My Thread Got Fat Fingered! Hollywood & Gun Myths Redoux

Status
Not open for further replies.

Treo

member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
3,109
Location
Co. Springs
I got a chance to restart this thread due an administrative error, so I decided to take it. (sans examples)

I got to thinking about this the other night while watching a movie.

The people in Hollyweed might be stupid but they're not dumb. They know that movies make wonderful propaganda tools, and I really wonder if they don't put some of these myths into movies on purpose, as opposed to just being ignorant.

some of the common themes I see are.

Automatic weapons widely available.

Gun registration in places that don't have gun registration.

Fugitives can get guns W/out a background check, easily

"Cop Killer" bullets

One of the most common myths I see ( From "Shane" to "Billy Jack")

is that self defense ( especially armed selfdefense )is wrong and some thing that "ordinary" people can't do.

Although a lot of those movies are pretty accurate in depiciting that the armed bad guys pretty much have their way W/ the unarmed peasantry until somebody gets tired of it and picks up a gun.

What say you? Is it mindless entertainment or is Hollyweed pushing an anti-gun agenda?
 
Hollywood is about entertainment. They are worried about telling a story, and reality gets sacrificed to do so. They don't do this only with guns, I am a diabetic and they say all types of weird things about diabetes. Does that make Hollywood anti-diabetic?
 
Good guys never shoot first

When they released the "remastered" version of the old Star Wars (Episode IV, but the first release), there was a new twist in the scene where Han Solo is cornered in the (famous) bar by a bounty hunter.

In the first version, the bounty hunter announces his intention to kill Solo, even saying "Goodbye, Solo." Han blasts him before he can do it.

In the remastered version, the BH shoots first, and misses, at a distance of 2 feet.
 
Georgey did a lot to those movies that I really don't believe it was about any agenda.

In the "original" Greedo says something to the effect of "I've been waiting a long time for this" and Solo goes "Yes, I bet you have" before shooting him.

In the "remastered" Greedo shoots first after all that. Really poorly done.

Changing the guns to walkie talkies in ET on the other hand....

I'm sure there are some actual movies with an underlying anti theme. Most though I'd bet are about being entertaining and pushing sales.

Just like newspapers and the ilk. Its not about the truth, but ratings.
 
In the remastered version, the BH shoots first, and misses, at a distance of 2 feet

And all this time I thought that was just my bad memory. They also took out the scene where Luke looks at Liea and says " Carrie! "
 
Georgey did a lot to those movies that I really don't believe it was about any agenda.

In the "original" Greedo says something to the effect of "I've been waiting a long time for this" and Solo goes "Yes, I bet you have" before shooting him.

In the "remastered" Greedo shoots first after all that. Really poorly done.

Changing the guns to walkie talkies in ET on the other hand....

I'm sure there are some actual movies with an underlying anti theme. Most though I'd bet are about being entertaining and pushing sales.

Just like newspapers and the ilk. Its not about the truth, but ratings.

There was actually an episode of South Park about that. How they were changing every movie with guns into walkie talkies.

http://www.southparkzone.com/episodes/609/Free-Hat.html

Here's the episode... It's not really high road... but they raise a lot of really good points about Hollywood, and their BS
 
One of the most common myths I see ( From "Shane" to "Billy Jack")

is that self defense ( especially armed selfdefense )is wrong and some thing that "ordinary" people can't do.

But doesn't Alan Ladd(Shane) prove the myth wrong and by picking up the gun and killing Jack Palance(the BG)and ridding the town of this evil ,he shows it could not be accomplished without fighting back with a gun.
Or,are you saying that Shane is not ordinary and therefore cannot be used as an example that armed self defense is the right course?And that Van Heflin(the father)is not a unusual pacifist but the norm and just hopes the evil will go away without having to resort to self defense?
To me,Shane(1953) is quite the pro-gun movie.And George Stevens quite the pro-gun director.
 
Remember in "Shane " the majority of the homesteaders gave up and were ready to quit after Ernie Wright got killed. They said they'd rather leave because gunfighting was murder. IIRC one of them even called Shane a murderer and Marion told Shane that the valley would be a better place if there were no guns ,including his (and by implication him) in the valley
 
"Warning, the characters and events depicted in this film are entirely fictional. Any resemblance to real persons or events, living or dead is entirely coincidental."

"No animals were harmed in making this movie."

The one that always cracks me up is:

"You got a permit for that gun?"

and --

"Is your gun registered?"

I'm waiting for the reply --

"Jeez officer. You know damned well this jurisdiction requires neither a permit nor registration to own a handgun."
 
Remember in "Shane " the majority of the homesteaders gave up and were ready to quit after Ernie Wright got killed. They said they'd rather leave because gunfighting was murder. IIRC one of them even called Shane a murderer and Marion told Shane that the valley would be a better place if there were no guns ,including his (and by implication him) in the valley
__________________

In the end who prevailed?What do we remember?Jack Palance going down.
Shane and the gun prevailing.The sheep saved by the man with the gun.
But a good topic,Treo and my kudos to you for starting it!:)
 
Perhaps this may be of some assistance in answering your question.





Entertainment Industries Council, Inc.
ISSUES: GUN VIOLENCE, FIREARM SAFETY & INJURY PREVENTION
Depiction Suggestions

# Attempt to highlight alternative resolutions to conflict rather than relying on gunplay as the only or automatic means of settling confrontations. Clashes can be resolved by other less lethal means, perhaps by characters using their wits and cunning to overcome opponents.

Consider highlighting the emotional consequences for the shooter, such as feelings of guilt, remorse, personal angst, and so on.

Consider incorporating such real-life scenarios as:

* The shooter or possessor of a gun being accidently injured by it.

* A gun accidentally misfiring while being loaded or unloaded by a criminal or other user.

* A gun misfiring and injuring someone after being accidentally dropped.

# Consider the story potential that may exist in a family filing suit against a gun manufacturer for injuries or death sustained by a defective firearm that misfired.

# Try emphasizing the fact that introducing a gun into an argument lethalizes anger: What could have been resolved with just harsh words, or even cuts and bruises, may end up with a death. Guns don't allow for cooling off or reconciling once the momentary or situational anger subsides.

# Consider reflecting the reality that homeowners often freeze up or tremble so badly when trying to use a gun in self-defense that they are unable to deploy it. Or show them as being too frozen in fear to even get the gun.

# Where appropriate to the story, consider portraying a teenage girl threatening to break up with her boyfriend unless he gets rid of his gun -- or a boy doing the same with a gun-owning girlfriend.

# Explore depiction of legal prosecution or civil action taken against parents for negligently leaving a gun available to a child who then uses it to either intentionally or unintentionally harm themselves or others.

# Attempt to provide a positive role model by showing parents making gun safety inquiries of other households where children visit, asking about storage, accessibility, and so on.

# Consider depicting the reality that women are far more likely to be shot by husbands or lovers than by an intruder. Odds are that a gun in her home will be used against her rather than in her defense.

# Consider showing bartenders or bar owners being prosecuted or held civilly liable for gun injuries caused by a drunken patron who is known by them to carry a weapon (akin to the prosecution of bar owners for traffic deaths caused by drunk drivers).

# When appropriate, incorporate parents having heart-to-heart talks with their children, especially teenagers, about guns not being an acceptable resolution to the problems they face with schoolyard bullies or anything else.

# Emphasize, where possible, the legal penalties invoked against "straw purchasers" who act as intermediaries between gun dealers and persons who are legally restricted from buying guns themselves.

# Consider showing someone who is attempting to use a gun in self-defense being overpowered by the attacker who then uses the gun against him or her.

# Attempt to show safe ways school kids can tip off the police or school authorities that a fellow student has a gun, and show that this action can bring about a positive outcome.

# Consider showing that even so-called "toy" guns, like pellet or BB guns or prop guns, can cause real injuries and even death.

# Give thought to starting the story after any gun violence has already occurred, and confine the plot line to the aftermath — detection, prosecution, coping of survivors, and so on.

# Consider occasionally having "junk" guns misfiring or jamming at critical times, as these guns are prone to do so after a period of use.

# Consider depicting people as feeling less safe, rather than more safe, when they find their neighbors becoming increasingly armed.

# Try incorporating statistics on gun usage into scripts by having appropriate characters, like law enforcement personnel, DA's and teachers cite them. For instance most people don't know that guns are more often used for suicide than homicide. (54% of gun deaths were suicides, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999)

# Consider highlighting the fact that teenagers often act impulsively and the presense of guns may increase the likelihood that a transient emotion may turn into a fatal event.

# Consider having characters criminally charged for simply brandishing a firearm.

# Try to emphasize that offenders get stiffer sentences if they use a gun in the commission of their crimes.

# Consider pointing out the inadvertant injuries caused by bullets shot into the air by holiday celebrants. What goes up must come down, sometimes with lethal force.

# If appropriate to the story, consider exploring a gun dealer's or a gun supplier's remorse about the harm done by someone to whom he or she furnished a firearm.

# Consider having a character use a gun in what he/she believes is self-defense only to be charged with murder or manslaughter because it's determined that excessive or unjustified lethal force was deployed.

# Consider having characters successfully use alternatives to guns for self-defense, such as pepper spray or mace.

# When appropriate, try to depict parents, teachers, counselors, and even peers giving advice to young people about alternate forms of conflict resolution.

# Try to provide role modeling behavior by showing friends trying to dissuade a character from arming him/herself after the gun death of a friend or family member.

# Consider portraying a gun manufacturer making the right decisions in choosing to design a safer firearm.

# Try making the point that having guns in the house may actually increase the possibility of home invasion robbery since firearms are an attractive target for theft.

# Consider having characters successfully use alternatives to guns for self-defense, such as pepper spray or mace.

# Consider showing a parent chastising his or her spouse for leaving a gun where their children can find it.
 
Entertainment Industries Council, Inc.
ISSUES: GUN VIOLENCE, FIREARM SAFETY & INJURY PREVENTION
Depiction Suggestions

# Attempt to highlight alternative resolutions to conflict rather than relying on gunplay as the only or automatic means of settling confrontations. Clashes can be resolved by other less lethal means, perhaps by characters using their wits and cunning to overcome opponents.etc.,etc. ,ad nauseum.

Good Golly, Miss Molly!
Can we refer to High Noon(1952) as a much better,faster, more effective final way, to resolve extreme conflict resolution instead?:D
Please?
I don't think Frank Miller would have confined himself to the industry guidelines.
 
Things weren't always this way. Remember the Fox and the Hound? That movie had a fair representation of firearms, I think, as tools... the lady even held Amos Slade at gun-point once.

Wow... you can watch Fox and the Hound on youtube.
 
In the first version, the bounty hunter announces his intention to kill Solo, even saying "Goodbye, Solo." Han blasts him before he can do it.

In the remastered version, the BH shoots first, and misses, at a distance of 2 feet.

thats because lucas probably got tired of the "HAN SHOT FIRST" crowd of which I include myself.
 
There was actually an episode of South Park about that. How they were changing every movie with guns into walkie talkies.

http://www.southparkzone.com/episodes/609/Free-Hat.html

Here's the episode... It's not really high road... but they raise a lot of really good points about Hollywood, and their BS

The makers of south park are known libertarians, I'm guessing they aren't very anti. Despite the show not being very high-road it is probably one of the most intelligent shows on television. The "Cartoon Wars" episodes are absolutely genius.

Most movies are horrible for accuracy. Insta-death of characters (usually faceless badguys) being shot is the most annoying imho.

Entertainment Industries Council, Inc.
ISSUES: GUN VIOLENCE, FIREARM SAFETY & INJURY PREVENTION
Depiction Suggestions

I do believe guns should be shown in a more "realistic" fashion, but these suggestions are blatantly anti. Meaning showing a fool twirling a gun/playing with a gun and having an AccidentalDischarge isn't really a negative thing as that is not safe gun handling. I don't have a problem with them showing results of bad handling/etc. as long as it is accurate to what could potentially happen if a fool is handling a gun.
 
I'm absolutely with Treo on the image Hollywood presents where there is this vast underground of automatic weapons that bad guys can always draw from. On the new FX show "Sons of Anarchy", the premiere revolved around a heist of Glocks and M-4s. Lethal Weapon 3 was about a crooked former cop helping bad guys clean out the evidence locker and funneling them back to the bad guys. It makes it really easy for people to believe that there are too many assualt rifles in society when they see massive gunfights of people hosing each other with machine guns like it's a thing cops encounter every day.

Based on movies, most people actually believe you can convert any semi to full auto by filing down the firing pin. They believe that bad guys are shreeding cars and dropping choppers with .50 sniper rifles. And oh yes, also from LW3, everyone is running around with armor piercing bullets that will penetrate not only a vest, but also the bucket of a backhoe.
 
The P.C. stuff goes back a lot longer than you might think.
I remember watching The Lone Ranger in the fifties SHootin the gun out of the hand of the bad guy and thinking 'what a dufuss' If you could shoot that well why not between the eyes. That would be eaisier than shooting a moving target[the hand]

Guess I was wierd even as a pre-teen.

Also used to laugh when the bad guy ran his gun dry and the white hat would put his gun away and fist fight with the bad guy. Never could understand the good guy taking a chance like that.
 
Based on movies, most people actually believe you can convert any semi to full auto by filing down the firing pin. They believe that bad guys are shreeding cars and dropping choppers with .50 sniper rifles. And oh yes, also from LW3, everyone is running around with armor piercing bullets that will penetrate not only a vest, but also the bucket of a backhoe.

I hated that movie.
 
I think many Hollywood people are ignorant, and make assumptions. I think they believe the propaganda as you pointed out.
 
Han Shot First

Now, I realize it's a joke but even that is a perfect example.

He's sitting a bar and a guy brandishes a weapon and makes it clear that he intends to use it ( aggravated menacing).

If that happened to one of us at Denny's we'd be 100% justified in shooting.
 
I agree about there being agenda. As for Lone Ranger, quite a few of those made-for-little-kid type shows of that era were that way. So, to some extent, were those series westerns of the '40s and '50s - Roy Rogers, Gene Autry, etc. Not that they wouldn't kill people, but they would resort to fists to remain "fair." Since these shows and movies were for young kids, I think the idea was to be as careful of their sensibilities as possible, not to be PC. Besides, if your the Lone Ranger, you can hit anything you want, even when shooting from the hip. Why not aim for the gun? :D

On the other hand, enyone ever notice who has the guns in modern crime/spy/cop shows or movies? The LEO's, or the bad guys. If he isn't a LEO and he has a gun, he's a bad guy.

Very sad.

~Dale
 
Treo point to the scene in the movie Shane in which:
Marion told Shane that the valley would be a better place if there were no guns ,including his (and by implication him) in the valley

This scene occurs just after Shane had given a lesson to Marion's little boy about how to carry a gun and had demonstrated his skill in shooting. But the scene contains more than Treo mentions -- it contains the central point of both sides of the argument for guns.

Marion says the valley would be better with no guns and, . . . (drum roll please), Shane responds that a gun is a tool like no other and is as good or bad as the hand that uses it.

Since most people are good -- we don't favor gun control for good people. On the other hand, we accept gun control for bad people in the hopes of mitigating the damage they do. The movie Shane demonstrates a good man defending the innocent against lawlessness.

I can't think of a more positive pro-RKBA movie.
 
The movie Shane demonstrates a good man defending the innocent against lawlessness.

Wouldn't it be more positive if the innocent were able to protect themselves?

If the movie is depicting armed self defense in a positive light why must Shane be stigmatized by the killing of 3 bad men to the point that he must leave the valley at the end of the movie
 
You bet there's an agenda. I noticed this some time back walking around in Blockbuster. Take a look at the dozens of gun movies in the video rental stores. What do you see? Dozens of well muscled, glowering, certified bad &#^, bad guys; automatic weapons everywhere; a truely astounding body count; lots of unrealistic action and death scenes; and if the bad guys don't have the guns, then the LEO's are the only other choice. Try taking a stroll through your local Blockbuster sometime and you'll see what the OP is talking about. Basically, Hollywood is pandering to the fantasies of the under 30 crowd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top