Hypocrisy in the media and by actors over guns?

[hakujinbakasama]

This video has been circulating and I think it does some what of a good point at addressing a huge issue..

http://youtu.be/pItiypwjHx4

Even Top Gear, a show that I personally love, makes glib jabs about violence and has feature guns on several occasions. (not that I'm aware of Clarkson making a PSA about this sort of stuff.) But I do find it sort of hypocritical for those who do make a fortune glorifying violence as entertainment to then get pissy about what has in part made them rich when reality all the sudden is at home.

Not to be too much of a dick here, but I'm pretty sure this whole "mass shooting" thing is a big deal in Syria and Africa. Not really seeing the bullshit psa announcements and claims of tears six weeks ago.

[Deleted]

I'm not sure what your complaint is here? If its that you think its hypocritical to portray make-believe violence in media and be against real people being shot senselessly, then well... um... no just no, there is no hypocrisy there.

If its that you feel its hypocritical about them using their voice to try and enact change in america due to the recent shooting but not in countries where they have no influence whatsoever... well... just umm... well... no, not really hypocritical either.

[The Riddler]

I'm not sure what your complaint is here? If its that you think its hypocritical to portray make-believe violence in media and be against real people being shot senselessly, then well... um... no just no, there is no hypocrisy there.

Media promotes violence. Violence happens. Are you saying there is no relationship at all? If it makes sense to reduce violence by regulating weapons, then why would it not also reduce violence if we "regulated" media messages that glorify violence? Having a constant media culture that is regularly and pervasively peppering the populace with messages of violence does have an effect. It is statistically impossible to deny that reality. Why does not the same logic apply? Reduce the messages that glorify violence, and you reduce the resulting violence.

Or can we agree that "regulation" of anything is a stupid, lazy, superficial, ineffective distraction to for far deeper, much more fundamental issues? You can't "regulate" morality. Only fools think you can do that. You only get a moral population by supporting and promoting MORALITY. Sadly - this culture does the opposite and then can't figure out why it fails spectacularly.

[hakujinbakasama]

I'm not sure what your complaint is here? If its that you think its hypocritical to portray make-believe violence in media and be against real people being shot senselessly, then well... um... no just no, there is no hypocrisy there.

If its that you feel its hypocritical about them using their voice to try and enact change in america due to the recent shooting but not in countries where they have no influence whatsoever... well... just umm... well... no, not really hypocritical either.

I'm not for sure if I'm actually going to be able to do this response justice but I'm going to try.

If the summation is that it's ok to make a fortune off of "make-believe" which glorifies violence in this case then I'm confused about the line in which THEY are speaking out against. If a gun is a tool which is only dangerous in the hands of "a mad man" (using the phrase) then where does the responsibility of the influence come into play as well.

I'll make note that while the Video Game industry has taken on the mantel it was once held that Hollywood was the real source influencing violence into the culture.

There was a great note, although it was greatly hindered by the rest of the bullshit, about the mentality of the people of Columbine in Moore's movie. He noted poorly about the irony to be had of parents going to work to build weapons of mass destruction while their children sat at home plotting mass destruction and the disconnect people of the community had.

I guess, in a "fuck off" sort of way, if the porn industry is some how to blame for teen pregnancy as well as "sex on television" then how are these people not taking some accountability as well?

[lalangamena]

people should be responsible for their actions, and not blaming outside sources.

[Deleted]

The argument that violent video games, movies, comics or any other media causes people to act violently is falacious. Violence has existed long before violent media, real world violence is what influences violent media. Also to state that those actors 'glorify' violence is a gross oversimplification. It is the 'heroes' who are glorified in most of these movies, you aren't meant to root for the villains who go about murdering innocents.

Also, the porn industry isn't responsible for teen pregnancy, poor sex education and parents unwilling to accept that their children can have sex, and thus prepare them to do so sensibly by talking openly about contraceptive options, are the main culprits in teen pregnancy.

[Trunksee]

The argument that violent video games, movies, comics or any other media causes people to act violently is falacious. Violence has existed long before violent media, real world violence is what influences violent media. Also to state that those actors 'glorify' violence is a gross oversimplification. It is the 'heroes' who are glorified in most of these movies, you aren't meant to root for the villains who go about murdering innocents.

Also, the porn industry isn't responsible for teen pregnancy, poor sex education and parents unwilling to accept that their children can have sex, and thus prepare them to do so sensibly by talking openly about contraceptive options, are the main culprits in teen pregnancy.

Yes i completely agree that a normal human being with a sound mind can do all of those things and not be influenced by them. On the flip side though there have been no studies on the effects on people with mental illness. There probably wont be either as money runs the world and the rich actors and video game producers wont allow the facts to come out as they are now going to lose money.

[Deleted]

people should be responsible for their actions, and not blaming outside sources.

But shouldn't we try to prevent things like school shootings?

If not? Why not remove security at the airports. If one decides to hijack a plane or worse, he should only be held accountable after he commited such crime?
I don't need guns to be removed - but they should be harder to get, than they are now.

OT: I also don't see the hypocracy, It would be if they own a gun in real life, but they are just acting and using fake guns to tell a non-real story.

[Knight Gil]

I play battlefield 3, modern warfare, watch movies like The good, the bad and the ugly, etc.


Doesn't mean I believe the world is a better place when you fill it with guns

[Grizzly Willy]

Censoring entertainment would be a violation of the first amendment. If there's going to be an uproar over violations of the second amendment, the same concern should be applied here.

[Deleted]

Media promotes violence. Violence happens. Are you saying there is no relationship at all?

Yes indeed, there is no relationship at all (especially compared to for example religion and alcohol/drugs), people have a brain, a brain that knows the difference between fiction used for entertaining purposes and real violence.
There is no statistic that shows violence is caused by violent movies and violent video games. Even serialkillers and psycho's rarely get inspired by a movie or a videogame, the most fictional inspiration they get is from books.

South Korea a country filled with violent video games, movies and comic books in short media has a murder rate of 2.6 (for comparison: Canada: 1.6, US: 3.2, UK: 1.2, Belgium: 1.7)
All those country's have a very low murder rate even tough they are filled with violent media.

[Deleted]

Yes i completely agree that a normal human being with a sound mind can do all of those things and not be influenced by them. On the flip side though there have been no studies on the effects on people with mental illness. There probably wont be either as money runs the world and the rich actors and video game producers wont allow the facts to come out as they are now going to lose money.

The answer to that is not censorship of the media but better mental health care facilities.

[Bakis]

Media promotes violence. Violence happens. Are you saying there is no relationship at all? If it makes sense to reduce violence by regulating weapons, then why would it not also reduce violence if we "regulated" media messages that glorify violence? Having a constant media culture that is regularly and pervasively peppering the populace with messages of violence does have an effect. It is statistically impossible to deny that reality. Why does not the same logic apply? Reduce the messages that glorify violence, and you reduce the resulting violence.

Or can we agree that "regulation" of anything is a stupid, lazy, superficial, ineffective distraction to for far deeper, much more fundamental issues? You can't "regulate" morality. Only fools think you can do that. You only get a moral population by supporting and promoting MORALITY. Sadly - this culture does the opposite and then can't figure out why it fails spectacularly.

Agree but with easy access to guns it would happen either way. To what degree can be debated.
Media is one thing, entertaintment is a far bigger culprit.
Either way, if guns wasn't as accessible as candy it would never be an issue anyway.
Blaming media, entertainment whatever will never ever brush the gun accessibility under the carpet, except for the fools

[Deleted]

The Romans loved watching people killing eachother in the arena. Just saying... Violence is part of the human nature. You can't stop it.