This is a discussion on Institutional Anti Gun/ Self-Defense Bias in Hollywood? within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; 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 ...
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 self-defense) is wrong and some thing that "ordinary" people can't do.
Another common theme I see is the idea that it's somehow honorable to take the escalating attacks of the villain W/out fighting back until some mythical line is crossed when the hero goes and kills everybody
Although a lot of those movies are pretty accurate in depicting 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.
I believe most movie and TV show scripts are written out of this book. It provides many scenarios depicting firearms and firearms owners in the most derogatory ways possible.
EIC | Entertainment Industries Council, Inc.
When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
"Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."
Hóka-héy! Crazy Horse
Emphasize that wielding a firearm in selfdefense
may ironically increase one’s risk of death
or injury by increasing the likelihood that the
assailant will use his or her own weapon.
◆ 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.
◆ If a character is offered a gun for self-protection
or retaliation, consider having him or her
refuse it as a bad idea that could just worsen
◆ Consider the reality that in self-defense,
homeowners often freeze-up or tremble when
trying to use a gun, rendering them unable to
deploy it. Or show them as being too paralyzed
by fear to even reach for the gun.
◆ Consider emphasizing that what the shooter
thinks is self-defense may simply be an escalating
confrontation between two people that led
to a shooting; both sides may claim self-defense
and neither side may be right.
◆ Exhibit alternate forms of household security
when possible, such as alarms, dogs, lights
triggered by movement, and so on. Consider
making the point that, unlike guns, none of
these are potentially lethal to household
◆ Consider showing someone who is attempting
to use a gun in self-defense being overpowered
by their attacker who then uses the gun
against him or her.
Check out the officers on IMDB. Not exactly the movers & shakers of the industry.
EIC aside, really, there ISN'T a concerted effort to portray guns and gun owners in any particular way. It's just a product of the mindset of the typical Hollywood liberal.
That said, I almost feel like taking that book and making a movie EXACTLY the opposite :)