Skip to comments.Tarantino: 'Everyone has the right to own a gun' (Flashback for Harvey Weinstein)
Posted on 01/16/2014 10:00:42 AM PST by jimbo123
US film director Quentin Tarantino admitted he was against the use of automatic weapons, but defended a citizens right to own a gun, in an interview published in German newspaper Frankfurter Rundschau.
Initially I think that everyone has the right to own a gun. I myself have one because I live alone in a large house and want to be able to defend myself, the 49-year-old director said.
(Excerpt) Read more at buenosairesherald.com ...
So will Harvey Weinstein confiscate Quentin Tarantino's gun or let him keep it?
At least we cannot say Tarantino is a hypocrite on this issue. Unlike Matt Damon, who hates guns but isn’t above taking a seven-figure salary to use them in films.
For some strange reason, Tarantino feels compelled to explain why he owns a gun, when no explanation is needed. He owns a gun - or guns - because he has the right to. No more need be said.
His remarks aren’t of any value in the 2nd Amendment crisis.
Even a broke clock can be right once a day, I guess. Still doesn’t change my opinions of a lot of Tarantino’s peer group though.
I own a broken clock. It is right twice per day.
Unless your broken clock looks like this:
At least he’s smart enough to know that he’d be ripped for criticizing firearms — after the putrid he imoviess responsible for.
Big name celebrity endorsements. I have no use for them. Tomorrow they could “renounce” their previously held beliefs, inflicting ever greater damage to resounding applause from the Left: “How sensitive! Such soul searching!” And, still have armed protection in the form of “rented” guns carried by their bodyguards. They will always have that to fall back on. We don’t.
Asking someone to explain why they need a gun/weapon is like asking somoene to explain why they need air, food or water.
All are necessary to protect and sustain your life. We do not live in a lollipop-unicorn world.
Society is a thin veneer that covers up the reality that the entire world is third-world or worse.
Is there a bigger DOUCHE BAG than Harvey Weinstein. I wonder if he would have been one of the Jews that helped the NAZI’s during the holocaust if he were there at the time. Hmmmmmm.....
For liberals, like Weinstein, it’s not about ‘gun control’, it’s about WHO gets to ‘control the gun.’................
Don’t blame the fish, blame the pond in which he has to swim....
I have a very misguided, liberal stepson. He and his mom were discussing “high-class” movies one day. To try to enter the discussion I mentioned, “Pulp Fiction”.
My very arrogant stepson piped up, “I would NEVER, ( His emphasis, not mine. ), watch a Quentin Tarantino film! There is much-too-much gratuitous violence!”
I mentioned that I had it on DVD.
He normally goes to sleep at 9 P.M. when he visits. That night he stayed awake after the wife and I went to sleep. I made a mental note.
The next morning I woke up and my wife mentioned that he had stayed awake for the specific purpose of watching “Pulp Fiction”! Can you say, “typical, liberal hypocrite”? I think that he meant that he would never PAY to see a Quentin Tarantino film but because he got to see if free then that was OK. ;-)
Pulp Fiction is not nearly as violent as reputed.
Not as violent as the blood baths in Kill Bill V1-V2.
Like their banker George Soros did?
No, I think he is right to explain why owning a gun is just commonsense.
Yes, they are. Stupid libs think the 2nd Amendment is about hunting.
“Pulp Fiction is not nearly as violent as reputed.”
I have the unpopular view that “Pulp Fiction”, beyond the storyline, is a religious movie about redemption, in a left-handed way.....specifically, the character played by Sam Jackson.
That describes one of the basic liberal worldview assumptions to a T.
broke clock is right twice a day
The witty script and the well- played acting remind me of an Eddie Robinson /Jimmy Cagney film.
Maybe. But that’s my story and I’m sticking to it. I have too many good friends who live in places like California. :^)
Such a basic, but profound comment. It seems in America we are now expected to explain ourselves on an entire range of common sense positions. In a nutshell, that is what is wrong with America...
Notice the reference to "automatic weapons designated toward military use".
Tarantino perhaps is among those who see no distinction between "assault rifle", which is by definition select fire and can be considered an automatic weapon, and so-called "assault weapons", which are not machine guns, fire only one round per trigger pull, and typically have pistol grips.
Whatever is the most useful and powerful weapon still legal to own is what the anti-gunners want to ban, until no one but the government has arms.
“Pulp Fiction” is one of my all time favorite movies. Mr. GG2 and I jokingly call each other Honey Bunny from the scene in the diner. :-)
“Mr. GG2 and I jokingly call each other Honey Bunny from the scene in the diner. :-)”
You may or may not want to reconsider calling each other, “Honey Bunny”. There is an Asian-American porn star who uses that name! LOL
Rut Rho!! :-)
In fact, the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, as you imply, but it is also not about home defense or sport shooting. It is about the natural right to own one for whatever purpose one deems necessary, hunting, sport and home defense against intruders all included.
Narrowing the justification for the 2nd Amendment to home defense against intruders only gives the liberals another tool to argue in favor of denying that right by defining a severely limited range of weapons suitable for the purpose. In addition, it gives them more reason to expand the police state under the guise of providing the defense against intruders - a con in and of itself, since the police can’t possibly do it - denied citizens by the gun confiscation that would follow. It also suggests that people who are homeless, voluntarily or otherwise, don’t have such a right.
One owns guns because one can. Period.
Therefore, Tarantino actually harms the argument for the 2nd Amendment.