaming spoons for obesity. People need a proper gun education including gun safety training courses, where to store your guns OUT of view and locked up so no one can get to them easily (unless it's you getting to them). People need to know guns are not bad, just as a spoon isn't, nor is a car, even though a car can easily drive full speed into a crowd of people.

3) Government has been planning the end of America for a long time now. Anti-American politicians have been given power and control (this has been happening now for a very long time, go watch "ENDGAME: Blueprint For Global Enslavement" on YouTube) and their main objective is to destroy the United States. Threw propaganda (the sending of programmed media to get you to think about something in a certain way accompanied by emotions that fits the agenda of the government) they have achieved much. They play on the strings of our hearts by of course showing all those kids killed and then saying that ALL guns are to blame, including a splash of racial division to REALLY get the ball rolling.

4) Ignorance will get you killed and will cause you to follow logical and reasonable sounding ideas, including peaceful disarming of the nation. What many are finding out is that there is a some plan to disarm us and it is going to take place sooner rather than later. Once we are disarmed, any resistance including protesters can and will be locked away, all the while the poor victims who CALLED FOR the removal of our guns will be one of the main causes for the absolute destruction of this country. Some people don't know nor are they able to understand (I don't know how but they are incapable of seeing the truth about things, loving lies I guess) that owning and properly using a gun for the right reasons (hunting, sporting events, self-defense) is not bad but actually quite exhilarating. Learning to shoot a gun strips out any fear you might have had and you can see clearly and understand that guns aren't evil, but they do require responsible decision making.

For anyone not knowing the large spectrum of things, I have always encouraged people to watch a few documentaries about how history went and how it's playing out again and what we can do about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J9cQpjSELk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klqv9t1zVww
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s

[rareboy]

Please tell us that you haven't used up all the Aluminum foil and that you do not own a gun.

[Jack Springer]

I am sorry, did we tell Clint Eastwood to go fuck himself when he was ranting at an empty chair? No, wait, we were defending him.

nah, you just made fun of him and called him a stupid old man.

[rareboy]

Well...

It was richly deserved.

He helped Mitt lose the election.

[JayHawk]

nah, you just made fun of him and called him a stupid old man.

Rolyo's quote was said as if he was a republican... considering they are the only halfwits angered over freedom of speech. Sensible people across the nation made fun of a weird performance at a political convention however NOBODY said that Eastwood should shut up or that he shouldn't have the right to free speech because he is an actor ostensibly for the other team.

I find situation moral courage to be quite amusing. Kind of like all the gay sex is bad republicans becoming embroiled in gay sex scandals. Or a Mormon Senator Crapping out on his party and his church by getting busted for DUI. How about you Jack? Do you find that stuff amusing?

[Kulindahr]

I've noticed a lot of people that love the second amendment have first amendment issues when someone talks about gun control.

Got any examples?

FWIW, the NRA has intervened in court cases on the side of free speech.

[Kulindahr]

Ambrocious, that video reveals nicely that Holder doesn't understand the Constitution or individual liberty. But the other side of that is that what you set out underneath does not necessarily follow.

[xbuzzerx]

Once they disarm us, it's easier to round up the resistance and kill them.

This is the part where you lose sane people. Are there FEMA death camps, btw?

[xbuzzerx]

Well...

It was richly deserved.

He helped Mitt lose the election.

I watched his whole speech and said "serious or trolling?" through the whole thing. I still to this day don't know.

Rolyo's quote was said as if he was a republican... considering they are the only halfwits angered over freedom of speech. Sensible people across the nation made fun of a weird performance at a political convention however NOBODY said that Eastwood should shut up or that he shouldn't have the right to free speech because he is an actor ostensibly for the other team.

I find situation moral courage to be quite amusing. Kind of like all the gay sex is bad republicans becoming embroiled in gay sex scandals. Or a Mormon Senator Crapping out on his party and his church by getting busted for DUI. How about you Jack? Do you find that stuff amusing?

Or "deficits and the economy are things to be hypercritical of politicians over, when Democrats are in control"?

[Ninja108]

Got any examples?

FWIW, the NRA has intervened in court cases on the side of free speech.

Bob Costas and Piers Morgan (who is really annoying by the way) come to mind.

[Jack Springer]

Rolyo's quote was said as if he was a republican... considering they are the only halfwits angered over freedom of speech. Sensible people across the nation made fun of a weird performance at a political convention however NOBODY said that Eastwood should shut up or that he shouldn't have the right to free speech because he is an actor ostensibly for the other team.

I find situation moral courage to be quite amusing. Kind of like all the gay sex is bad republicans becoming embroiled in gay sex scandals. Or a Mormon Senator Crapping out on his party and his church by getting busted for DUI. How about you Jack? Do you find that stuff amusing?

Here comes Mr. Sanctimonious again.

[xbuzzerx]

Here comes Mr. Sanctimonious again.

I notice this is frequently you or Chance's response when someone calls out the double standards you guys won't acknowledge.

[Kulindahr]

I notice this is frequently you or Chance's response when someone calls out the double standards you guys won't acknowledge.

You're not supposed to notice that until you have a few thousand more posts.

[xbuzzerx]

You're not supposed to notice that until you have a few thousand more posts.

&#*%&@# rage!! You're not the boss of me!

But yeah I want to take this area seriously. I do. I want to. People are making it incredibly difficult. OH MY GOD OBAMA KNITTED AN AFGHAN FOR HIS WIFE THEREFORE CONTRIBUTING TO THE NATIONAL DEFICIT AND SUPPORTING OPPRESSED YARN MAKERS IN THE THIRD WORLD. Ugh. Make it stop. My head. The pain.

[JayHawk]

Here comes Mr. Sanctimonious again.

I don't think understanding English counts as sanctimonious... but hey what ever makes ya feel good at night curled up with your faux outrage and conspiracy theories.

[TX-Beau]

HOLA CHICAS!!!!!!

I see we've made progress.



Don't worry, y'all look more festive after my vacation.

Jack

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!!

Now, where to start....