Talk about MESSAGES.....

Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
34,218
Reaction score
33,639
City & State/Province
(outside) Charleston, SC
We've enjoyed watching the fictional 'Cold Cases' show. Until last night. I couldn't believe how many subtle anti-gun messages could be crammed into one show. I complained to my wife, but told her I'd finish watching the shot with her. It was disgusting. The episode was called 'Crime Time' if anybody wants to induce vomiting.
 
A lot of cop shows have anti gun messages in the script. Hawaii Five-0, Blue Bloods, Criminal Minds, and S.W.A.T. come to mind. The general theme is, only LE should have firearms.

The old original Hawaii 5-0 series with Jack Lord was very anti-gun, with it being brought up to some degree in every episode. In fact I remember an episode where that was the sole topic. The current version not nearly as much.
 
The First 48 is one of my favorite shows but a couple of the police departments are not trying very hard to hide their anti-gun feeling.
 
On Blue Bloods, I don't know how Tom Selleck puts up with that. He is a gun owner and pro NRA.

There have been a few* episodes where Selleck does in fact act pro gun.

I distinctly remember one where he takes but then returns a mans permit to carry a gun. I cant recall the name.

As for the rest of the show....."Danny" was investigating a case of a man who shot robbers on the subway and actively pushed for his sister to drop the case and make a deal with the shooter seeing as the shooter was a felon yet in Dannys eyes did what was right.

So the show may not be actively pushing for everyone to carry guns I wouldnt necessarily say its pushing the anti gun message.
 
Blue Bloods is of course set in NYC. NYC is anti gun. NYPD policies and Frank's personal beliefs are different. It's all about what's legal and what's not. I watched 9 seasons of Blue Bloods on DVD or at my lady friend's on her dish and never thought it was anti gun.
 
Back when I was a kid, sometime in the '60s someone complained to the TV critic in the local paper about having to watch the horrible "I Love Lucy" show.

The critic replied, "I'm very interested in hearing more about your one channel TV with no on-off switch."

The fact that I can remember this about 50 years later, but can't remember what I had for breakfast is somewhat scary.

As to the original post, I hardly watch any drama shows on TV these days. They are all full of horrible scripts, horrible acting, and horrible political messages. I'd rather watch a good movie from the 1930s, '40s, '50s, or '60s.

Most TVs have a channel changing option and an On-Off switch.
And then there’s the Elvis option, if you don’t like what’s on the TV,
Shot the TV!
 
It's pure fiction that a regular person in NYC would have a permit to carry in the first place! :mad:

Maybe "Danny" was so compassionate because his real life brother Mark is a convicted felon and Prohibited Person.

There have been a few* episodes where Selleck does in fact act pro gun.

I distinctly remember one where he takes but then returns a mans permit to carry a gun. I cant recall the name.

As for the rest of the show....."Danny" was investigating a case of a man who shot robbers on the subway and actively pushed for his sister to drop the case and make a deal with the shooter seeing as the shooter was a felon yet in Dannys eyes did what was right.

So the show may not be actively pushing for everyone to carry guns I wouldnt necessarily say its pushing the anti gun message.
 
Last edited:
If it has doctors, lawyers or cops I generally avoid watching it.

"Better Call Saul" excepted... ;)
 
Blue Bloods is of course set in NYC. NYC is anti gun. NYPD policies and Frank's personal beliefs are different. It's all about what's legal and what's not. I watched 9 seasons of Blue Bloods on DVD or at my lady friend's on her dish and never thought it was anti gun.

Ditto. I actually like the show for that reason - and because I've liked pretty much everything Selleck has done.
 
Last edited:
I remember that one, too.

The old original Hawaii 5-0 series with Jack Lord was very anti-gun, with it being brought up to some degree in every episode. In fact I remember an episode where that was the sole topic. The current version not nearly as much.

I was watching reruns and got the message and I'm pretty sure I saw that episode. I was disappointed having better memories of the show.
 
Wives don't.....

Most TVs have a channel changing option and an On-Off switch.
And then there’s the Elvis option, if you don’t like what’s on the TV,
Shot the TV!

Wives don't have an on/off switch. Even though we are retired, we don't see enough of each other and we value our time together. We've enjoyed the show up til now. She's not anti-gun at all, but doesn't see things the way I do. She said, "We can watch something else." but my male Spidey-sense told me to sit through it.:D
 
On Blue Bloods, I don't know how Tom Selleck puts up with that. He is a gun owner and pro NRA.

Selleck puts up with it because he's paid very well for it. At last report, he makes $200K per episode of Blue Bloods.

Tom Selleck also resigned his position on the NRA Board of Directors in late 2018, claiming his work schedule conflicted with any NRA duties.

He never really did all that much for the NRA, other than provide some name recognition. At the time of his stepping down from the board, his publicist, Annett Wolf said, "He has nothing to do with policy. He’s never been active on the board or anything the NRA engages in. He’s almost always been a silent board member."

Quoting from one source: "While he may have participated little on the board, Selleck has done a lot to promote the NRA. His popularity drew memberships and donations, and he personally donated firearms from his TV and movie projects to the NRA Museum over the years."

My own opinion is that he left because he simply may have gotten sick of listening to Ted Nugent run his mouth, and he just didn't want to be associated with that level of lunacy.
pound.gif


I believe Tom Selleck is still an NRA member.
 
Just about everything on mainstream media these days has a decided left slant. Probably why I don't watch much of it.
 
Selleck puts up with it because he's paid very well for it. At last report, he makes $200K per episode of Blue Bloods.

Tom Selleck also resigned his position on the NRA Board of Directors in late 2018, claiming his work schedule conflicted with any NRA duties.

He never really did all that much for the NRA, other than provide some name recognition. At the time of his stepping down from the board, his publicist, Annett Wolf said, "He has nothing to do with policy. He’s never been active on the board or anything the NRA engages in. He’s almost always been a silent board member."

Quoting from one source: "While he may have participated little on the board, Selleck has done a lot to promote the NRA. His popularity drew memberships and donations, and he personally donated firearms from his TV and movie projects to the NRA Museum over the years."

My own opinion is that he left because he simply may have gotten sick of listening to Ted Nugent run his mouth, and he just didn't want to be associated with that level of lunacy.
pound.gif


I believe Tom Selleck is still an NRA member.

Surely you aren't talking about the motor city madman who
bragged about messing his pants and wearing them for days
to avoid military service.
 
...My own opinion is that he left because he simply may have gotten sick of listening to Ted Nugent run his mouth, and he just didn't want to be associated with that level of lunacy.
pound.gif
LOL, project much?
FWIW, not everyone holds as low opinion of "uncle Ted" as you do. Some people who actually know him like him... :D
 
...
FWIW, not everyone holds as low opinion of "uncle Ted" as you do. Some people who actually know him like him... :D

Other people have told me that.

But the problem is that with a “celebrity/famous person” as a public attractant for an organization or cause, it doesn’t matter how likable or nice he is if you know him personally; most people won’t.

All that matters is his public image. And that could politely be described as “a mixed bag”.
 
Other people have told me that.

But the problem is that with a “celebrity/famous person” as a public attractant for an organization or cause, it doesn’t matter how likable or nice he is if you know him personally; most people won’t.

All that matters is his public image. And that could politely be described as “a mixed bag”.

Absolutely, public perception of him is very much a "mixed bag", as was so amply demonstrated in a thread that recently devolved into a discussion about him. At least I think it was on this forum.

Truth is NOBODY is universally liked. So do you choose nobody as a board member? Some of the replies in this thread show that Tom Selleck isn't liked by everyone either. However, Ted and Tom have both attracted people to the organization. The fact is, a lot of people don't like Wayne Lapierre either, but a lot of others see how the NRA has grown under his leadership and like him for that.

Same with "uncle Ted". Sure, he comes off as the crazy uncle sometimes (OK a lot of the time), and some people still hate him for what he did to avoid the draft.

Others look at it kind of like the song "Fortunate Son" - not everybody who objected to what was happening in Viet Nam had wealthy, connected parents who could keep them out of that mess. While I don't condone what Ted may have done, I don't use it as the only criteria for my opinion of him either - any more than I do the deferments that sons of the rich and powerful got to keep them out of it.

As much as I respect and admire the folks who served in Viet Nam (my uncle was one, and I have a couple of older friends who served as well), I can also see why some people did whatever they could to avoid it. The experience definitely changed those who went and many still suffer because of it.

Even after going and doing what was asked of them a lot of them were treated really badly when they came home. I can see why people would want to avoid that. Again, I don't necessarily condone it, but I understand it.

So, in the final analysis, EVERYBODY is a "mixed bag". Some more positive and some more negative, and I don't see Nugent as being much more or worse of a "mixed bag" than most others. Our tent needs to be as big and as inclusive as possible IMO. God knows there is a big enough group fighting against us.
 
Last edited:
Barf bag is more like it.
puke.gif
A lot of folks have that same opinion about other people - even ones who aren't famous or ones they don't actually know - or only sorta know.

Such is the human condition.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top