In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Eric Clapton and Bruce Willis Pro-Gun Rights
tr fox
Member Posts: 13,856
This was in an email from the National Shooting Sports Foundation:
CELEBRITIES TAKE STAND ON HUNTING, SHOOTING ISSUES . . . Rock guitarist Eric Clapton will headline a concert this summer in support of the Countryside Alliance's fight to lift a ban on fox hunting in the United Kingdom, PR Inside reports. "Eric supports the Countryside Alliance. He doesn't hunt himself, but does enjoy rural pursuits such as fishing and shooting," a Clapton spokesperson said. Meanwhile, movie star Bruce Willis spoke out recently for the right to carry a firearm, defending law-abiding gun owners as responsible citizens, reports contactmusic.com. "If you take guns away from legal gun owners then the only people who would have guns would be the bad guys," Willis said.
CELEBRITIES TAKE STAND ON HUNTING, SHOOTING ISSUES . . . Rock guitarist Eric Clapton will headline a concert this summer in support of the Countryside Alliance's fight to lift a ban on fox hunting in the United Kingdom, PR Inside reports. "Eric supports the Countryside Alliance. He doesn't hunt himself, but does enjoy rural pursuits such as fishing and shooting," a Clapton spokesperson said. Meanwhile, movie star Bruce Willis spoke out recently for the right to carry a firearm, defending law-abiding gun owners as responsible citizens, reports contactmusic.com. "If you take guns away from legal gun owners then the only people who would have guns would be the bad guys," Willis said.
Comments
How long have you been waiting to use that archaic expression?[:o)]
[8D][:D][8D]
He who has a larger platform has a larger responsibility to use it to the good.
Frog, you anti-intelligent slimy squid puke. The views of celebrities are hardly elevated or affirmed by our assent. A guitar player and an actor getting to voice their opinion is not the reward of demonstrable expertise or certainty of truth, but the reward of name recognition and following. Pretty lame credentials in any case, and I certainly would not take up arms or lay them down because of what some ex-heroin addict or affirmed womanizer says I should do. Who do these asshats think they are kidding? Are you convinced by Susan Sarandon or Barbra Streisand? Different ca-ca, same stink.
My regard for Clapton and Willis for taking a pro-gun stance is equal to that for Tim Robbins and George Clooney for taking a negative one. That each side advantages their celebrity to espouse a personal view publically blows major donkey, and I don't care what the message is or who says it. Eric Clapton is just Natalie Manes with a smaller pudendum.
So, what you are really telling us, is that simply because a person is a known "celebrity" they can no longer have a public opinion or stance on an issue[?] Hmmm... it seems to me that the First Amendment applies equally to all of us regardless of our own individual "celebrity" status. Maybe we should make you a "celebrity" so that your personal views become less meaningful[:0]
Bert
WACA Historian & Life Member
So, what you are really telling us, is that simply because a person is a known "celebrity" they can no longer have a public opinion or stance on an issue[?]
Is your reading comprehension really that bad?
quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
So, what you are really telling us, is that simply because a person is a known "celebrity" they can no longer have a public opinion or stance on an issue[?]
Is your reading comprehension really that bad?
What a lame retort... you are starting to act and sound just like HAIRY[xx(]. I think you know exactly what my point was. You might also consider wording your future prose a wee bit better[;)].
WACA Historian & Life Member
DWS IS a celebrity (on GB Forums, that is)[:D]
Maybe in his own mind... [:o)]
WACA Historian & Life Member
I am amazed that a British celebrity likes shooting.
Way to go, Eric!
What a lame retort... you are starting to act and sound just like HAIRY[xx(]. I think you know exactly what my point was. You might also consider wording your future prose a wee bit better[;)].
I'll tell you what a lame retort is: A reply that fails to acknowledge having misread (I can't even say misinterpreted) what I wrote. Yes, I know exactly what your point was; and my point was that if you had the reading comprehension of a third grader you would have known better than to make the point in the first place.
I am glad for any pro-gun help from most any source.
I agree. In one single instance these fellows have expressed their opinions and influenced more people on firearms and hunting than I will ever be able to do in my entire life - and I work in wildlife management (last year I had just under 5000 hunters thru my check station).
So hes a big guy and got famous doing action movies.... how does this make his personal views relevant? Why dont you go flipping through the phone book, pic a name at random, call them up, and see what their views are, and report it to us here on GB.
I dont have a problem with his views, or the fact he stated them.
The problem is that people care what his views are, because he was in Die Hard or something.
Its not what he says that is the problem, but the reason that you care what he says.
i think what DWS is saying.... is that while willis has the right to state his views..... no one should care what they are.
So hes a big guy and got famous doing action movies.... how does this make his personal views relevant? Why dont you go flipping through the phone book, pic a name at random, call them up, and see what their views are, and report it to us here on GB.
I dont have a problem with his views, or the fact he stated them.
The problem is that people care what his views are, because he was in Die Hard or something.
Its not what he says that is the problem, but the reason that you care what he says.
Geez S. Crist! We gun people for years have endured anti-gun babble from people who have enough draw to be quoted in national media sources. And here we have an example of two public figures speaking out FOR gun rights. Which I passed on to any INTERESTED readers. Even the title of my topic is enough that anyone not interested could easily have SKIPPED IT. But instead the whiny, always want a reason to complain people like CA Sucks has to analyze the whole situation and then criticize.
Go do something that might actually make you smile instead of frown.
Geez S. Crist! We gun people for years have endured anti-gun babble from people who have enough draw to be quoted in national media sources. And here we have an example of two public figures speaking out FOR gun rights. Which I passed on to any INTERESTED readers. Even the title of my topic is enough that anyone not interested could easily have SKIPPED IT. But instead the whiny, always want a reason to complain people like CA Sucks has to analyze the whole situation and then criticize.
Go do something that might actually make you smile instead of frown.
Do you know whether Eric and Bruce have similarly expressed their thoughts on no-load muni's or acceptable tolerances for nuclear imaging distortion in determining secondary prophylaxis for a herniated disc? I am considering both retirement and surgery and would certainly welcome their views on these matters, as, after all, who doesn't want to be the Last Man Standing, if you catch my drift.
..... no one should care what they are.
So hes a big guy and got famous doing action movies.... how does this make his personal views relevant? Why dont you go flipping through the phone book, pic a name at random, call them up, and see what their views are, and report it to us here on GB.
Of the hundreds of kids (maybe 1000) that I've worked with on special youth hunt days, I don't believe a single one of them would care about the views from a random name in a phone book, but they do care about the views of a celebrity - and I couldn't tell you why, but it seems to be in the majority and has been since Hollywood started in the movie business - look at what Hopalong Cassidy and Davy Crockett did in the movies.
Kids are the future of firearms, shooting and hunting. Any celebrity acting as a responsible proponent of hunting and firearms is benefitting our future.
There are a few views on this forum that are little more than venting a negative opinion and benefit no one.
Kids are the future of firearms, shooting and hunting. Any celebrity acting as a responsible proponent of hunting and firearms is benefitting our future.
It's a different world now than when Fess Parker wore buckskins, in case you haven't noticed. And in case you haven't noticed, the kids of today don't give crap one about Eric Clapton or Bruce Willis. Now if 50 Cent came out with his very own gangstah Glock and said that every lil pimp an' ho should have one, you can bet your bippy that would be a more pro-gun message than any ol' stinky coonskin cap. Where the hell you been the last fifty years, man? The lines on gun rights have been drawn in the sand, and the likes of Ted Nugent or Eric Clapton or Bruce Willis ain't what's happening and ain't gonna change the minds of anyone, just like all those lame * old actors and musicians on the other side of the line ain't gonna change your mind or mine. Hate to be so negative, but you don't have a friggin' clue.
[br
...but after "Quigley Down Under" came out we did get a statewide jump in the number of students in Hunter Safety classes, not to mention an enormous amount of questions on black powder hunting and rifles.
No doubt. And after Boyz n the Hood came out, B&B Sales in North Hollywood sold every semi-auto handgun they had in 36 hours. What's your point? I'm afraid your Norman Rockwell, Filson wool and wood decoys with grandpa on Saturday morning perception of the gun rights issue in this country and elsewhere is a little askew. You need to check it against the demise of magazines like Argosy and the diminishing circulation of magazines like Outdoor Life and Fur-Fish-Game and the plethora of new tactical gun rags and increased circulation of magazines like SWAT and Soldier of Fortune. Even guys on this board are poo-pooing the Winchester 94 in favor of the SKS for deer. Care to guess what the number of new hunting licenses vs new guns sold in America was last year? Care to guess what percentage of those new guns sold were non-hunting caliber semi-automatic handguns? I'm afraid Eric Clapton coming out for hunting foxes in the UK at this point is like finding hope in being able to fart under water. The gun rights issue for the generations following us will be different, simply because the people of those generations are different. I really do wish things were like they used to be. Unfortunately, they're not.
Why is there argument over this? Are you people looking for something to squabble over?
Too old to live...too young to die...
Why is there argument over this? Are you people looking for something to squabble over?
I think the point is that the opinions of celebrities are wrongly weighted on factors irrelevant to the subject for which those opinions are held; that the relative worth of prescribing anti-depressants to children with ADD are colored by personalities like Tom Cruise whose only credentials are that he was cool in Top Gun; that most all knowledgeable, credentialed authorities on any subject you can imagine are not given the time of day because they do not have hit songs or play basketball for a living; that the influence of celebrities, even those celebrities who espouse views similar to our own, is undue and unduly privileged. I'm afraid you can't have it both ways, i.e., Barbra Steisand don't know squat because she's a flaming liberal, tree--hugging cow, but Tom Selleck does know squat because he is conservative and pro-gun and speaks to your own mind. Truth is, both are advantaging their celebrity status to vocalize their own personal views, and this irrespective of demonstrable experience or knowledge of the subject matter. That you judge the worth of celebrity opinion solely by whether you agree with it or not is not the criterion of a rational, thinking person, and this whether you agree with Eric Clapton and Bruce Willis or Tim Robbins and George Clooney. My point is that we listen to the wrong people for the wrong reasons and compound the error by attributing weight based on popularity rather than repute. In other words, grow the F up.
FCD: What the hell is your problem lately?
I'm not certain, but i think it's possible that a rich old fart like Bruce Springsteen probably actually voted for Bush even though he held concerts for john kerry..Why, cause the kids who buy his records don't like George Bush.
I Clapton's case, he's merely trying to identify with and become a part of the British upper-crust country-house set now that he's rich and in old age. I doubt clapton has ever hunted anyt6hing beside a good buzz or ever really been passionette about something, excpet scoring when he's got a jones on.
quote:Originally posted by SaxonPig
Why is there argument over this? Are you people looking for something to squabble over?
I think the point is that the opinions of celebrities are wrongly weighted on factors irrelevant to the subject for which those opinions are held; that the relative worth of prescribing anti-depressants to children with ADD are colored by personalities like Tom Cruise whose only credentials are that he was cool in Top Gun; that most all knowledgeable, credentialed authorities on any subject you can imagine are not given the time of day because they do not have hit songs or play basketball for a living; that the influence of celebrities, even those celebrities who espouse views similar to our own, is undue and unduly privileged. I'm afraid you can't have it both ways, i.e., Barbra Steisand don't know squat because she's a flaming liberal, tree--hugging cow, but Tom Selleck does know squat because he is conservative and pro-gun and speaks to your own mind. Truth is, both are advantaging their celebrity status to vocalize their own personal views, and this irrespective of demonstrable experience or knowledge of the subject matter. That you judge the worth of celebrity opinion solely by whether you agree with it or not is not the criterion of a rational, thinking person, and this whether you agree with Eric Clapton and Bruce Willis or Tim Robbins and George Clooney. My point is that we listen to the wrong people for the wrong reasons and compound the error by attributing weight based on popularity rather than repute. In other words, grow the F up.
FCD: What the hell is your problem lately?
Once again, you are allowing your opinionated alligator mouth to overload your hummingbird *. It is quite apparent by your descision to use Tom Selleck as an example in your argument, that you really know next to nothing about him.
For those who are not already aware, Tom Selleck is an extremely advanced and very knowledgable firearms history buff and collector. I have personally seen (and met) him and his brother at several antique arms shows in Las Vegas. I am also a close friend of Mr. Sellecks's personal gunsmith. To unequivocally state that Tom Selleck is not qualified (regardless of his celebrity status) to publically speak about firearms is totally ludicrous.
As for your final comment, try looking in the mirror once in awhile. I am of the opinion that you yourself need to grow up, and that you need to use better language. As I stated earlier, you are reminding me of HAIRY more and more each time you post[V]. Get a grip on life, and then try joining the rest of the civilized world.
Bert
WACA Historian & Life Member
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by SaxonPig
Why is there argument over this? Are you people looking for something to squabble over?
I think the point is that the opinions of celebrities are wrongly weighted on factors irrelevant to the subject for which those opinions are held; that the relative worth of prescribing anti-depressants to children with ADD are colored by personalities like Tom Cruise whose only credentials are that he was cool in Top Gun; that most all knowledgeable, credentialed authorities on any subject you can imagine are not given the time of day because they do not have hit songs or play basketball for a living; that the influence of celebrities, even those celebrities who espouse views similar to our own, is undue and unduly privileged. I'm afraid you can't have it both ways, i.e., Barbra Steisand don't know squat because she's a flaming liberal, tree--hugging cow, but Tom Selleck does know squat because he is conservative and pro-gun and speaks to your own mind. Truth is, both are advantaging their celebrity status to vocalize their own personal views, and this irrespective of demonstrable experience or knowledge of the subject matter. That you judge the worth of celebrity opinion solely by whether you agree with it or not is not the criterion of a rational, thinking person, and this whether you agree with Eric Clapton and Bruce Willis or Tim Robbins and George Clooney. My point is that we listen to the wrong people for the wrong reasons and compound the error by attributing weight based on popularity rather than repute. In other words, grow the F up.
FCD: What the hell is your problem lately?
Once again, you are allowing your opinionated alligator mouth to overload your hummingbird *. It is quite apparent by your descision to use Tom Selleck as an example in your argument, that you really know next to nothing about him.
For those who are not already aware, Tom Selleck is an extremely advanced and very knowledgable firearms history buff and collector. I have personally seen (and met) him and his brother at several antique arms shows in Las Vegas. I am also a close friend of Mr. Sellecks's personal gunsmith. To unequivocally state that Tom Selleck is not qualified (regardless of his celebrity status) to publically speak about firearms is totally ludicrous.
As for your final comment, try looking in the mirror once in awhile. I am of the opinion that you yourself need to grow up, and that you need to use better language. As I stated earlier, you are reminding me of HAIRY more and more each time you post[V]. Get a grip on life, and then try joining the rest of the civilized world.
Bert
Your reading deficit continues to astound. The point missed on you (again) is that celebrities get to voice their views for who they are and not for what they know, and this WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE EXPERTS ON ANY PARTICULAR SUBJECT; that any number of other experts or bozos will not get the occasion to publically air their views precisely and only because they are not box office or Top 40. Your pathetic insults aside, you display a lack of comprehension one seldom sees in adults left unattended. When you finally get it, stamp your foot twice and I'll give you a cookie.
I think we've taken this far enough. Maybe a tad too far. Can't we discuss without yelling?
Too old to live...too young to die...