stupid contradiction

Not really. I love violence on film as a form of entertainment, but I hate it in real life. Putting in such a statement in a voilent film actually works pretty well for me, Donner shows that he can draw the line between fictional entertainment and real violence.

here is my question then do you people (the average person) automatically think guns translate to violence

sorry to say if you feel this way, unless for a personal reason, then youve seen one too many movies

Not not surprising these people litteratly make Millions of dollars $$$$ off something they dont supposely like and turn aound and blast it,no complaining beforehand.Hyprocrites!!

Whats more frightening are the people who find violence "entertaining" and yet turn around as cry and whine about it when it happens in real life.Morons!

Violence is part of human and animal nature,Violence can either save lives or take them..

Did sharp rocks or knives kill people? Or shovels and axes or swords.The gun thing is tiresome.Guns are weapons made for hunting or other collecting purposes but yes they are also used and made for defence or offence warfare like anything else man creates basically.

Uh, yeah, it was funny. That was the point. It's called "irony".

Actually, Richard Donner isn't anti-gun at all. He's anti-NRA. He used to be a member of the NRA until they started supporting things like armor piercing bullets. He then decided they were a little too radical for his taste. He talks about it on one of the Lethal Weapon audio commentaries.

Firstly, I do think many Hollywood movies come across as hypocritical when the opinions of their actors and directors come out. Roger Moore, for instance, detests guns; yet played James Bond in movies for a number of years. I don't know what Donner's politics are, but either way I think an anti-NRA sign in a movie called "Assassins" is pretty pointless.

Somebody asked why cops wear body armor if it doesn't stop FMJ rounds. There IS body armor that stops, or has the potential to stop, FMJ rifle rounds. Actually, they're inserts, made of metal or ceramic, that cover the chest when inserted into a kevlar vest pouch. Most cops don't wear inserts in their body armor. In fact, most cops wear what's called Level II armor. Believe it or not, there is actually a classification for this stuff.

Level I: Stops most .22lr rounds, .380 ACP rounds.
Level IIA: Stops most 9mm and .40 rounds.
Level II: Stops .357 magnum soft point rounds
Level IIIA: Stops .44 magnum rounds... in fact, stops almost any pistol round.
Level III: Stops some or most 7.62x39 soft point rounds, most 5.56 rounds.
Level IV: Trauma Plate Insert. Stops just about anything... once. Won't stop a .50 BMG, though, anymore than it'll stop a 20mm cannon.

Finally: I don't know about everyone else on this thread, but I do equate guns with violence. Are they inanimate objects? Of course. Designed with a specific purpose: To kill, either humans, animals, or paper targets. Honestly, I almost wish guns had never been invented. You know why? Because they equalize combat. I'm a big guy, and in a world without guns, that would mean I would have a tremendous advantage over everybody who isn't a big guy. I would have a lot less to worry about, and probably a lot more job opportunities.

The problem is that the cat's out of the bag: The 'bad guys' (i.e, criminals, governments) already have guns. They will always have guns. As long as there are guns to be had, they will have them. Outlawing guns makes sure that only outlaws have guns (and the government... which is usually the point). In the United States, at least, a citizen still has the right to arm himself. The reason for this is so that he may protect himself, his family, and his property, from the 'bad guys'.

And you know what? I have a shotgun AND a samurai sword. In Omnia Paratus.



Death to the Panopticon!

Anyone else feel it was funny Richard Donner had anti NRA signs yet the movie was based on killing with the use of guns?
It's not a stupid contradiction, it was intentional. It was supposed to be funny.

here is my question then do you people (the average person) automatically think guns translate to violence
Yes, I do. And no, I haven't simply seen too many movies or had a bad personal experience. No matter what you're shooting at, animal or human, you're performing an act of violence. If you're only using a gun to scare someone, you're threatening violence. Unless someone only uses a gun to shoot at non-living things, they are being violent.

There was a similar sentiment in Donner's movie Lethal Weapon 4.

In the opening scene Riggs and Murtaugh have to fight this psychopath dressed in armour, and Riggs jokes that he might be a spokesman for the NRA.