Hollywood, et al. Hops on the Gun-Banning Bandwagon…From Their Gated Communities
So here I am, sitting at work, during what has to be the least productive week of the year. Since I have the time, I thought I’d look through some of the random emails I receive on a daily basis. One of those emails contained the following public-service announcement:
Actors. Always with the actors. I guess there were some musicians in there too, but whatever. Marching ‘em up there to read a cue card must work though, or they’d stop using them for the “social issues,” right? Of course, all of these people have one thing in common: they’re Democrats. Oh, and they all live in some sort of compound/gated community in California and/or New York that keeps them from having to interact with the “common folk,” while being protected by some sort of armed security. It’s like Sean Penn telling us about how Venezuelan communist dictator Hugo Chavez is a great guy, when the closest Penn has ever come to actual communism is watching a re-run of Rocky IV. In other words, they’re all a bunch of clowns without any credibility.
Many of the actors in this liberal propaganda piece contribute just as much, if not more, to gun violence than the guns themselves. Crap, the very first guy up, Jamie Foxx, has been in a truckload of movies where people getting killed by guns is the norm. You can connect each and every one of the individuals up there with the glorification of gun violence. Well, maybe not all of them. I think two of them are basketball players. At least they didn’t put a hologram of 2 Pac in there.
They all want a plan. “Demand A Plan,” they say. The demanded “plan” equates to banning assault rifles, and creating more gun laws. In 2011, 323 murders were the result of rifles (not necessarily “assault” rifles), while 6,220 were the result of handguns (Don’t worry. Diane Feinstein wants your handguns too). We already have lots of gun laws. Federal gun laws that apply to everyone are here. Enforcement’s the issue. Overall, not much of a plan.
How about this? Let’s ban violent movies. Forget about putting ratings and age restrictions on them. That’s not enough. The mentally ill are still getting their hands on “Natural Born Killers.” So, no more “Django Unchained,” or “Scream,” or “Hurt Locker.” Wait, what was that Elizabeth Banks? “It’s not movies, it’s people.” “Lots of people see these movies, but only a small number go on a shooting spree.” “Why did the parents let them see it?”
And then someone will bring up the First Amendment. “It’s the most offensive speech we need to protect,” they say. Well I say let’s amend the First Amendment so that we can ban offensive speech. Let a majority of citizens in each community decide what’s ok. Or better yet…let’s just repeal it all together. It’s not like our government would take advantage of that. This is America. Don’t be paranoid. Oh, and we should make murder illegal-er. That’ll do it.
Notice how only one person mentioned the kid killed on the corner? While Newtown was a horrific occurrence, it pales in comparison to the number of people being shot and killed in the inner cities every day due to gangs. Why aren’t there any public service announcements about figuring out how to keep inner-city dads at home and not in prison? Why don’t they Demand A Plan to lower the rate of unwed mothers in the inner city? Because that would require a change in their liberal-ness, that’s why.
Why don’t we allow cops in the inner city to stop and frisk suspected gang members? And I don’t actually mean “suspected;” the officers who patrol the neighborhoods know who the gang members are. Why not arrest groups of gang members who are loitering? Or jaywalking? If any of this was ever tried, the ACLU would be filing lawsuits left and right, claiming violations of the Fourth Amendment or alleging racial profiling. And Hollywood would be right there making the same claims.
Taking guns from law-abiding citizens, and allowing them to stay in the hands of gangs, is all part of the liberal agenda. How do I know this? Because the gun control measures being touted by the left have no hope of working, and they never have. Columbine happened during the last assault weapons ban, for crying out loud. Could disarming the public of assault rifles have kept Newtown from happening? That’s the question that needs to be asked repeatedly over the next weeks and months. It won’t be though, because stopping “Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tuscon, Aurora, Fort Hood, Oak Creek, Newtown” and all the others isn’t the point.
In a tightly contested race, Jennifer Aniston wins the “Delivers Lines With The Most Feigned Emotion” award, and Chris Rock needs to remember that, no matter what the intelligentsia say, the “h” in “human” is not silent.