Sylvester Stallone is a gun-toting hypocrite

It has been said that hypocrisy is the only evil that walks invisible and throughout history that statement has been proven true time and again.

When it comes to the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States perhaps no other topic in this country has flamed the ire of the American public no matter which side of the debate you take.

ccw_page03Throw Hollywood celebrities in the mix and it is no surprise that you have supporters of the Second Amendment and those who support gun control.

That in of itself is not a problem.

After all one of the freedoms we as Americans have is to our own opinion and the freedom to express those opinions publicly.

The right of freedom of expression and freedom of the press is no less more important than a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms.

That right has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States, when they ruled that an individual does have the right to keep and bear arms.

This article is not about whether one side is right or the other is wrong, that would take volumes to write and in effect would only be one person’s opinion over another’s opinion.

That’s what makes this country the great country it is. We stand out from the rest of the world because in this country no one is forbidden to speak out for what they believe in.

Like the general public, Hollywood is also divided, by those who support and those who oppose private gun ownership and one’s right to self-defense.

On one side we have celebrities like Sylvester Stallone, who has been the most anti-gun celebrity in Hollywood for decades.

Then there is Rosie O’Donnell who came under scrutiny because her anti-gun stance seemed to conflict with the fact that she employed bodyguards who carried concealed weapons.

Matt Damon, who told the Sunday Herald in January 2003, “I actually hate guns. They freak me out,” and a host of others who usually are given more press time for their stance against gun ownership than those celebrities who support the Second Amendment.

ccw_page05There are those in Hollywood who do support the right to keep and bear arms.

Brad Pitt told the British magazine Live “… America is a country founded on guns… It’s very strange but I feel better having a gun. I really do. I don’t feel the house is completely safe, if I don’t have one hidden somewhere.”

Angelina Jolie in 2008 told the U.K.’s Daily Mail, “I bought real guns of the type we used in ‘Tomb Raider’ for security. Brad and I are not against having a gun in the house, and we do have one. And yes, I’d be able to use it if I had to … If anybody comes into my home and tries to hurt my kids, I’ve no problem shooting them.”

Joe Perry of Aerosmith in an interview with Fox News said, “I’ve been fascinated with all kinds of weapons my whole life, and as I have been able to afford to acquire pieces, here and there I started to collect.”

Country Star, Miranda Lambert told in 2012, “I carry a weapon. I got a death threat a few years ago and was really scared. But I don’t want bodyguards. I am my own security.”

Johnny Depp stated, “When I was a kid it was a controlled atmosphere, we weren’t shooting at humans – we were shooting at cans and bottles mostly. I will most certainly take my kids out for target practice.”

Whoopi Goldberg discussed on The View that she is a member of the National Rifle Association.

Clint Eastwood once said, “I have a very strict gun control policy: if there’s a gun around, I want to be in control of it.” Eastwood is a supporter of the NRA and other pro-gun organizations.

James Earl Jones said, “The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.”

Air Force veteran, martial artist and actor Chuck Norris has been a long time defender of the right to keep and bear arms.

ccw_page11Tom Selleck is an NRA board member and spokesman. Selleck has defended the Second Amendment throughout his career.

Other notable celebrities that support private gun ownership are Ted Nugent, Ice-T, Eric Clapton, Gary Sinese, Joe Montegna, Kevin Sorbo, R. Lee Ermey, and Dean Cain. And there are many more.

Perhaps Bruce Willis said it best when he told the Associated Press, “I think that you can’t start to pick apart anything out of the Bill of Rights without thinking that it’s all going to become undone. If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn’t they take all your rights away from you?”

Some of those rich celebrities who do not believe in the right of a citizen to own firearms for their own protection, they employ personal bodyguards for themselves and their children, have armed security patrols of their homes and some who have armored vehicles that would make the Secret Service envious.

Celebrities have the right to protect themselves just as every other citizen has. Their life is no more precious than any other citizen. Like the rest of us they too are targeted by criminals and crazies.

If we all had the finances to buy the protection that celebrities can afford we all would. But the average citizen cannot.

So when we hear these rich, elite, anti-gun Hollywood people supporting a repeal of the Second Amendment, and then we see them surrounded by personal security wherever they go, we see the hypocrisy of the elite.

If you live in a neighborhood where home invasions and other crimes occur and hear the police helicopters overhead night after night, having a firearm close by makes many ordinary citizens feel just a little bit safer.

For decades Sylvester Stallone has been the most anti-gun advocate in Hollywood.

Stallone has called for the repeal of the Second Amendment and the door-to-door confiscation of all handguns.

Guns & Ammo magazine stated in 2012, “Some actors and celebrities may hope and wish for gun control, but their takes aren’t as totalitarian as Stallone’s.”

Stallone speaks out against gun violence in this country and is a supporter of the Brady Center To Prevent Gun Violence.

Stallone was a supporter of the 1994 effort to ban assault weapons and he supports similar proposals to this day.

Stallone’s anti-gun sentiment when juxtaposed with his violent gun-toting, gun glorifying movies that have made him a multi-millionaire are in stark contrast to what he says.

In fact one could say that Sylvester Stallone through the use of handguns and assault rifles in his movies, has been in effect, the firearms industry’s most successful gun salesman and promoter for decades.

Reuters said in 1985, “Movie cult figures like Rambo are seen as boosters for every American’s right to bear arms.”

ccw_page13Stallone told Access Hollywood in 1998, “It has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a certain dauntless political figure, and say, “It’s ending, it’s over, all bets are off, it’s not 200 years ago, we don’t need [the Second Amendment] anymore, and the rest of the world doesn’t have it.” “Why should we?” “Until America, door to door, takes every handgun, this is what you’re gonna have.” “It’s pathetic. It really is pathetic. It’s sad. We’re living in the Dark Ages [in America].”

Mr. Stallone let me educate you on one fact. The rest of the world also doesn’t have the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

Stallone also said, “I know we use guns in the films but the time has come to be a little more accountable and realize that this is an escalating problem that’s eventually going to lead to, I think, urban warfare.”

Well Mr. Stallone it appears that since you made that statement in 1998 you have done nothing to put your money where your mouth is. How many more movies that promote gun violence and slaughter have you made since that time? Plenty. I guess money means more to you than your anti-gun causes which apparently you don’t believe in either.

Actions speak louder than words or should I say your violent action movies speak louder than your own words Mr. Stallone.

Right about the time Stallone was promoting his then-new film, Bullet to the Head in 2013, he said, “I know people get upset and go, ‘They’re going to take away the assault weapon.’” “Who … needs an assault weapon? Like really, unless you’re carrying out an assault … You can’t hunt with it … Who’s going to attack your house, a f*cking army?

More education Mr. Stallone. An assault weapon is a semi-automatic rifle. Its cosmetics make it no different than any other semi-automatic rifle. It is also called a Personal Defense Weapon.

Whenever possible you don’t bring a pistol to a gunfight. Taking into account that most home invasions occur with more than two or three criminals at a time entering your home, I would take a PDW over a pistol anytime.

According to FBI statistics, long guns are used in less than one-half of one percent of all crimes.

In 2012 Democrats in the United States Congress proposed the Stallone Act (Stop The Action, Let’s Love Only Non-violent Entertainment), which would of made it impossible for action stars to use firearms in their movies.

Representative Sheila Lee from Texas told the news in April 2012, ‘When is enough, enough?” “As the president has said, at some point I think you’ve had enough success, and these action heroes have been inciting gun violence for decades. There are strong correlations between violent video games and aggressive behavior, and Congressional Democrats believe the same holds true for movies put out by Stallone and his ilk. The ‘Stallone Act’ is the Democratic Party’s favor to the American people. It’s hard to take away gun rights when men like Stallone keep glorifying their defensive purposes, but we can make it near-impossible for him to get his guns on the silver screen,” Lee said.

It was a proposal that went nowhere. Censoring ones right to make movies, no matter how violent is not the issue. Censorship should not exist in a free society.

It’s not Sylvester Stallone’s anti-gun stance that is disturbing. Like I said earlier, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Stallone though comes off in public as a staunch supporter of anything anti-gun and anti-gun violence.

The he does just the opposite.

Stallone has become one of the richest stars in Hollywood and by no small account from the proceeds of his violent gun-promoting movies.

But that is not the whole story.

Sylvester Stallone advocates the door-to-door confiscation of all handguns.

He doesn’t believe that any citizen should have handguns. He said that from his own mouth. That is, no citizen but himself. Only he has the right to carry and possess handguns for his protection, but the rest of us can go to hell.

Sylvester Stallone is by far the biggest hypocrite in Hollywood.

Anti-gun Stallone who wants everyone’s guns taken away, except for his own of course, is a bona fide gun owner and carrier of concealed weapons. I am not taking about in his make-believe movies, but in his personal life.

Over 30 years ago, on August 14, 1984 Stallone was issued a concealed weapons permit from the Culver City Police Department in California, permit # 7243577.

ccw_page14On September 29, 2004 Sylvester Stallone applied for a concealed weapons permit from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. He was issued the permit on November 30, 2004.

On the application for the concealed weapons permit he listed the following weapons that he owned, handguns, that he wanted to carry concealed: a Walther PPK/S .380ACP, serial number 030247; Browning Hi Power 9MM, serial number 245RNS7243; Beretta Model 20 .25 caliber, serial number BE35243V and a Glock Model 21 .45 caliber, serial number AVM705.

Stallone was married to actress Brigette Nielsen from 1985 to 1987. While they were married Neilsen obtained a concealed weapons permit from the Alhambra Police Department in California.

In the Republic of California it is extremely difficult for any citizen to obtain a concealed firearms permit. However it seems as though Sylvester Stallone and other celebrities obtain them rather easily, when regular law abiding citizens cannot. Why is that?

Does the Republic of California hold a celebrity’s life at a higher standard than an ordinary citizen? Or is it that in California money talks and bullsh*t walks.

Mr. Stallone, your actions, which have contradicted your comments, have reduced your credibility to groundhog level.

So in an effort to redeem yourself with the public I have a personal challenge for you. Let’s see if you are man enough to accept it.

Take all the millions of dollars you have made over the years from your violent action movies, and give that money to all the victims of gun violence in this country. As a suggestion, take out your checkbook and start with the survivors and the families of the victims of the mass shootings that we have had in this country.

Start from there and continue on. Show the American public how serious you really are about what you say. The majority of law abiding citizens in this country who own firearms, never commit a crime with those weapons and are responsible gun owners.

I would like to ask Sylvester Stallone one question: Have you ever threatened anyone with a firearm or used a firearm in an inappropriate manner?

60 thoughts on “Sylvester Stallone is a gun-toting hypocrite

  • April 1, 2018 at 12:18 AM

    The writer is an idiot when it comes to insulting Stallone about guns. There’s a difference between ACTING with guns, and killing people with them.

  • October 17, 2017 at 6:52 PM

    Its NOT also called a personal defense weapon by ANYONE EXCEPT the manufacturer of said assault weapons…they call it that to promote something you dont need.
    Self moderation seems an impossible concept for gun fanatics. They see only extremes its all or nothing.
    You can have exercising of rights without abusing them by going over the top.
    And if you people seriously can’t control your urges and addiction then yeah the rest of us for our protection should do exactly that. Control it for you.

  • September 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM

    I pretty much dislike guns but I dislike TYRANNY even more, though I do believe too many nuts have guns.

  • September 23, 2015 at 11:04 AM

    The retard thinks he will be able to keep his guns and everyone else turns theirs in.

  • September 23, 2015 at 9:53 AM

    One of the greatest evils are those who take an oath to govern by “delegated
    powers” but use it to take from others what they keep for themselves.

    Government that does not trust its law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms,
    is itself, unworthy of trust.” –James Madison, chief wordsmith of the

    “Any government that would attempt to disarm its people is
    despotic; and any people that would submit to it deserve to be slaves.”–
    Stephen F. Austin, 1835
    “The historical reality of the Second Amendments
    protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right
    to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right
    to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us.”
    –Judge Andrew Napolitano
    Molon Labe

    • October 17, 2017 at 6:54 PM

      How many cops and soldiers you planning to be able to kill? Thats the state agents that will come for you IF they come. You killing your neighbors kid wearing their military uniform at your door? Doubtful. So dont excuse your willingness to accept the murder of babies like Newtown as a cost of doing business like your something honorable.

      • October 20, 2017 at 4:23 PM

        First of all…no one from the police will collect guns from the neighbors they live next to…Second…you must be some coward commenting on a post 2 YEARS OLD….wake up…never mind, GO BACK TO SLEEP…Molon Labe!

        • October 20, 2017 at 5:43 PM

          Except if given the valid order to do so …yeah they would…and they wouldn’t need to be told twice either.

          Also after Vegas this issue is still relevant 2 years later…so…how about you WAKE UP.

  • September 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM

    Shouldn’t the title title of your article be “John Rambo is a gun-toting blah blah blah”? You must be one of these geniuses that can’t tell the difference between movies and real life. I guess in your world, Ralph Fiennes would be a hypocrite for not being an anti-Semite. Give me a break. Stallone makes extremely fantastical action movies, perhaps the genre in Hollywood that should be taken the most lightly.

    • Doug Poppa
      September 22, 2015 at 3:03 PM

      Read the story again, you must of missed something!!

      • September 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM

        I didn’t miss anything. The fact that Stallone makes violent movies is a reoccurring theme throughout your article, and it has absolutely nothing to do with his stance on gun control in the real world. Stick to the main points, and your opinion won’t come across as frivolous as it does. If everyone jumped on board with a door to door confiscation of firearms, I’m sure Stallone would partake. And yes, it makes total sense that a celebrity could get a gun permit easier than any other citizen. They are public figures who recieve threats of violence simply for being public figures.

        • Doug Poppa
          September 22, 2015 at 4:39 PM

          Obviously you are not comprehending what you are reading.
          You can’t say that the industry needs to be held accountable and then continue to make the same movies you speak out against.
          Calling for confiscation of handguns and the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and then he himself owns the same weapons he wants taken away from the rest of us, by definition that is a hypocrite.
          Any law abiding citizen who applies for a CCW in California should be allowed to receive one. Celebrities receive special consideration and that is wrong.
          Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion, however wrong and baseless it is.
          The rest of us have the freedom to ignore it.

          • September 22, 2015 at 5:32 PM

            I’m comprehending just fine sir, but thank you for the insult. Anyway, why is it necessary for an actor to show accountability strictly through his or her art form? Isn’t speaking about the importance of gun control in a forum where possibly millions of people will hear it taking accountability? Seems like it is to me. But again, you ridiculously seem intent on blurring the line between real life and movies. Luckily, most people know the difference. Your quote from Stallone in 1998 is hurting your argument. He’s flat out saying that someone with power needs to rise up and and change things. That person needs to be a political figure, not a guy that makes popcorn flicks. Stallone wants to be led, he doesn’t want to lead. And he shouldn’t have to. He’s an actor for Christ sake. It’s his right as a tax paying citizen in a democracy to have his voice heard. That doesn’t mean he has to become a politician.

          • September 22, 2015 at 9:28 PM

            You missed the point, stallone is calling for house to house confiscation of ALL handguns and yet he gets a permit to carry a concealed handgun. How is this not the action of a hypocrite?

          • September 23, 2015 at 1:12 AM

            I addressed this already in a previous comment. I can’t speak for the man, but I’m guessing his opinions are similar to mine. I own a gun, but I, like Stallone, believe that it’s unnecessary for civilians to own firearms. How can this be so? Very simple actually. I would be first in line to surrender my firearm if the rest of the country lined up behind me. But as long as crazy rednecks can go into a store and walk out with a pistol, I’m going to own one also for my own protection. I would gladly give up my right to own a gun if the same went for my crazy neighbors.

          • September 23, 2015 at 2:35 PM

            you realize those “crazy rednecks” are generally the ones DEFENDING, not committing the crime right?

            you also realize criminals dont care about the law, and would have guns regardless of the ban. so why give up the ability to fight with the same weapon as they have? makes. no. sense.

          • September 23, 2015 at 3:00 PM

            And these people are defending themselves from what? Deer? Innocent black people in churches? Get real dude. You are beyond naive if you really think the people I’m talking about don’t exist by the thousands in every state in this country. As for a criminal, someone needs to take charge (just like Stallone suggests in his quotes used in this very article) and confiscate his or her firearms. Nobody ever said it would be easy. Should we just let crack run rampant because drugs addicts don’t care that it’s illegal?

          • September 24, 2015 at 10:20 PM

            You need to get real, guns are used to PREVENT more crimes a year then they cause, and I am not talking about the police, I’m talking normal citizens defending themselves and others. A lot of times the trigger is never even pulled.

          • June 14, 2016 at 9:57 AM

            One word: Orlando. I’ll take my apology now. Even Bill O’Reilly, the God of conservatives is now finally admitting to the fact that we need to take guns out of the hands of civilians. It’s because of people like you that horrible things like what happened in Orlando happen.

          • June 14, 2016 at 3:51 PM

            Three words, “Gun free zone.” All that gun free zones do is guarantee that there will be nothing but disarmed victims to kill. Get rid of gun free zones, let honest citizens carry weapons and these shootings will stop. Your apology is not accepted.

          • June 14, 2016 at 4:00 PM

            I never offered an apology. Learn how to read. And yes, allowing guns into night clubs and rock concerts where people are drinking heavily is a wonderful idea (that was sarcasm, by the way). People like you give Americans a bad name.

          • June 16, 2016 at 1:20 PM

            Bars have designated drivers, why not a designated shooter? It’s leftists like you who created these problems. Name one mass shooting in the US that did not happen at a “gun free zone.” You totally missed my sarcasm. Go have more of the resident’s free kool aid.

          • June 17, 2016 at 2:46 PM

            Designated shooter, huh? I believe those people exist. They’re called police officers and security guards, genius. Name one mass shooting that happened without guns. And I’m aware you were attempting sarcasm, but you don’t know how to read. What you should have said was, “your apology is not offered.” That would have been the appropriate sarcastic comment, instead you wrote “your apology is not accepted.” How can you not accept an apology I never offered?

          • June 18, 2016 at 2:03 AM

            You expect me to apologize for something I am not responsible for, you are the one who needs to apologize for your treasonous views on the Constitution. As for the police being designated shooters, in the Castle Rock vs Gonzales case the Supreme Court ruled that the police are not responsible for the safety of the citizenry, you might want to read the ruling.

            You have still avoided answering my question about a mass shooting that happened outside of a “gun free zone.”

            Gun free zones need to be banned, the NFAs of 1935, 1968 and 1994 need to be overturned and any politician attempting to introduce anti-gun legislation needs to be arrested and tried for treason against the United States Constitution.

          • June 30, 2016 at 8:23 PM

            Speaking of low intelligence, go look in the mirror, since you cannot refute the fact that a CITIZEN with a gun stopped a mass shooting, you take the typical leftist approach of insulting me. You totally missed the sarcasm behind my referring to Lyman SC as one word.

          • September 25, 2015 at 3:37 PM

            of course crazy people exist.. and im sure those crazy people would magically turn good if guns were outlawed… its not like pressure cookers or airplanes were used on innocent civilians at any point in our history.. oh wait.

            so explain to me how campaigning to remove guns from law abiding citizens will solve this problem again? oh right it wont.

            also MANY people with guns defend themselves ALL THE TIME in the real world.. it just doesnt get reported because all it usually takes is a confident person pointing a gun (but not actually using it) to diffuse the situation. that happens waaaay more than people like you realize.

          • September 25, 2015 at 4:30 PM

            It’s not about turning bad people into good people. It’s about removing an element from our society that causes a lot of harm. I’ll use drugs again as an example since you chose to completely ignore that point. Should we legalize crack just because the people that choose to use it don’t care that it’s illegal? As for your second statement, I don’t even have a clue what you’re attempting to say. What in the world are you talking about airplanes and pressure cookers for?
            Thirdly, neither myself or any of the quotes taken from Stallone in this article say anything about removing firearms from ONLY law abiding citizens. The goal is to remove them completely.
            Now on to the real gem of your comments. If your only evidence supporting the claim that guns are used more for good then they are for bad is simply that it doesn’t get reported, then you need some serious education my friend. You know what else happens way more than people like you realize? Spaghetti monsters come out of your refrigerator at night. It just doesn’t get reported on a lot. Anybody can say anything if that’s the only defense you’re going to use. Research and sources my friend. That’s all that counts in discussions like this.

          • September 28, 2015 at 5:36 PM

            the pressure cooker and planes comment was to show crazy people will use other weapons other than guns to kill others and cause havoc.

            as for drugs.. IMO, i believe drugs SHOULD be legalized..after all how well has the drug war worked? just ask blacks and other individuals in urban areas how well it has worked.. not to mention prohibition worked sooo well for alcohol. in fact, it worked so well for alcohol, we legalized it.

            and the difference between the spaghetti monster analogy, and the one i used was.. mine actually happens ALL THE TIME. how do i know it happens? who would you be more likely to rob.. a petite female walking alone in the parking lot unarmed.. or a petite female alone in the parking lot with a concealed pistol?

            and if you actually believe you can remove guns COMPLETELY from a country.. you are delusional. that will NEVER happen, especially in the US. how do i know? ever heard of drug cartels and gangs? they dont need government permission to get access to guns. they are CRIMINALS lol. so there will still be guns. they will just be in the hands of criminals.. not in the hands of law abiding citizens.

          • October 3, 2015 at 10:53 PM

            I thought that’s what you meant by the airplanes and pressure cookers comment, but it is so dumb that I thought I better let you clarify first. It’s more fun that way. YOU’RE SERIOUSLY COMPARING USING AN AIRPLANE TO KILL SOMEONE TO USING A GUN?!?!?! Good. Lord.

            I’m not even going to bother responding to the rest of your nonsense because it is so incredibly ridiculous. After what happened in Oregon this week, do we really even need to have this conversation anymore? Are you f***ing kidding me?!? How many more Sandy Hooks do we need before you rednecks get the point? The writer of this article and YOU should be ashamed of yourselves for continuing to argue that civilians need to be able to own a machine gun, or even a pistol for that matter. Your point of view is despicable.

            Let me guess who you’re going to vote for next year. Donald Trump, right? As much I think the Tea Party people are the most unintelligent humans on the planet, I’m so happy they came along. They split the Republican Party and made it impossible for a Republican to ever get elected again. All of you God loving, gun loving lunatics are going to be enlightened one way or another.

            And by the way, go back to school. Your grammar is horrendous, and you should be embarrassed to call yourself an adult.

          • October 5, 2015 at 6:51 PM

            The problem with the shooting in Oregon, Virginia Tech and all the other schools is the gun free zones that the leftys love so much that only serve to disarm law abiding citizens. Gun free zones need to be abolished. There’s a school district in Idaho that now has armed staff on the premises, and guess what, the guns they carry were provided by the parents of the students.

          • October 5, 2015 at 7:43 PM

            No, that absolutely is not the solution to the problem. What about all the shootings that take place in public places that aren’t gun-free? Like all the movie theatre shootings that happen. Your logic is beyond flawed.

          • October 5, 2015 at 7:07 PM

            why do lefties like you always feel the need to add insults to internet posts? Would you call me an idiot if we were having a face to face debate?

          • October 5, 2015 at 7:41 PM

            The word “idiot” never appears in any of my comments. I said one of his comments was dumb. Which it was. That’s not my opinion, it’s a fact. But if you’re asking me if I would call him idiotic to his face for comparing using a gun to kill a group of people to using an airplane to kill a group of people, then yes. Yes I absolutely would.

          • October 5, 2015 at 10:02 PM

            That is really adult of you.

          • October 6, 2015 at 7:31 PM

            But calling my opinion feeble is? Enough is enough. I’m arguing with children. Read a little history. Every single debate since the dawn of time is eventually won by the liberal side. Every single one.
            The world has gotten nothing but MORE liberal as time goes on. Everything from religion, to sexuality, to race, to gender, to age, TO GUN CONTROL becomes less conservative, and more liberal. What does that tell you? You’re on the losing side my friend. It’s a sinking ship you’re on, and you’re going to lose. LIBERALS ALWAYS WIN. Have a nice life, and give that idiot Donald Trump my regards. That’s right, I called him an idiot.

          • October 11, 2015 at 3:25 PM

            I called your opinion feeble, not you. What is so liberal about wanting to take the right to self defense away from people? What is so liberal about governments with a disarmed populace slaughtering the people? You Are not a liberal, you are a socialist.

          • October 8, 2015 at 12:33 AM

            the point is YOU DONT NEED A GUN TO KILL LOTS OF PEOPLE. you can use lots of things to kill people.. including airplanes and pressure cookers.. get it now? probably not.

            let me ask you a question.. if we banned every US citizen from owning or carrying a gun, do you honestly believe guns would no longer exist? and do you honestly believe the mental illness and evil would magically disappear? if you do, you’re the idiot not me.

            also, you do realize criminals can get access to guns illegally right? and at the southern border no less.. or do you have your head in the sand so deep that you are going to deny there are drug cartels in mexico.. guns can be imported into the united states very easily if they were made completely illegal. that is, unless you actually believe our southern border is secure.. which of course IT ISNT, and is yet another reason law abiding citizens should be armed.

          • October 5, 2015 at 6:49 PM

            The UK banned guns and gun crimes increased. Same thing with Australia.

          • October 5, 2015 at 7:37 PM

            The gun ban in Australia is a complete misconception. Do your research first.

          • October 11, 2015 at 3:29 PM

            I have done the research, have you?

          • October 5, 2015 at 6:48 PM

            Hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Hail His noodly appendage!

          • October 5, 2015 at 7:35 PM

            I never said it could fly.

          • October 11, 2015 at 3:28 PM

            The irony about the black church shooting is that state law allows citizens to carry firearms in churches with permission of the pastor, said pastor in this case was trying to get that law repealed.

          • September 24, 2015 at 10:21 PM

            With the brady checks in place anyone waking into a gun store has to go through a background check. Next feeble argument.

          • September 25, 2015 at 8:39 AM

            As for your first post goes, statistics and sources please. Excluding police officers, you actually believe that guns are used more often by people protecting themselves then they are by criminals? Wow. Just wow.
            As for your second post, what in god’s name do background checks have to do with anything? At one point in his or her life, every criminal that has ever existed has had a clean record. There is always a first crime. Secondly, what about people with mental disorders? It’s not a crime to be bipolar or schizophrenic. Thirdly, what about kids that get ahold of their parents’ guns? I could go on and on. Your logic is extremely flawed. Thank god you’re not a policy maker mister Thunderfoot.
            Keep em coming. This is fun.

          • October 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM

            Why not? Theres plenty of films where an actor or actress has to commit rape, domestic violence, etc…they are not condoning it they are also not hypocrites to be against those acts.

            I’m sure you do shit at work you dont like.

          • Doug Poppa
            October 20, 2017 at 7:14 PM

            No Matt, actually I never did. I never compromised my integrity and my principles!!!

          • October 21, 2017 at 5:23 PM

            Then you don’t have a job! That’s part of having job.

          • October 21, 2017 at 5:26 PM

            Its not an integrity or principles thing. Its you have a job. If you dont like that type of movie, his job, dont encourage it by spending your hard earned money on it.

          • Doug Poppa
            October 21, 2017 at 7:16 PM

            I lost a twelve year police career because I stood up for my principles. I did have a job and that’s not part of having a job, it depends on the character of the individual person. Taking a backseat to cowardice and complicity is never honorable. Hollywood degenerates and hypocrites are who they are. The make movies for money then come out and speak against the acts they portray in the roles. That should tell you something.

          • October 22, 2017 at 2:39 PM

            That IS part of having a job.
            And what it tells me is YOU have no idea what it is to be an adult who doesn’t have life handed to them by momma and daddy.
            They make movies that WE tell them will sell. Buy a different product if you dont like it. But so long as we say this is what we want to purchase, they can agree to do these types of films or be unemployed.

            And if you were a cop …where do you find the balls to generalize hate at entertainers? Talk about a career FULL of degenerates , predators, and corrupt hypocrites….the police state pretty much embodies that.

          • April 1, 2018 at 12:24 AM

            How many innocent people did you shoot/arrest?

          • April 1, 2018 at 12:23 AM

            Trust me, Doug. You have NO integrety or principles. You’re too stupid to even know the meaning of the words.

          • April 1, 2018 at 12:22 AM

            You’re an idiot, Doug. Stallone doesn’t go around killing people with deadly weapons. That’s only in the movies. Gain yourself a higher I.Q. so you can figure that out for yourself.

  • September 22, 2015 at 8:13 AM

    Hollywood may have the outward appearance of being against personal private firearms ownership but the place literally bristles with guns. Even in a State where the laws have descended into stupid territory, the elite are immune to scrutiny and are armed to the teeth.

  • September 22, 2015 at 4:35 AM

    “Take all the millions of dollars you have made over the years from your violent action movies, and give that money to all the victims of gun violence in this country.”

    That apply to big list of movie producers, directors and all important movie staff involved in production and distribution of “gun movies” and/or “violence movies” !

  • September 21, 2015 at 11:44 PM

    Spending time and effort criticizing the hypocrisy of these Hollywood types strikes me as a waste of time and effort, as it seems to lend them an importance neither they nor their antics merit.

  • September 21, 2015 at 11:02 PM

    Stallone? Stallone who?

    I’ve never wasted my time or money on him or his movies — and knowing about his anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment stance I’m even happier I’ve never wasted a penny on his movies.

  • September 21, 2015 at 8:24 PM

    Well, one more big name actor who’ll never get another dime of my money at the cinema… Oh well.

  • September 21, 2015 at 8:00 PM

    What a hypocritical arse! Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I was under the, evidently, mistaken impression that Stallone was of the conservative ilk … a rare commodity in Hollywierd. I never considered him talented but “tolerated” his efforts because I thought his heart was in the right place. I can now shed that mistaken impression!

Comments are closed.