More ABC Gun Control rah rah?


PDA






Baba Louie
October 18, 2005, 11:10 AM
http://abc.go.com/primetime/bostonlegal/preview.html

"Forced by a client to put Denny Crane on the case, Shirley Schmidt reluctantly enlists his help to defend a Democratic Congressman being sued for not keeping a campaign promise to pass a ban on assault weapons. The right-wing Crane is an unlikely defender from the start, but Schmidt really wonders if she made the right decision when he goes missing the day of his closing."

I laughed my head off last week as Shatner "shot" his first steelhead and had to sit on the beach in a "time-out".
Saw the preview for this show about "assault weapon ban or gun control" where Shatner's persona (Denny Crane...very right wing) and thought it might be worth another laugh... or rage... depending on how it's written. (Like I don't have a preconceived notion of how ABC will spin it)

If you enjoyed reading about "More ABC Gun Control rah rah?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LAR-15
October 18, 2005, 11:15 AM
So they didn't pass a ban on machineguns?

jsalcedo
October 21, 2005, 04:24 PM
In the show Shatner shows off all his "assault rifles" and has several ND's in the office after he asures they are not loaded. --Hyuck Hyuck --

Then after soul searching he enters the court room dressed as a revolutionary patriot holding a "charleton heston-esque musket which he ND's
into the court-room ceiling after he assures everyone its unloaded.
(Who writes this stuff?)

Then he goes on and sums up to the jury like he was at an NRA convention
doing the cold dead hands thing. Actually pretty funny if you are already pro gun.


It doesn't tell whether he wins or not but the other lawyers cringe at every
time he invokes an "NRA cliche"

See the episode for yourself and decide.

Carl N. Brown
October 21, 2005, 04:36 PM
When has a politician ever been sued for failing to keep
a campaign promise? The difference between this stuff
(network TV) and Monty Python is Monty Python did not
take itself seriously. Reality is a lot more complicated than
the inside of a TV screenwriter's head.

hoppinglark
October 21, 2005, 04:38 PM
please define
"ND's"

DelayedReaction
October 21, 2005, 04:42 PM
ND = Negligent Discharge.

Zundfolge
October 21, 2005, 05:07 PM
(Who writes this stuff?)

David E. Kelley ... rabid leftist


I liked the show and watched it regularly until that episode ... he's a tricky bastard, he sets up a show with good writing and good characters and then starts seeping more and more politics into it until finaly he ruins the show.

I think he jumped the shark with this episode.

Baba Louie
October 21, 2005, 06:28 PM
Thinking I might give it one more episode just to see where it all goes before I go back to reading books on Tuesday evenings.

Gordon Fink
October 21, 2005, 06:31 PM
It was blatantly anti-gun. The fictional case in the episode was also legally groundless.

~G. Fink

ScottsGT
October 21, 2005, 06:33 PM
Don't worry fellas. The show is reportedly dead anyway. Last fall right before they pulled it off Sunday evening, there was an article in Parade Magazine that said there was only 6 more episodes in the can and they would finish them off and not make anymore. That's the last I heard of this one though.

rick_reno
October 21, 2005, 07:04 PM
Put some new batteries in your remote and change the channel. Do you watch this crap just to get upset? Put on OLN, watch someone kill something.

ReadyontheRight
October 21, 2005, 07:09 PM
BANG! Don't your BANG! guns just BANG! go off BANG! all the time BANG! for no BANG! reason? Whoops, I thought it was unloaded. BANG!

Hollywood:rolleyes:

NoBite
October 21, 2005, 07:26 PM
David E. Kelley ... rabid leftist

I think he jumped the shark with this episode.

Up until this episode, I loved this show, most especially the Denny Crane character. Tara really does it for me, too. Spader is brilliant and usually the blatant leftist characters are revealed as boobs, IMO.

This episode, however, went over the edge. Spouting tired gun-grabber scare tactics and using a straw-man argument, the producer tried to convinve the viewer that the NRA is an organization in the ilk of the Third Reich, that 70+% of the public, all the police forces and the majority of the Congress would quickly reinstate Clinton's "assault" weapon ban if not for backroom pressure tactics of the NRA. They went farther and briefly commented on the recent bill just signed that protects gun manufacturers from frivolous and patently unfair law suits. Of course, this show insisted the bill really gives the gun manufacturers unprecedented protection from liability law suits. To the casual watcher, it might be easy to be swayed by this bunk. The law suits in question have nothing to do with product liability, as implied on the TV show, and everything to do with bankrupting an industry in a thinly veiled attempt at gun control. For instance, a Bic pen can be a lethal weapon when jabbed into a victim's throat. Do we then permit the victim's survivors to sue the Bic pen company because someone used one of their pens to commit a murder? Of course not. These are the types of law suits prevented by the recent legislation, not legitimate liability cases.

In short, I nearly wrote the producers of this show a heated letter. But, I don't want to give them even a moment of satisfaction that they might have drawn ANY attention to their agenda.

FWIW, Denny Crane could have done a much better job responding to the prosecutor than he did. That would have been worth watching.

If you enjoyed reading about "More ABC Gun Control rah rah?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!