Hollywood Demands End to Second Amendment

Posted by on January 1, 2013 1:31 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Categories: The Nation

LEE’S SUMMIT, JANUARY 1, 2013 – Happy New Year to Everyone.

Violence has been around since the dawn of time, since Cain and Abel of biblical times, and Hollywood has graphically brought that violence into our collective psyche since the early 1900’s.  The violence in movies goes back to the early days with the Western Serials.  Violence has paid the way for many of Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters.  It is time for Hollywood to end its reign of terror on America’s children, teenagers and vulnerable young adults.  Violence must stop in the movies.

Hollywood has taken a horrible tragedy and put its artistic license behind it in an attempt to affect politics and emotions in the United States of America.  They attack the same constitution that protects their right to put out videos and movies – as well as music videos – with graphic violence, near pornographic content, adult language (a nice term for graphic and explicitly vile language) and situations.

The Hollywood establishment relishes the protection of the First Amendment, but cannot stand the Second Amendment.  They praise the wisdom of the Founders when it is good to them, and attack it when it suits them.

Caution: Adult language at the end edited out – for the full video go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxRlpRcorEU

The stars demanded a plan:  Here’s one, I call it the 10 Disarming Commandments.

  1. Guns of any kind cannot be in any movie (from single shot flint locks, to cannons, to futuristic weapons).
  2. Knives cannot be in any movie.
  3. No strangulations whether fictional, imagined, or historical.
  4. No executions of criminals, or citizens.
  5. No use of lasers or any futuristic weapon to promote violence.
  6. No violent acts of crime can be shown graphically, nor described in too graphic details
  7. No adult language, nudity, or adult situations.
  8. No signs of any anger aimed at another human being.
  9. No biblical, religious or political form of violence may be depicted on any movie.
  10. No racism or hate crime shown, it may only be discussed in terms of resolving the harm done by previous generations – including our own.

These simple 10 Commandments of Disarmament of Hollywood – once enacted and all old movies destroyed including the original recordings so they may never come back to haunt the children, teenagers and vulnerable young adults of the world (keep in mind Hollywood affects people all over the world); then I think I can get 100% behind the diminishment or ultimate eradication of the Second Amendment.

Until then, I consider the opinion of any actor, actress, director, or movie mogul a harmful tool of propaganda and hate of the Founding Father’s Principles that were enacted in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights of the United States of America:  The document which gave them their industry and their audience to influence.

My Thanks to the blog “The Right Side of It” and the author of the post John L Work for bringing this video to my attention.

Respectfully Submitted

The Lee’s Summit Conservative

2 responses to Hollywood Demands End to Second Amendment

  1. Akron Artist January 7th, 2013 at 11:46 am

    I laugh when I see things like this. Is this an excerpt from the Glen Beck show? I mean seriously. The actors in this video are asking for a plan to further control gun violence. Not asking for the “abolition of the second amendment.” If there is a more subjective and emotionally driven article out there please point it out.

    First of, the point of the second amendment is to protect the ability of the people to revolt. Singularly, that is the purpose. Not for protection from robbers, not for hunting, but for protection from the government. In an age when canons were expensive, difficult to move, and army’s almost never breached 100,000 in size, a force of citizens who were well trained with weapons because they used them almost daily for hunting made sense. Today, where wars are fought with computers, planes, tanks, and battles that can reach in the millions of soldiers, a few citizens armed with non-armor piercing ammunition in a 9mm pistol with piss poor accuracy really makes little to no sense. Not only that, seeing as though stock piling weapons is illegal and the government is already (and has been for decades) not threatened by anything close to a revolution means that in reality and by the original writing of the founding fathers the second amendment is long since dead.

    The biggest problem with weapons today is this. They are high capacity, and few individuals (when looking at the total population of the nation) know how to fire a gun and do not know the power of a gun. Growing up in an area where guns are commonplace for hunting and having fired my fair share. I am well aware of the physical damage a gun can do to the person SHOOTING the gun, let alone the annihilation it inflicts upon the target. So, if anything needs to be done. Massive gun training programs.

  2. Larry Swickar April 16th, 2013 at 8:19 am

    Akron Artist is adept at setting up a strawman argument. Time spent on anti-2nd Amendment websites, lists of Hollywood supporters, and comments they have made demonstrate that they do indeed want to abolish the 2nd Amendment. To argue otherwise is not being honest. A purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to revolt but, that is only part of the of the truth. The Declaration spells out that rights are God-given and among those is the right to life. Property stolen can be replaced but not a life. This right is meaningless without the means to effect its use and goal, the protection of one’s life. That a man could protect himself, especially when viewed in the historical concept of the development of this right in England, is part of reason for the right as well.
    The notion of “high capacity” is also a red herring. At any time in history, a bowman with 10 instead of 3 arrows had a “high capacity” weapo. The correct term is “full capacity.” Certain weapons were designed to hold more rounds. How many rounds does it take to stop (not kill because mortally wounded people can still kill) an attacker? As a cop, I never knew. One needs access to as many rounds as possible because no one can answer that question. The claim that few people know how to fire such weapons is also nonsense. I’ve been a member of the shooting community for decades and they are among the most and best trained practioners of their art and sport one can imagine. They practice way more than the police departments with whom I served and take their pursuit very seriously. We need to listen to those who actually know what they’re talking about and not misinformation.