Hollywood liberals have long embraced the mantra of “for thee, but not for me.” Hence, the lineup of limos at environmental galas. And then we come to guns.
The Hill reports on the meeting with Vice President Biden and entertainment representatives:
“The entertainment community appreciates being included in the dialogue around the administration’s efforts to confront the complex challenge of gun violence in America,” the entertainment trade groups said in a joint statement issued late Thursday, following a meeting with Vice President Biden. “This industry has a longstanding commitment to provide parents the tools necessary to make the right viewing decisions for their families.”
Umm. It’s not about violence directed at kids. It is about a violence-soaked media in which the unstable young men who commit these crimes see role models in the gun-blazing heroes and anti-heroes. I am certain everyone who signed onto that self-serving blather understand this. They were simply changing the subject.
Now of course they can get away with this dodge, demonstrating general uncooperativeness, since they are sanctimonious liberals who give millions to Democrats (and bemoan the presence of all that money in politics).
As if that were not bad enough, there is this:
It would be difficult for the administration or Congress to regulate violent content in films and TV shows because of concerns over protecting First Amendment rights. Defenders of the entertainment industry have noted that it has taken steps to address concerns about children viewing violent media content.
The MPAA, for example, oversees the ratings system used to inform parents about the content featured in films played in the U.S.
[Former Sen. and now Motion Picture Association of American chief] Chris Dodd told The Hollywood Reporter this week that the MPAA would “vehemently” oppose content regulation.
But the Second Amendment? Feh, go get the NRA! In their hierarchy I guess only “their” (First) Amendment counts. Wal-Mart can get strong-armed to get on board with gun regulation, but Hollywood can’t be asked to voluntarily limit the blood splattering, not simply slap a rating that tells us the blood splattering is there. (It’s art, don’t you know?)
Once again, a promise to consider the full range of the causes of mass shootings devolves into merely an anti-gun exercise, giving liberals who churn out gore-celebrating entertainment the opportunity to chest beat.
I say this as someone who has no problem with universal background checks (in the day of the Internet it should be easy for gun shows and others to comply) and/or banning high-capacity magazines. But I do have a problem with the lack of even-handedness and the pretense that such measures are really going to stop these horrendous incidents. The more helpful suggestions (police officers in schools, reforming of laws regarding the mentally ill) are not flashy enough and carry no political payoff for the left. Hence, the symbolic moves dominate the discussion and light the match for another partisan firestorm.