Liam Neeson can stick it
- Thread starter ryansride2017
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Win
His opinion is pretty much what I would expect, given his profession.
I think the manner in which he expressed it says a lot more about him.
You got that right...pretty much all of those Hollywooders are nut cases...
His opinion is pretty much what I would expect, given his profession.
I think the manner in which he expressed it says a lot more about him.
You got that right...pretty much all of those Hollywooders are nut cases...
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Bruce Willis is oro-gun and Die Hard 1 is STILL a super awesome movie.
Yippie-kiii-aaa..
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Bruce Willis is oro-gun and Die Hard 1 is STILL a super awesome movie.
Yippie-kiii-aaa..
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
...Nothing wrong with what he said, it's true we do have too many darn guns but....it is embedded in our culture and country motto. So good luck breaking us of it...
There should be more firearms in the hands of trained citizens, not less. With both localized crime on the rise and terrorist threats, more CC's needs to be had.
I reject this "imbedded in our culture" nonsense.
Firearms in America are both historical and a right: Historical in our fight for freedom and oppression, and in the sense of an inalienable right, something the EU seems to have no sense of and often ignores.
Neeson is another arrogant Hollywood elitist.
...Nothing wrong with what he said, it's true we do have too many darn guns but....it is embedded in our culture and country motto. So good luck breaking us of it...
There should be more firearms in the hands of trained citizens, not less. With both localized crime on the rise and terrorist threats, more CC's needs to be had.
I reject this "imbedded in our culture" nonsense.
Firearms in America are both historical and a right: Historical in our fight for freedom and oppression, and in the sense of an inalienable right, something the EU seems to have no sense of and often ignores.
Neeson is another arrogant Hollywood elitist.
Originally Posted By: MalfunctionProne
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Bruce Willis is oro-gun and Die Hard 1 is STILL a super awesome movie.
Yippie-kiii-aaa..
Its my favorite Christmas movie. Lol.
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Bruce Willis is oro-gun and Die Hard 1 is STILL a super awesome movie.
Yippie-kiii-aaa..
Its my favorite Christmas movie. Lol.
Originally Posted By: ryansride2017
I will watch the upcoming Spongebob movie before I would watch any of his movies. To basically say, I don't like guns but I will use them to make millions, is hypocrisy at its best.
Liam Neeson
LOL !
he's an ACTOR - he can ACT as any character he wants - it is a ROLE, it doesn't have to meet his PERSONAL standards.
I will watch the upcoming Spongebob movie before I would watch any of his movies. To basically say, I don't like guns but I will use them to make millions, is hypocrisy at its best.
Liam Neeson
LOL !
he's an ACTOR - he can ACT as any character he wants - it is a ROLE, it doesn't have to meet his PERSONAL standards.
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Originally Posted By: ryansride2017
I will watch the upcoming Spongebob movie before I would watch any of his movies. To basically say, I don't like guns but I will use them to make millions, is hypocrisy at its best.
Liam Neeson
LOL !
he's an ACTOR - he can ACT as any character he wants - it is a ROLE, it doesn't have to meet his PERSONAL standards.
Exactly, if he plays a Bank robber, does it mean he is in favour of robbing Banks?
On the other hand, just because he is an Actor, does it mean his political views mean anything?
I know a plumber with strong political views, he's proberbly more intelligent than the average Holywood actor / actress.
But nobody pays any attention to what he says.
Originally Posted By: ryansride2017
I will watch the upcoming Spongebob movie before I would watch any of his movies. To basically say, I don't like guns but I will use them to make millions, is hypocrisy at its best.
Liam Neeson
LOL !
he's an ACTOR - he can ACT as any character he wants - it is a ROLE, it doesn't have to meet his PERSONAL standards.
Exactly, if he plays a Bank robber, does it mean he is in favour of robbing Banks?
On the other hand, just because he is an Actor, does it mean his political views mean anything?
I know a plumber with strong political views, he's proberbly more intelligent than the average Holywood actor / actress.
But nobody pays any attention to what he says.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
But of late, their "position" (by statements and/or actions) on many things has me not supporing their lives any longer with my cash.
Most of these folks are good at their craft, but when they veer off point and think that my money spent on them means that I support their position, that's where I pull the plug.
But why is it that they think my money should empower them to espouse their personal beliefs outwardly, publically? I don't "pay" them to talk about stuff off-camera or mic. If they would not speak out, I would not care about their position. But once they do speak out, they now make it part of my overall consideration package as to whether or not I "like" their position. Once they go public with their private thoughts, they make it open for me to choose to stop supporting them.
Somehow, somewhere along the line, they made the mistake in thinking that I was paying them for their opinion rather than their performance. Stick to what you're good at, and shut up about the rest. I fully agree that we have an open marketplace and they have the "right" to talk about anything they wish. But once they do so, I then have the "right" to cut off my portion of the cash flow.
I cut apart this post because these few thing are an interesting point of discussion.
You're paying an actor for their acting, not for their viewpoint, not for their beliefs, not for their personal point of view. I think the big, possibly bad assumption, is that one would think that supporting their craft, their product, is in any way supporting their beliefs.
It's kind of like going to the local Indian buffet. I'm not Hindu, I don't support their beliefs, but I like their food and are paying for it. Same thing if I go to yoga. I'm not enthralled with the "spiritual" side of it, or the beliefs of the teacher/owner, but I like the breathing/motion/stretching and that's a service I'm paying for.
If your HVAC maker CEO came out saying he hated guns and oil, but the HVAC they made was the absolute best in the industry, do the two things relate in any way?
I suspect that since opinions are like anii, where everybody has one, these actors couldn't care less what their opinions were or who did/didn't agree. They may be brainwashed and 180 degrees from how any one of us may think, and thus have an opinion or a sound byte in their brain that we dislike, but they're only spouting it because they have become high viz people that get asked questions that get recorded. Picking up an opinion because it's the rage or it's what is seemingly popular, or just because they don't know any better, just is what it is, and one should realize that at any time, 50% or more of the population may be doing exactly that in a manner undesirable to one one of us on any one topic.
I get voting with a wallet, and I do it, and we're all free to do so. But I think that doing it because of an indication of opinion, may be a bit much. Actions on the other hand may be a different thing.
It's an incredibly interesting discussion to have.
But of late, their "position" (by statements and/or actions) on many things has me not supporing their lives any longer with my cash.
Most of these folks are good at their craft, but when they veer off point and think that my money spent on them means that I support their position, that's where I pull the plug.
But why is it that they think my money should empower them to espouse their personal beliefs outwardly, publically? I don't "pay" them to talk about stuff off-camera or mic. If they would not speak out, I would not care about their position. But once they do speak out, they now make it part of my overall consideration package as to whether or not I "like" their position. Once they go public with their private thoughts, they make it open for me to choose to stop supporting them.
Somehow, somewhere along the line, they made the mistake in thinking that I was paying them for their opinion rather than their performance. Stick to what you're good at, and shut up about the rest. I fully agree that we have an open marketplace and they have the "right" to talk about anything they wish. But once they do so, I then have the "right" to cut off my portion of the cash flow.
I cut apart this post because these few thing are an interesting point of discussion.
You're paying an actor for their acting, not for their viewpoint, not for their beliefs, not for their personal point of view. I think the big, possibly bad assumption, is that one would think that supporting their craft, their product, is in any way supporting their beliefs.
It's kind of like going to the local Indian buffet. I'm not Hindu, I don't support their beliefs, but I like their food and are paying for it. Same thing if I go to yoga. I'm not enthralled with the "spiritual" side of it, or the beliefs of the teacher/owner, but I like the breathing/motion/stretching and that's a service I'm paying for.
If your HVAC maker CEO came out saying he hated guns and oil, but the HVAC they made was the absolute best in the industry, do the two things relate in any way?
I suspect that since opinions are like anii, where everybody has one, these actors couldn't care less what their opinions were or who did/didn't agree. They may be brainwashed and 180 degrees from how any one of us may think, and thus have an opinion or a sound byte in their brain that we dislike, but they're only spouting it because they have become high viz people that get asked questions that get recorded. Picking up an opinion because it's the rage or it's what is seemingly popular, or just because they don't know any better, just is what it is, and one should realize that at any time, 50% or more of the population may be doing exactly that in a manner undesirable to one one of us on any one topic.
I get voting with a wallet, and I do it, and we're all free to do so. But I think that doing it because of an indication of opinion, may be a bit much. Actions on the other hand may be a different thing.
It's an incredibly interesting discussion to have.
I think the issue is the actors are lining their pockets by glorifying some thing they are opposed to. If the HVAC CEO had the theory that air conditioning was bad for the environment, but still manufactured ACs, that would be a better comparison.
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
...Nothing wrong with what he said, it's true we do have too many darn guns but....it is embedded in our culture and country motto. So good luck breaking us of it...
There should be more firearms in the hands of trained citizens, not less. With both localized crime on the rise and terrorist threats, more CC's needs to be had.
I reject this "imbedded in our culture" nonsense.
Firearms in America are both historical and a right: Historical in our fight for freedom and oppression, and in the sense of an inalienable right, something the EU seems to have no sense of and often ignores.
Neeson is another arrogant Hollywood elitist.
x2!
Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
...Nothing wrong with what he said, it's true we do have too many darn guns but....it is embedded in our culture and country motto. So good luck breaking us of it...
There should be more firearms in the hands of trained citizens, not less. With both localized crime on the rise and terrorist threats, more CC's needs to be had.
I reject this "imbedded in our culture" nonsense.
Firearms in America are both historical and a right: Historical in our fight for freedom and oppression, and in the sense of an inalienable right, something the EU seems to have no sense of and often ignores.
Neeson is another arrogant Hollywood elitist.
x2!
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: cbear
I think the issue is the actors are lining their pockets by glorifying some thing they are opposed to. If the HVAC CEO had the theory that air conditioning was bad for the environment, but still manufactured ACs, that would be a better comparison.
Opposed to? Was that stated explicitly? Perhaps you read a different article then the attempt to sell advertising that FOXNews put up.
Quote:
Theres too many f___ guns out there," the actor said recently. "I think the (U.S.) population is like 320 million. Theres over 300 million guns privately owned in America. I think its a f____ disgrace."
I can in no way directly correlate that comment to say anything specifically about control or limitation of rights. As I mentioned before it makes zero sense to play ostrich and the reality is that if 150,000 guns a year are going into the hands of criminals which the FBI statistics says is the case then there are too many out there that are not properly controlled.
I don't particularly find his other commentary very much of any use to justify his position. And I'm no fan of needing to use expletives to get a point across ever (above quote).
Quote:
You can slap me in the face with that and say I'm a liar. My defence is that it's very much cartoon violence. That's what I see it as: Tom and Jerry played out with human beings.
I can't say that the quote was very strong or useful in the overall discussion in fact I think it's rather stupid. But again I think sensationalism from FOXNews trying to sell advertising over a comment that is very much ado about nothing is rather funny. I'm an avid gun owner, pro 2A, Pro national free carry for responsible citizens, and work with time effort and money to change our local laws. But I'll also say that it's a disgrace that there are so many millions of guns that some contingent of the population is too irresponsible to own. Does that make me a hypocrite?
I can't say that the guy is "glorifying" violence in any way. He is performing his trade just like everybody else does. His assignment is to act out a certain character. I don't see him injecting his personal views into the performance of his art. To me that's a discriminating factor that make this out to be just an attempt to sell advertising. maybe I missed it but I don't see where he says that nobody in the US should be allowed to own guns even his comments about what he identifies as the founding fathers' response does not specifically indicate any call to action or motion to do anything different.
Heck I would even argue that if we wanted to be absolutely true to the founding fathers' intent, everybody that was able-bodied would have an M4 carbine or something like that for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia. All of these other small arms and carry issues and everything else when not necessarily even align.
Heck look at the regulations associated with gun carrying in Switzerland, a country in Europe with some of the highest gun ownership rates in the world. That's ownership and regulations associated with maintaining a well regulated militia. I'm not saying that that is right, wrong or relevant even, but just because the quotes Liam made don't align 100% with the NRA or FOXNews is not a good reason to boycott or even for FOXNews to try to sell advertising over what is pretty much an irrelevant point by an irrelevant person from a different country with a slightly different viewpoint. Especially sincethe comment doesn't even go as wildly in some bad direction as one would imply by all the knee-jerk reactions.
A thought about this came to mind when a song came on the radio today. It was that song "what it's like" (I think) by Everlast (I think). In that song talks about the girl that goes into the abortion clinic and is heckled. And it it it essentially says something along the lines of that someday you may have to choose. Now that's a situation where artist actually puts their views into their work, and while certainly there allowed and free to do that, that's a good reason to decide to vote with one's wallet. Not that I ever have or ever will buy that guys music, but it's a good example of where the views start to come out in a real way, and influence the public when every 20-year-old college student is playing that song on the radio. Yes even Christians it right wingers.
If Liam had said that every American should be forced to turn in their guns and only the military and police I have them because it's so much safer and every other country does it so much better, I could certainly see being absolutely disgusted. Especially since he isn't a citizen of this country to my knowledge. If he was actively take me up American gun control sponsorship as part of his public profile, I can see that as being worse. If there are any specifics whatsoever this commentary I can see pointing a finger.
But I can hardly see the commentary that you made deserving any sort of a gripe practically speaking and what's even more ridiculous is to think that attempt to get the public up in arms over such an irrelevant, it is somehow fair and balanced.
There's a reason why talking news is such a profitable medium. It's garbage like this that does nothing but polarize and split the population, which is exactly the way that the money handlers want going on, to destroy this country. Go ahead and boycott Liam over this. Their agenda is still being done at your expense.
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
I'm happy that I have better things to do than support Hollywood actors by watching their movies. And I'm certainly glad that I don't get my knickers knotted up over their meaningless views.
Despite my long-winded posts, I very much agree.
I think the issue is the actors are lining their pockets by glorifying some thing they are opposed to. If the HVAC CEO had the theory that air conditioning was bad for the environment, but still manufactured ACs, that would be a better comparison.
Opposed to? Was that stated explicitly? Perhaps you read a different article then the attempt to sell advertising that FOXNews put up.
Quote:
Theres too many f___ guns out there," the actor said recently. "I think the (U.S.) population is like 320 million. Theres over 300 million guns privately owned in America. I think its a f____ disgrace."
I can in no way directly correlate that comment to say anything specifically about control or limitation of rights. As I mentioned before it makes zero sense to play ostrich and the reality is that if 150,000 guns a year are going into the hands of criminals which the FBI statistics says is the case then there are too many out there that are not properly controlled.
I don't particularly find his other commentary very much of any use to justify his position. And I'm no fan of needing to use expletives to get a point across ever (above quote).
Quote:
You can slap me in the face with that and say I'm a liar. My defence is that it's very much cartoon violence. That's what I see it as: Tom and Jerry played out with human beings.
I can't say that the quote was very strong or useful in the overall discussion in fact I think it's rather stupid. But again I think sensationalism from FOXNews trying to sell advertising over a comment that is very much ado about nothing is rather funny. I'm an avid gun owner, pro 2A, Pro national free carry for responsible citizens, and work with time effort and money to change our local laws. But I'll also say that it's a disgrace that there are so many millions of guns that some contingent of the population is too irresponsible to own. Does that make me a hypocrite?
I can't say that the guy is "glorifying" violence in any way. He is performing his trade just like everybody else does. His assignment is to act out a certain character. I don't see him injecting his personal views into the performance of his art. To me that's a discriminating factor that make this out to be just an attempt to sell advertising. maybe I missed it but I don't see where he says that nobody in the US should be allowed to own guns even his comments about what he identifies as the founding fathers' response does not specifically indicate any call to action or motion to do anything different.
Heck I would even argue that if we wanted to be absolutely true to the founding fathers' intent, everybody that was able-bodied would have an M4 carbine or something like that for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia. All of these other small arms and carry issues and everything else when not necessarily even align.
Heck look at the regulations associated with gun carrying in Switzerland, a country in Europe with some of the highest gun ownership rates in the world. That's ownership and regulations associated with maintaining a well regulated militia. I'm not saying that that is right, wrong or relevant even, but just because the quotes Liam made don't align 100% with the NRA or FOXNews is not a good reason to boycott or even for FOXNews to try to sell advertising over what is pretty much an irrelevant point by an irrelevant person from a different country with a slightly different viewpoint. Especially sincethe comment doesn't even go as wildly in some bad direction as one would imply by all the knee-jerk reactions.
A thought about this came to mind when a song came on the radio today. It was that song "what it's like" (I think) by Everlast (I think). In that song talks about the girl that goes into the abortion clinic and is heckled. And it it it essentially says something along the lines of that someday you may have to choose. Now that's a situation where artist actually puts their views into their work, and while certainly there allowed and free to do that, that's a good reason to decide to vote with one's wallet. Not that I ever have or ever will buy that guys music, but it's a good example of where the views start to come out in a real way, and influence the public when every 20-year-old college student is playing that song on the radio. Yes even Christians it right wingers.
If Liam had said that every American should be forced to turn in their guns and only the military and police I have them because it's so much safer and every other country does it so much better, I could certainly see being absolutely disgusted. Especially since he isn't a citizen of this country to my knowledge. If he was actively take me up American gun control sponsorship as part of his public profile, I can see that as being worse. If there are any specifics whatsoever this commentary I can see pointing a finger.
But I can hardly see the commentary that you made deserving any sort of a gripe practically speaking and what's even more ridiculous is to think that attempt to get the public up in arms over such an irrelevant, it is somehow fair and balanced.
There's a reason why talking news is such a profitable medium. It's garbage like this that does nothing but polarize and split the population, which is exactly the way that the money handlers want going on, to destroy this country. Go ahead and boycott Liam over this. Their agenda is still being done at your expense.
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
I'm happy that I have better things to do than support Hollywood actors by watching their movies. And I'm certainly glad that I don't get my knickers knotted up over their meaningless views.
Despite my long-winded posts, I very much agree.
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Yes, THANK YOU for NOT demanding an absolute purist/fanatic commitment to an (your) ideology, in order to accept them as a fellow citizen/human being.
He is European.. they are a bit liberal when it comes to guns. Not sure what sort of thing Ireland has going on, but I am sure only the thugs have them.
Harrison Ford is anti gun.. I will be watching the new Star Wars in theatres. Sylvester Stallone is anti gun too. I love Rambo and will continue to watch it.
I have a few good liberal friends as well. We are still friends, go out together for drinks and honor each others opinion.
Life is good.
Yes, THANK YOU for NOT demanding an absolute purist/fanatic commitment to an (your) ideology, in order to accept them as a fellow citizen/human being.
Originally Posted By: expat
The most productive discussion I have had was with the late Garry Allen (Who I had great respect for)
He was probably the greatest human being that I've ever had contact with. He and his wife travelling to NY to meet use was amazing.
The most productive discussion I have had was with the late Garry Allen (Who I had great respect for)
He was probably the greatest human being that I've ever had contact with. He and his wife travelling to NY to meet use was amazing.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: expat
The most productive discussion I have had was with the late Garry Allen (Who I had great respect for)
He was probably the greatest human being that I've ever had contact with. He and his wife travelling to NY to meet use was amazing.
I only wish that I had met him as well. He was an absolutely remarkable individual, and one with an enviable way with words. I miss him greatly.
Originally Posted By: expat
The most productive discussion I have had was with the late Garry Allen (Who I had great respect for)
He was probably the greatest human being that I've ever had contact with. He and his wife travelling to NY to meet use was amazing.
I only wish that I had met him as well. He was an absolutely remarkable individual, and one with an enviable way with words. I miss him greatly.
- Status
Similar threads
