 jjoshua
Premium Member
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
3 recommendations |
jjoshua
Premium Member
2013-Jan-22 8:45 am
HypocrisyThey will show all sorts of programming with guns being aimed at people.
That's ok? |
|
| |
why?Will they also stop showing tv shows, and movies with semi-automatic weapons as well? It's silly things people do to try to prove a point. |
|
| |
Hypocrites...They own "The Smoking Gun", and other assets like Time, Inc (publishes Shooting Times, Sporting Gun, Shooting Gazette, Shooting Monthly, Practical Parenting...(hint hint), DC Comics (Violence in comics you say?), WB Interactive, dozens of movie production groups like New Line Cinema, etc...) But we'll still show commercials and trailers with shooting and smokers... yup.  |
|
| |
Mr_Otis
Anon
2013-Jan-22 8:49 am
MisnamedAren't all guns 'semi-automatic'? At least, all those that are not machine guns? Pull the trigger, gun fires. Pull the trigger, gun fires. Semi-automatic. |
|
3 recommendations |
to jjoshua
Re: HypocrisyRemember, this is America, it's perfectly acceptable to air shows where people are murdered and/or violated during prime time, but if there's even a flash of a tit the FCC jumps into the equation and levies millions of dollars worth of fines.
Tits, even in a non-sexual context are apparently more damaging to young minds than watching someone get raped and stabbed to death (e.g., Law and Order SVU, et. all) |
|
|
| |
StrangeI cannot remember the last TV commercial I have seen with someone pointing a semi-automatic weapon at someone.
TWC should drop all of the broadcasters that have any violence whatsoever on their programming schedule including the local news. The only channels TWC should provide are religious programming and channels like sprout with family friendly programming if they are going to take this stance. |
|
| kdwycha |
to Mr_Otis
Re: Misnamedsaid by Mr_Otis :Aren't all guns 'semi-automatic'? At least, all those that are not machine guns? Pull the trigger, gun fires. Pull the trigger, gun fires. Semi-automatic.
I believe a one shot musket would be semi-automatic as well considering you can reload it with powder, place the ball inside and fire it at a rate of about 1 shot every minute. So I guess no muskets are allowed to be displayed or pointed on TWC commercials either. (Well maybe not considering the definition is b of a firearm : able to fire repeatedly but requiring release and another pressure of the trigger for each successive shot) |
|
|
1 edit |
TWC needs to highlight medical industy incompetentcy first.Before the media and government ass kissers attack the gun proponents the media and government should be targeting the medical industry, where according to statistics they kill 98,000 patients due to medical malpractice and medical mistakes each year. If Ten Percent of those killed were children then the medical industry killed 9800 children last year, a lot more dead children than guns caused. The only time one hears about the medical industry incompetency is when a celebrities child is killed or maimed by an incompetent, indifferent or careless medical professional.
When someone with a gun kills or maims someone they are subject to immediate sanctions. When a medical professional kills or maims a patient it is called an honest mistake and they can go on screwing up patients, with the loss prevention department of the medical facility covering for them. of the The gun issue is simply a red herring to cover up all the other faults of corporatist America. |
|
| |
Adverts With Firearms Pointed At People?Time Warner proclaims "We no longer accept ads showing semi-automatic weapons and guns pointed at people." I guess this must be Time Warner's version of feel-good legislation, because I can't say as I've ever seen a commercial, anywhere, depicting anybody aiming a firearm at anybody. My impression is reinforced by the fact that the statement contains a superfluous redundancy: "semi-automatic weapons" is included in the set that comprises "guns."
I wonder if they'll also censor the scenes in movies and TV shows where somebody's seen aiming a firearm at somebody else? Somehow I doubt it.
Jim |
|
| jseymour |
to Mr_Otis
Re: Misnamedsaid by Mr_Otis :Aren't all guns 'semi-automatic'? At least, all those that are not machine guns? Pull the trigger, gun fires. Pull the trigger, gun fires. Semi-automatic.
No, they're not. There are single-shot firearms of various kinds; single-action revolvers; magazine-fed bolt-action, pump and lever action firearms, etc. Double-action revolvers could be thought of as "semi-automatic," in that they operate as you describe, but they're not regarded as such. Jim |
|
| |
to Mr_Otis
Single Action Revolvers, Lever Action, Black Powder, and Pump Shotguns are not Semi-Automatic. |
|
| battleop |
to kdwycha
Not true. If the ONLY action needed to reload and shoot again is pulling the trigger then it's Semi-Automatic. If you have to do anything else between rounds then it's not Semi-Automatic. |
|
battleop
1 recommendation |
to kdwycha
Re: StrangeWhen was the last time you saw a commercial for an Action Movie? |
|
| |
to Crookshanks
Re: HypocrisyYou can thank RW America for that sort of idiocy. Whereas, I've seen topless women used in commercials in various countries during prime-time. Probably why they do not have the crime or violence we do. |
|
| Terabit |
to kdwycha
Re: MisnamedI see what your mean. One shot every 60 seconds versus the 30 rounds Lanza fired off in 27 seconds. |
|
 antdudeMatrix Ant
Premium Member
join:2001-03-25
US |
antdude
Premium Member
2013-Jan-22 9:33 am
When and where do they show these gun ads.?I never saw one before! |
|
| |
to Mr Matt
Re: TWC needs to highlight medical industy incompetentcy first.Only a Floridian could make such an absurd comparison and actually assume they are the same. To think that a doctor in surgery, working on a complex human body, is apparently the exact same thing as a weapon designed to kill or destroy.
These sort of ridiculous comparisons are the poster-child of gun control, as no one with that sort of a warped rationale, should be allowed to own anything that can harm another American.
"The gun issue is simply a red herring to cover up all the other faults of corporatist America." -- Um. One guess who 'profiteers' off guns, ammo, fear, paranoia etc etc etc... lol Hint: who do you think the NRA really represents... |
|
| |
to Mr Matt
They should be looking at our mental healthcare system and the laws relating to it. You will never stop every mass shooter, but there are at least two instances (VA Tech. and Tucson) where the authorities knew that the person was mentally ill but nobody did anything about it. The Tucson shooter was even kicked out of his college by the campus police because of his issues, but they didn't do anything more than that. Once he was out of their jursdicition they adopted a "Not our problem" mentality.
The really sad thing here is these people aren't evil, they are just very ill. With early intervention they would have been treated and cured, instead they kill other people, and either off themselves or wind up in the express lane to death row/life without parole.
One might also argue that it's stupid to legislate based on high profile events that are statistically rare. My wife is a teacher and has gone through all manner of training and preparation because of this. Statistically speaking, her school is much more likely to be leveled by a tornado, but the extent of their preparation for that is a single drill once a year. |
|
| Crookshanks |
to Terabit
said by Terabit:These sort of ridiculous comparisons are the poster-child of gun control, as no one with that sort of a warped rationale, should be allowed to own anything that can harm another American. So you're going to take away their automobiles, kitchen knives, cleaning products, electrical hookups, and power tools, as well? People have the inherent right to defend themselves and to access the tools required to effectively exercise that right. This right is recognized in both the 2nd Amendment and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or target shooting. It's all about the people having the right to defend themselves against those who would do the harm. Firearms are simply an equalizer. They enable the weak to protect themselves against the strong. A 90 pound woman can effectively defend herself against a 200 pound man with a firearm. An old man in a wheelchair can effectively defend himself against a group of young men with a firearm. Take away firearms and you give the strong the ability to run roughshod over the weak. The police won't help you, there is a SCOTUS precedent that says they don't even have an obligation to protect you, and even if they did it takes them minutes to respond to a call under the best of circumstances. It's been over-quoted to the point of becoming a cliche, but it's still relevant: God created man, Sam Colt made them equal. |
|
Crookshanks
1 recommendation |
to Terabit
Re: HypocrisyThe right may be more vocal about it, but it was under Clinton that the so-called v-chip was made mandatory. He also signed the Communications Decency Act (later overturned because it was such an overreach) into law.
Much of the left is just as prudish as the right. It's an American trait, for better or worse. Actually, one might argue it's a trait inherent to many of the states that descended from Great Britain, because Australia is the same way. It goes back to the type of people who emigrated out of Great Britain back in the day. |
|
| |
to battleop
Re: MisnamedAnd the AR-15 isn't an "assault rifle". Regulators make up their own definitions. |
|
| |
to Terabit
Re: TWC needs to highlight medical industy incompetentcy first.said by Terabit:Only a Floridian could make such an absurd comparison and actually assume they are the same. To think that a doctor in surgery, working on a complex human body, is apparently the exact same thing as a weapon designed to kill or destroy.
These sort of ridiculous comparisons are the poster-child of gun control, as no one with that sort of a warped rationale, should be allowed to own anything that can harm another American.
"The gun issue is simply a red herring to cover up all the other faults of corporatist America." -- Um. One guess who 'profiteers' off guns, ammo, fear, paranoia etc etc etc... lol Hint: who do you think the NRA really represents...
I love how you pull out the "Only a Floridian" line...I may live here, but I'm not from here. I grew up in DC where they have some of the most draconian gun laws in the country next to Chicago and now New York. Imagine that...DC was tops of the gun crime list for many many years until Chicago "won" that title. Yep...those laws sure do a ton of good don't they? The Gun industry already has their own lobbying firms, it's not the NRA. His comparison isn't ridiculous...for some reason "anti-gunners/anti-gun liberals" only care about "death by firearm". They run on emotion and not reasoning. Prime example....New Yorks new gun "law" they railroaded through their legislature with out due process. Limit ALL magazines to 7 rounds....they forgot to write in an exemption for law enforcement....Oooops!!!! They apparently couldn't care less about how many children are killed in car accidents or are beaten to death or starved to death in this country. Never mind the fact that more people were killed by hands and feet according to the FBI last year than ALL rifles combined...but no target and blame those "evil looking" rifles instead of ignoring the mental health, or lack of mental health in this country. |
|
1 recommendation |
to Wilsdom
Re: MisnamedBut they are black and scary looking.... |
|
1 recommendation |
to Crookshanks
Re: TWC needs to highlight medical industy incompetentcy first.said by Crookshanks:They should be looking at our mental healthcare system and the laws relating to it. You will never stop every mass shooter, but there are at least two instances (VA Tech. and Tucson) where the authorities knew that the person was mentally ill but nobody did anything about it. The Tucson shooter was even kicked out of his college by the campus police because of his issues, but they didn't do anything more than that. Once he was out of their jursdicition they adopted a "Not our problem" mentality.
The really sad thing here is these people aren't evil, they are just very ill. With early intervention they would have been treated and cured, instead they kill other people, and either off themselves or wind up in the express lane to death row/life without parole.
One might also argue that it's stupid to legislate based on high profile events that are statistically rare. My wife is a teacher and has gone through all manner of training and preparation because of this. Statistically speaking, her school is much more likely to be leveled by a tornado, but the extent of their preparation for that is a single drill once a year.
No one did anything about it because the ACLU (read: Liberals) would have screamed and cried about violating said persons "civil rights". Like I said in a previous reply....Liberals use knee jerk reactions and emotions when it comes to their train of thought. |
|
 bobjohnson
Premium Member
join:2007-02-03
Spartanburg, SC |
to Terabit
said by Terabit:Only a Floridian could make such an absurd comparison and actually assume they are the same. To think that a doctor in surgery, working on a complex human body, is apparently the exact same thing as a weapon designed to kill or destroy.
Damn it man...  On that note, there are alot of things that should be changed as far as what is glorified on tv but you are correct in saying there is no direct relation to nutcases killing people and doctors killing people. |
|
1 edit
1 recommendation |
to Seaboogers
said by Seaboogers:Prime example....New Yorks new gun "law" they railroaded through their legislature with out due process. Limit ALL magazines to 7 rounds....they forgot to write in an exemption for law enforcement....Oooops!!!! I used to live in New York State, the laws there are insane. It is against the law for you to touch a handgun if you don't have a pistol license. It costs >$100 and takes more than six months to obtain such a license, but it's illegal for you to shoot my licensed gun at the range to see if it's worth pursuing or not. New York City is even more over the top than the rest of the state, their pistol licenses cost >$300, and have to be renewed every two years. The average handgun costs around $500-$600, so you're literally paying half the cost of your property every two years to legally own it. It's the equivalent of paying $10,000 every two years to register your Honda Civic. Technically it's illegal for my wife to use my licensed handgun to defend herself if someone breaks into the house while I'm not home. Mind you, it isn't likely to be prosecuted, but the fact that it's illegal is beyond absurd. New York State reminds me of the quote from Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. Case in point: The State Police took a bunch of NYS Legislators out to the range a few years ago and let them shoot handguns, with the objective of showing them what a police officer faces in the line of duty. All well and good in theory, except those Legislators without pistol licenses (most of them) literally committed a felony the moment they picked up a loaded handgun. The State Police assisted in the commission of a felony, something that you or I would receive a prison sentence for, but nobody stopped and asked "Should we do this?", much less discussed the hypocrisy of allowing privileged individuals to break the law without consequence. |
|
| |
to Crookshanks
This argument doesn't really work, since the weak don't want to be equal, they want universal weakness, enforced through an all-powerful government. |
|
| Wilsdom |
to Seaboogers
I'm not sure that this is true. Liberals love the psychiatric industry, and will support any measure that "protects people from themselves". But...they also can't criticize an obviously incompetent female psychiatrist. Personal responsibility is not a concept, and they always look for group and "cultural" solutions. |
|
| |
to Terabit
Jealous you are not here? I mean seriously what does his or anyone else location has to do with who he is?
Besides he is more than likely talking about direct negligence which is preventable manslaughter; not non-preventable deaths during surgeries or in ER.
What since those people were not killed by guns that makes it somehow OK and less important?
And from what I understood his main point was not exactly straight comparison but more of how guns get demonized and blamed for everything but any other thing killing "kids" and destroying lives is just in the shadows and part of everyday life.
A gas can, fertilizer and a flare can take out more people than a gun so what we should become a sissy state and make everything "dangerous" banned? |
|
| |
to battleop
Re: StrangeI was going to say the same thing, but I reread the news item and it stated "gun advertisement". I read this to be an ad with guns as the product for sale...I didn't actually read the linked article, though. |
|
