Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (4947)	11/12/1999 12:03:00 PM
From: Null Dog Ago	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

Yeah, I think the field of psychology is filled with a bunch of people more messed up in the head than those they try to help. I could really get into explaining what I mean, but I just don't have the time for all that. I'm sure all you have to do is think about their theories, etc, and you'll probably reach similar conclusions, anyway.

To: pezz who wrote (4947)	11/12/1999 1:09:00 PM
From: Merritt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

Pezz: <<I believe that gun control is only a band aid on a festering sore..... having said that I don't know what the cure is. Unfortunately apparently neither does anyone else.>> I can't say that I have an answer either, but in the past - WWII - Hollywood worked with the government to produce many films that could best be characterized as propaganda, and they seemed to work. Now Hollywood says their movies have had no impact on youthful crime, but it seems reasonable to me that those words should be considered self-serving. I remember going into a theater to see Bonnie and Clyde, when it first came out. There had been no publicity about the film at that time. As the first bank robbery was taking place, and the police were acting like something out of The Keystone Kops, the audience was laughing and enjoying themselves. When the gore started, there was a shocked silence, interrupted only by a few gasps. That was then, but now that type of mayhem is so common in movies that it's taken for granted. That's the kind of thing that helps to change our, and especially our youths', perception of violence, IMHO. Censorship is considered a dirty word by many, and I used to be one of them, but I'm not so sure that it isn't called for when what's being put out has a negative effect on society. It's against the law to yell fire in a crowded auditorium, and justifiably so. The romanticizing of gangs, violence, and casual indifference to killing and maiming people shown in our visual media may have a more subtle effect, but I don't think it's less damaging. I've had a tough time in posting this note because it isn't really consistent with some of my basic views of government participation in the Arts...but my thinking is that maybe because this seems to be a societal problem, that it should be handled by the government. I don't think individual boycotting of violent movies is a realistically viable treatment. I don't believe censoring gratuitous gore and violence out of film will be a panacea, but it should have an impact on the problem, IMHO.