Gun control should involve Hollywood's violent movies

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Jan. 22, 2013 6:56 p.m.


    "Let's deal with the actual people who are murderd by gun violence.

    Before we move on to victims in the world of the imaginary."

    What do you think influences them to do such things? I'm pretty sure they didn't wake up one day and say. "I think I'm going to be a murderer."

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:40 p.m.

    LDS Liberal: ". . . the Constitution clearly calls out that ONLY the Supreme Court can make rulings as to what is or is not Constitutional."

    Not to pick nits, but the Constitution does not clearly specify that only the Supreme Court can determine constitutionality. That principle was not definitively decided until the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 6:08 p.m.

    Let's deal with the actual people who are murderd by gun violence.

    Before we move on to victims in the world of the imaginary.

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 5:52 p.m.

    When I was a kid, I used to watch the Lone Ranger and that genre. Almost every episode involved gun violence. And I played with toy pistols and wooden rifles. According to the reasoning of the gun advocates and the letter writer, I should be the next Adam Lanza.

    Can someone explain how I grew into an adult who owns no guns, abhors violence, and favors reasonable restrictions on the possession of guns? Could the causes of gun violence possibly be more complex than the influence of realistic portrayals of violence in the media?

  • nonceleb Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 2:15 p.m.

    Japanese children spend twice as much time as American children watching violent movies and playing violent video games. True, Japan has strict gun laws, but other kinds of violence - assaults, battery and use of other kinds of weapons, are virtually non-existent in Japan. Violence is a cultural issue and is too complex to be singling out media as the main culprit.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 1:36 p.m.

    Which one is worse, a Democrat who refuses to touch upon fictional guns or a Republican who refuses to touch upon real guns when it comes to dealing with the gun violence problem we have?

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 21, 2013 1:31 p.m.

    Mike, I'm in full favor of you and your mental kin in being free from the rest of us. I suggest Texas where you can live in harmony with others just like you. I'd like all of you to go to Texas and secede.

    Your morals are founded in what time frame? The 1700's when there was slavery?

    The 1800's when women couldn't vote and children worked in factories without any safety rules?

    The 1900's when antisemitism, racism and chauvinism were the norm?

    Where and when were your morals practiced as you like it Mike? The rest of us would like to know which of us would be back to being oppressed.

    I think the US just has too much freedom for Mike to handle.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 21, 2013 1:04 p.m.

    MR..potatoe/potahto..disagree/mock. So he doubles down on next post.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 21, 2013 12:34 p.m.

    The "mockers" are in high form today. They pretend that they are incapable of self-contorl or self-restraint. They claim that without the boot of government on our necks that we cannot choose to do the right thing. They ignore the fact that "criminals" use guns to slaughter people and that law abiding citizens use arms properly.

    They twist and turn our words to suit their purposes.

    They reject the Constitution relying instead on their "wisdom".

    No President, no Congress and no Court can change the Constitution. Only the States have that right and only when 75% of the States agree. The mocker ignore the process just as they ignore the rest of the Constitution. Their greatest insult to the people is that they're tired of hearing about the Constitution. Maybe that's because the Constitution rejects everything that they do and everything that they say.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Jan. 21, 2013 12:16 p.m.

    The first phrase of the 2nd Amendment is an absolute phrase that modifies the following clause, as any lawyer can tell you. My question to all the gun nuts here: Which well-regulated militia do you belong to? Who regulates it? What regulations do you abide by?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 11:41 a.m.

    It's "irrefutable" that JCS is an extremely extreme extremist.

    But I did once hear a TV executive boast that it was his intention to "push the envelope" when it came to the shows his network was going to offer.

    They did. And now his network has some of the most violent and raunchy shows on the tube.

    Which network?


  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 10:48 a.m.

    Just love reading Mike Richard's interpretation of the Constitution.

    He puts himself and his single opinions above United States Supreme Court's.

    Mike -- Isn't that trampling the Constitution?
    Since the Constitution clearly calls out that ONLY the Supreme Court can make rulings as to what is or is not Constitutional?

    You're making yourself an ENEMY of the Constitution, rather than defending it.
    ...and that's why I fight you.

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    In the animal kingdom, the play of the young prepares them for adult life. Predatory animal babies "play kill" until they are big enough to do it for real.

    Like it or not, humans are in the animal catagory. Our children's play will prepare and train them to be adults. If their play is filled with predatory killing, why are we surprised that they become predatory killers as adults.

    Somewhere we need to recognize that the media our children engage in, does shape who they are. Hollywood goes after guns to hide their own guilt. They set the trends and the masses follow, on Twitter, in fashion, in humor, and in violent behavior.

    I shun the Hollywood trends. I consume very little of their fare. I could care less who was oozing out of her dress at the Oscars, or who got an Oscar. But I live in a world full of people who worship the Hollywood type, as idols, just like the people of the Old Testament worshiped their idols.

    The entertainment industry is ruining our children and our society, and we are paying them very well to do it.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    Hollywood isn't selling violence, it's selling heroism. Nobody goes to the movies thinking 'gee, I really want to see a lot of violent images.' You go because you want to see a story, an interesting and engaging story. And most action movies (the ones everyone's upset about right now), all tend to explore the same basic narrative elements--good guys, going after bad guys. We see bad guys using violence to do bad things, and then we see good guys shooting them. In fact, a lot of the most violent movies being made hardly involve human beings at all--mostly they're about space aliens, vampires, zombies, super-heroes.
    Nobody makes 'violent movies.' Filmmakers tell stories. Often the conflicts in those stories involve acts of violence. This has always been true, and it's especially true today, because movie technology has advanced to the point that really cool action sequences look very realistic. But the point is to sell heroism. Not violence disconnected from narrative.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:41 a.m.

    I think these cries about movie violence are disingenuous. Those violent movies have done well in America, including here in Utah, for a long, long time. We want this stuff, and we pay for it. Guns are something of a national sickness, and pop culture reflects that. The president is trying to treat root cause, not symptoms, and accusing him of playing to hollywood is just a distraction.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:31 a.m.

    Could you imagine how angry repubs would be if president Obama made restrictions on Hollywood? The comparisons to hitler would never end.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:16 a.m.


    Your stance has been NO RESTRICTION ever.

    If the choice came down to NO Restrictions as you suggest, OR reasonable gun laws, I am quite confident that 75% of the states would ratify. Instead, we have a supreme court that has the latitude to interpret the constitution within the context of the times that we live in.

    And until you are appointed to the Supreme Court, they, rather than you get to make those determinations.

    Is it really that difficult to see that in the days of the Constitution, there was no federal army?
    That the citizens could be called to defend this country in the form of a militia? Is it really that difficult to understand that when the Constitution was written, the second amendment made perfect sense?

    You would advocate that the average citizen can carry weapons in bars. And on airplanes. And into courtrooms. That makes NO sense in todays society.

    Your views are out of touch with the mainstream, they are out of touch with the constitution, and at times, they are out of touch with the reality that we live in today.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    "violent movies that Hollywood continues to churn out that glamorize the use of guns and the committing of murders."..Grace did we forget our high school literature courses? Have you forgotten the greek tragedies, have you forgotten the theme of many of Shakesperes plays. The "glamorizing of murders" has alwyas been one of the most central themes of entertainment. Hollywood is better at portraying blood splatter now and that's it. Themes haven't changed. Entertainment has always been centered on love/cheating, hate/murder, commitment/infidelity.

    To Mr. Richards, please your self agrandisment of being "mocked" is getting tiring. We disagree with your interpretation of the constitution. most of Americans, including the courts believe the constitution was written in a way that allows for the application of principles within the context of changing circumstances. That is not "mocking" you. It's disagreeing with you.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    If Obama called on restrictions on Hollywood and video games then you folks would be complaining that he was violating the 1st Amendment. He just can't win! Either way the far right would bash him.

    Just admit it, you folks are less concerned with gun control and violence and far more concerned with bashing the President.

  • isrred South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    So guns don't kill people (people kill people), but fake guns in Hollywood movies do?

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    This type of letter cracks me up. Starts off with a gently stated, reasonable premise, and then immediately degrades into an "BUT OBAMA IS EVIL!" backflip at the finish line.

    Yes, Obama is afraid to insult Hollywood for fear of losing campaign contributions.

    For his third term.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    Where in the Constitution is the President authorized to establish "gun control"? How about Congress? How about the Courts? How about State and Local governments (see the 2010 Court ruling)?

    Gun control is left to the individual. Gun control is a guaranteed freedom where government is prohibited from interfering. Gun control is the responsibility of each citizen. Those who choose to misuse that responsibility will be prosecuted and penalized.

    No level of government and no President has any authority to modify the Supreme Law of the Land until 75% of the States ratify an amendment allowing "gun control" laws.

    Arguments for governmental gun control are simply arguments to disregard the Supreme Law of the Land. There are many to whom the Constitution is an impediment. They want nothing more than to re-establish a "king" to rule over us who will mete out "liberties" as he desires. They want a return to King George. They mock anyone who reminds them that we are a free people and that anything not enumerated in the Constitution is left to the States or to the people. Gun control is an issue that can only be "governed" by the individual.

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 7:58 a.m.

    @John Charity Spring:

    Where can I read or hear Hollywood's open and stated agenda of tearing down traditional moral values? I would be surprised if everyone in Hollywood could agree on a lunch menu, much less a nefarious agenda.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 7:20 a.m.

    This is one of the most correct letters to appear in this paper in a long time. No amount of gun control can bring moral values back to a society when that society is constantly bombarded with messages claiming that violence is nothing more than an entertaining pastime.

    It is irrefutable fact that Obama ignores the social harm being done by modern Hollywood because he is beholden to the left-wing directors and producers. Indeed, he could not have been elected without Hollywood money and publicity.

    Hollywood has an open and stated agenda of tearing down traditional moral values. Its promotion of violence is just another part of this effort.

    In essence, Obama has willingly sold his soul for a few pieces of silver. What is far worse is that for a few more pieces of silver, he has sold the souls of millions of innocent schoolchildren.

  • Clydesdale Tooele, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 7:19 a.m.


  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 21, 2013 6:07 a.m.

    "He is too beholden to the entertainment industry due to its generous contributions to his campaign and support of his liberal agenda."

    And you fail to mention the "generous contributions" by the gun lobby to the other side of the issue.

    Our politicians are bought and paid for, no doubt.
    Funny how people only complain when the "other side" gets bought.

    Until we get all the big money out of politics, we will have the best politicians that money can buy (on both sides).

    Secondly, I find it ironic that people who want the second amendment of constitution protected at all costs are so quick to want to step on the first amendment.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 21, 2013 3:03 a.m.

    Hollywood is involved with gun control. They have to have licences to use auto-matic and restricted weapons even if they load them with blanks. I'd say there is more gun paperwork in Hollywood than any other place on Earth.