Tarantino: ‘Disrespectful’ To Newtown Victims To Link Shooting To Movies

[Freewill]

Yes, nothing can be learned from films it is the guns fault that someone uses it for evil. Tarantino proves to be a total jackass.

NEWTOWN, Conn. (CBS Connecticut) — Director Quentin Tarantino calls it “disrespectful” to the victims of the Newtown school shooting to link that tragedy to movie violence.

In an interview with National Public Radio, the “Django Unchained” director, who got annoyed answering the question, said the true issue is about gun control and mental health rather than violence in movies.

“I think it’s disrespectful to … the memory of the people who died to talk about movies,” Tarantino said. “I think it’s totally disrespectful to their memory.”

Tarantino: ‘Disrespectful’ To Newtown Victims To Link Shooting To Movies « CBS Connecticut

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

 

[Plasmaball]

man has an opinion at 11.

rest of the world gave two shits.

 

[Freewill]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Graphic in nature:

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Well he DID get it half right.

In an interview with National Public Radio, the “Django Unchained” director, who got annoyed answering the question, said the true issue is about gun control and mental health rather than violence in movies.

Do you know what it means when the national discussion starts turning from Gun Control to Mental Health and then Medications?

It means we're turning the tide!

It means we're gonna' win!

 

[WillowTree]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

Tarantino is still an asshole if he thinks violence in movies doesn't make an impression on young people.

 

[Freewill]

Well he DID get it half right.

In an interview with National Public Radio, the “Django Unchained” director, who got annoyed answering the question, said the true issue is about gun control and mental health rather than violence in movies.

Do you know what it means when the national discussion starts turning from Gun Control to Mental Health and then Medications?

It means we're turning the tide!

It means we're gonna' win!

Are you saying that the shooter in Newtown didn't receive Mental Health treatment? Can you give me the cause and the reason of why he did what he did? We know he was addicted to violent video games but apparently that would be OK if he were merely drugged.

 

[Freewill]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

BS. Movies are action they are how we teach children in schools. Hardly different then cyber school A gun is an inanimate object. Just like your car. It would be foolish to blame car ownership on your wreck when you were driving drunk.

 

[Freewill]

Oh, and BTW. Remember not long ago the lie that Obama was telling about a little seen video causing riot in Benghazi? Sure seem to me that a little seen video was used as an excuse for a person's behavior. But now all of a sudden movies have no effect. BS.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

BS. Movies are action they are how we teach children in schools.

I don't know where you went to school, but I wasn't taught with action movies.

Hardly different then cyber school A gun is an inanimate object.

So is a violent movie.

Just like your car. It would be foolish to blame car ownership on your wreck when you were driving drunk.

It would be just as foolish to blame The Fast and The Furious for a wreck.

 

[Rocko]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

As far as I'm concerned Hollywood is free to express whatever they want, but I also believe that Hollywood is responsible, to a degree, for the culture of violence in our country.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well he DID get it half right.

In an interview with National Public Radio, the “Django Unchained” director, who got annoyed answering the question, said the true issue is about gun control and mental health rather than violence in movies.

Do you know what it means when the national discussion starts turning from Gun Control to Mental Health and then Medications?

It means we're turning the tide!

It means we're gonna' win!

Are you saying that the shooter in Newtown didn't receive Mental Health treatment? Can you give me the cause and the reason of why he did what he did? We know he was addicted to violent video games but apparently that would be OK if he were merely drugged.

riight...so the conservative right, who are huge believers in personal responsibility are now trying to blame video games and violent movies for perps' actions? Interesting....

 

[Dr Grump]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

As far as I'm concerned Hollywood is free to express whatever they want, but I also believe that Hollywood is responsible, to a degree, for the culture of violence in our country.

I don't. I blame the individual...and parenting....

 

[Freewill]

Well he DID get it half right.

Do you know what it means when the national discussion starts turning from Gun Control to Mental Health and then Medications?

It means we're turning the tide!

It means we're gonna' win!

Are you saying that the shooter in Newtown didn't receive Mental Health treatment? Can you give me the cause and the reason of why he did what he did? We know he was addicted to violent video games but apparently that would be OK if he were merely drugged.

riight...so the conservative right, who are huge believers in personal responsibility are now trying to blame video games and violent movies for perps' actions? Interesting....

And the left is trying to ignore the influence. Of course the movies and video games are not going to effect the majority in a way they become homocidal. But the fringe wack job? Can you deny they could have an influence as Tarantino has done?

 

[Freewill]

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

BS. Movies are action they are how we teach children in schools.

I don't know where you went to school, but I wasn't taught with action movies.

Hardly different then cyber school A gun is an inanimate object.

So is a violent movie.

Just like your car. It would be foolish to blame car ownership on your wreck when you were driving drunk.

It would be just as foolish to blame The Fast and The Furious for a wreck.

Videos, films, movies are teaching tools, that was the obvious point you missed.

A gun does not talk to a person a movie does.

No, it would not be as foolish to blame fast and furious for exciting a person to drive fast.

BTW no where did I say that these movies should be banned nor did I say to silence Tarantino. What I am saying is that to ignore the impression we receive from movies seems to be just a bit of denial of reality.

 

[freedombecki]

I think it's hilarious how quick you guys are to attack the First Amendment in defense of the Second.

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

The power of suggestion that pictures have is far more of a leader than 1,000 words are. Children are seeing people shoot other people, blood spurting everywhere, and the shooter exultant. It's the picture that teaches our children it's a good thing to kill bad people. All that is left is for the child to grow up and determine who he thinks are bad people. Of course, that would be people who either bullied or shamed him some way, real or imagined, in years past.

That young man should have been institutionalized years ago. He decided his primary care giver, who had put her life on hold to make sure he had a "normal" life may have made some mistakes, but she paid with her life, which he took away from her because she didn't act to institutionalize him soon enough, which made her his worst enemy when he found out her plan, which she should not have disclosed. It's too late now. She's dead, and he's dead.

It's a national lesson learned. There aren't many people who teach their severely mentally unbalanced children to shoot killer weapons. Hopefully, with the lesson learned, there are none.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Well he DID get it half right.

In an interview with National Public Radio, the “Django Unchained” director, who got annoyed answering the question, said the true issue is about gun control and mental health rather than violence in movies.

Do you know what it means when the national discussion starts turning from Gun Control to Mental Health and then Medications?

It means we're turning the tide!

It means we're gonna' win!

Are you saying that the shooter in Newtown didn't receive Mental Health treatment? Can you give me the cause and the reason of why he did what he did? We know he was addicted to violent video games but apparently that would be OK if he were merely drugged.

Not saying it was ok if he was. Lets look at his Medical Records to see what Medications with huge side effects he was on. Oh we can't, they're sealed!

Gee I wonder why?

 

[Freewill]

Who in the f... said his speech should be restricted? WTF is wrong with you people? He can say whatever he wants that makes him sound like an asshole that is his right but I don't have to like it.

Blaming violent movies for shootings is as much of an attack on the First Amendment as blaming guns for shootings is an attack on the Second.

The power of suggestion that pictures have is far more of a leader than 1,000 words are. Children are seeing people shoot other people, blood spurting everywhere, and the shooter exultant. It's the picture that teaches our children it's a good thing to kill bad people. All that is left is for the child to grow up and determine who he thinks are bad people. Of course, that would be people who either bullied or shamed him some way, real or imagined, in years past.

That young man should have been institutionalized years ago. He decided his primary care giver, who had put her life on hold to make sure he had a "normal" life may have made some mistakes, but she paid with her life, which he took away from her because she didn't act to institutionalize him soon enough, which made her his worst enemy when he found out her plan, which she should not have disclosed. It's too late now. She's dead, and he's dead.

It's a national lesson learned. There aren't many people who teach their severely mentally unbalanced children to shoot killer weapons. Hopefully, with the lesson learned, there are none.

Parents seldom see or will admit that there children are mentally unbalanced or at least the severity. I think the mother tried but failed in her attempt to get him treatment. Obviously if she knew he was homocidal she would have taken precautions. Just because he did her in doesn't mean she knew he could or would.

 

[Dr Grump]

[
And the left is trying to ignore the influence. Of course the movies and video games are not going to effect the majority in a way they become homocidal. But the fringe wack job? Can you deny they could have an influence as Tarantino has done?

Oh, there might be some influence, but how much is moot. At the end of the day, I would say for every nutter influenced into doing something bad due to watching a movie like Tarantino's, there are millions of us who have also seen the same movie and done nothing.

It reminds of the case of a couple of Nevada kids who tried to commit suicide after doing drugs while listening to a Judas Priest record in the 1980s. They used a shotgun. One died the other survived with horrendous facial injuries. The survivor sued JP and lost. I always found it interesting that something like 500,000 people bought that record. 499,998 of those buyers didn't do a damn thing, but somehow it was Judas Priest's fault that two drug-addled losers decided to shoot themselves. it was 100 percent their fault and decision.