In the new CBS series Stalker, has Hollywood just made the case for why everyone should have a gun? Does the whole series? Some would say, the show “Criminal Minds” makes the case, but all those are stories of scary monsters. Stalking is much more personal. According to the show and reinforced by Wikipedia, 1 in 8 women will be staked in their lifetime (an unwanted aggressive advance) as will 1 in 19 men. How many of those wack-os will turn violent? No idea, but looks like the show will have something for us every week. The question is, will a show like this scare enough people into thinking twice about their security? Are they helping to make the case for guns?
Letting television programming shape your world view is idiotic.
Yes, James letting television programming shape your world view is idiotic, but failing to realize that most Americans do just that is idiotic too.
Life makes a better case for having a gun than Hollyweird ever could.
Yes, you are correct. However, Jaws freaked people out and other film/media has at least made people think in terms or ways they had not thought about before. As my post below notes, I have had several women come to class that have said they were motivated by that show, I have had people in the same class reinforce their thinking by pointing out they were there that day because they had an “actual” home invasion.
I see it as, whatever it takes people to finally consider their own safety. Apparently actual facts does not always do it.
There is a show called “I survived…”
It’s real people setting in a chair and recanting their experience of near death, usually at the hands of someone else. It’s a simple show, yet bone chilling because it’s real people.
The show should really be called “I survived not having a gun…” because in almost every case the victim being armed could’ve changed everything.
Absolutely agree! Where there a bad guy messing up a good person, I always think “should have a gun to even have a chance of coming out less scarred.
Having said that, don’t think it’s lack of DGU victims, just not politically correct to use any, in MHO
“Three armed psychopaths kicked in my door and met Mr Mossberg on the landing.” makes for about five minutes of screen time, tops, unless the prosecuting attorney gets wind that you’re white (or at least pretty close) and the “victims” (psychos who are now assuming room temperature) were black.
The only two I ever watched were skydiving accidents, so having a gun would at best done nothing and at worst made them just heavy enough for the crash landing to be lethal. Maybe I am watching the wrong episodes.
There are those types too, skydiving accidents, snake bits, heart attack while hiking, lost at sea, etc.
But, most I’ve seen, and I’ve seen a lot, a gun could’ve prevented the harm.
There’s an entire channel, called Investigation Discovery, filled with shows around the clock depicting dramatizations and actual footage of events where people would have been better served had they been armed for self-defense.
It will until the producers decide to run with a story where the stalker is armed, or get access to the victims firearm. Then you’ll have antis come out of woodworks screaming, “SEE, THIS IS WHY GUNS ARE BAD!”
Exactly this, the stalker will be armed, the victim will not, and some other unarmed person will heroically defeat the evil gunmen.
” 1 in 8 women will be staked in their lifetime (an unwanted aggressive advance)”
Well they must be vampires then, not sure what SOP is for that one…
Ralph has a great point, life tends to play out in a less clean cut manner than the “riding off happily into the sunset” kind of Hollywood shenanigans + Deus Ex Machina endings. The psychological after effects are rarely mentioned in stories like that where people are traumatized sometimes for the rest of their lives.
100% agree on the “psychological after effects”.
I’ve owned guns for nearly 30 years, but I carry after a hick thought it great fun for his dog to attack the guy on a bike.
So I guess I carry half for the dog and the other half for the POS who sicced the dog.
If the guy on the bike ran a stop sign, I’m with the hick.
To all cyclists: Don’t bitch about “Sharing the road” if you don’t follow the rules.
The show is not all “riding into the sunset” which is standard Hollywood. Not say they don’t do that sometimes, but you will have watch a few episodes to see including some where the person being victimized is forever afraid showing even physical changes from the start to the end of the story. I am not defending Hollywood’s view of the world, I am just saying they do address the trauma. One thing for sure that they show each time, the police are never there when you need them and that 911 is minutes away when seconds count.
Why am I watching these shows? Because I teach firearm safety classes and at the beginning of each class I go around the room and ask what brought you here today and several classes now this show was mentioned as motivation. So, I watched to find out. Then I sent a post to RF.
Jaws forever freaked out people about sharks, this show has made some people finally consider their own personal safety. Like it or not, Hollywood, TV and media has a way to change people’s views for good or bad no matter if you believe them to be brain dead.
Interesting, great that you can make the connection during classes. Ill have to catch a couple episodes of it, my wife likes any kind of crime show so Im sure she wont be too difficult to talk into it. My wife’s best friend had a stalker like 5ish years who is now in jail for something involving ANOTHER girl(not sure of the details.) Long story short, this girl lives in San Fran with her boyfriend and still does not own firearms. /epicfacepalm
I wonder if that 1-in-8 stalking statistic comes from the same BS factory that produced the lies that 25% of college women will be sexually assaulted and that women earn 82% of men?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the 1-in-8 includes women who receive a mis-dialed number and the person hangs up without apologizing. How rude!…I’ve been stalked!
Is tv the reason why I carry? No. Is John Wayne and Clint Eastwood the reason I carry revolvers? Yes.
Well, that just shows good taste…
Do you carry a MAC-10, too? Because John Wayne.
No, but I have shot one. Not for me to say the least. I can’t believe people still remember McQ.
Didn’t they call the gun an “Ingraham” or something like that in the movie?
Life makes the case for gun rights. What the gun-grabbers do not understand is that their fantasy world, only lives in their imaginations and mass hallucinations. Worldwide real life and real people, DO NOT act like they tell them to do act.
If it isn’t politicians (and the people that voted for them) trying to disarm the VICTIMS, (giving the perps free reign,) then it is the liberals trying to tell us how to LIVE. After what I’ve seen of the laws they have ignored, I feel confused and just shake my head.
If a gun is on the scene doing bad things, then there is someone there actually doing the bad things. Let’s focus on them, not they tools they use.
Most of the mass shooters were far left, not far right! Gun-grabbing liberals are dangerous! Don’t see them enacting any laws that protect us from them! Let’s get a congress filled with people that have real life guts!
maybe. if the thought hasn’t occurred to protect oneself before watching stalkers it would probably require a statement at the end of the show to the effect of “arm yourself”. ‘cuz that would never happen to me…
If only inadvertently, yes.
But, it still harkens back to the pro-“Protectionist” mindset of the show’s creators and thus, by default, exalts this mindset over both ownership of self and of individual responsibility; particularly our sole individual responsibility to our own personal security. It is we — and we alone — not the government who are the guarantors of our liberties and our security; security that only flows from liberty.
While it “feels” nice to have have law enforcement at least attempt to help us, even though the prevailing legal precedent of the last 150+ years completely absolves them of any and all such duties, it always and without exception devolves to us in our capacity to protect ourselves.
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) (no federal constitutional requirement that police provide protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 475 So. 2d 560 (Ala. 1985); Cal Govt. Code 845 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 846 (no liability for failure to arrest or to retain arrested person in custody)
Davidson v. Westminster, 32 Cal.3d 197, 185, Cal. Rep. 252; 649 P.2d 894 (1982) (no liability for failure to
provide police protection)
Stone v. State 106 Cal.App.3d 924, 165 Cal Rep. 339 (1980) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C.App. 1983) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C.App 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla. App. 1st Dist.), cert. denied 354 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1977); Ill. Rec. Stat. 4-102 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Keane v. Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1st Dist. 1968) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Jamison v. Chicago, 48 Ill. App. 3d 567 (1st Dist. 1977) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Simpson’s Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. App.) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Silver v. Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1969) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Wuetrich V. Delia, 155 N.J. Super. 324, 326, 382, A.2d 929, 930 cert. denied 77 N.J. 486, 391 A.2d 500 (1978) (noliability for failure to provide police protection)
Chapman v. Philadelphia, 290 Pa. Super. 281, 434 A.2d 753 (Penn. 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morris v. Musser, 84 Pa. Cmwth. 170, 478 A.2d 937 (1984) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
“Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.” – Lynch v. North Carolina Department of Justice, 1989.
Don’t forget Castle Rock v. Gonzales, where the Supremes held the town and its police couldn’t be sued for failing to enforce a restraining order.
You’re a funny guy, Dan. Do you expect each episode to end with “if the victim had a gun, none of this would have happened”? My guess is that no such advice will be expressed. They might say something like: tell other people where you’re going, have a cell phone on you, avoid poorly lit places etc. But please, do let me know if I’m wrong and the police characters on the show actually advise the stalking victims to carry a gun. But I’m not holding my breath, because that will never happen (not on a network TV show anyway).
No, Hollywood is not going to have a message that says “go out and get a gun” Never ever going to happen. That, however, does not mean that people may not reassess their own personal security and put two-and-two together to maybe take some action for their own safety.
I read an article that the CSI shows motivated people to want to go into forensic sciences. I even met a young women on a place during a business trip who explained to me that the show motivated her to go into forensic science.
All I am saying is for some, it might be the push they need to take care of their own personal safety. If that means a gun or self defense classes or something else that will prevent them from being victim.
They message will not reach everyone, Hollywood will not point out the obvious, but sometimes it takes something to get people thinking.
My bad, I thought Dan was the OP. I see what you mean, and maybe that’s true for a small percentage of the viewers, but is this show really that much different from any other scripted police drama? (I don’t know, since I don’t watch any of them). Somebody else posted already about the show ‘I Survived’ on ID, it’s about victims recounting their own horror stories. There are other shows on ID, many of which implicitly suggest to the viewer that a gun would be the best tool for self-defense. But even though there’s an entire network devoted to that type of shows, I don’t think the percentage of people who watch it end up arming themselves ‘just in case.’ So one little show on CBS probably won’t change much either.
Yes, most problems depicted in such Hollywood productions could easily be alleviated by proper use of a gun. But then, who in Hollywood would have a job?
I believe this series takes place in California; LA specifically. Good luck getting a permit in LA.
And, cars blow up simply by having a few cups of gasoline poured on them, lit, and then backing into a telephone pole. Yep…. Hollywood is “for real!” 😮
Here’s a Hollywood Lie that they love to sell: a bunch of charismatic, quirky LEOs that will break the rules to help you because they are so passionate about their jobs. Rules? Pssshhhhttt. They go with their gut. And they also get their man in the nick of time. Any lowly civilian who questions the mastery of the hero LEOs promptly gets put in their place.
Yet these cops have their own deep secrets.
Pretty standard Hollywood stuff for the sheeple. You can really see it in NCIS. “Stop! Federal agents!” Only a badass federal agent should carry a handgun, and whenever they do, they win their gun battles with flying colors.
In real life the cops don’t break the rules to help you, because it’s their ass if they’re wrong. They make break the rules to hurt you, though. Usually, they arrive minutes or hours past the nick of time. You’re on your own, so keep calm and carry on.
Reminds me of a King of the Hill episode where they think someone robbed their house.
Bobby: Are you going to catch whoever did this officer?
Cop: Haha this isn’t the movies kid.
That’s real life if I ever heard it.
A lot of tv shows feature unarmed people being victimized. How is this show different?
While Id like to think people are not affected by what they see on a fictional TV cop show.
I also know the majority of the people in this country are air heads.
So who knows maybe this will make some of the few literate folks think twice about personal protection.
OMG Hollywierd makes the best case for owning/carrying guns on earth! If a person watched to much T.V. and the ultra-violent movies they wouldn’t go anywhere without a sawed-off Sagia 12 ga. w/a drum hanging from it loaded w/some good ol’e 9-ball shot.
Making the case for carrying? If they are, I’m fairly certain it is unintentional. But hey, that MDA domestic violence vid did it….
Question of the Day: Is Hollywood Making a Great Case for Carrying a Gun?
Yes — because countless movies and television episodes feature violent criminals attacking hapless victims.
No — because countless movies and television episodes portray the police arriving just in time to stop violent criminals (which almost never happens in the real world) or they portray the hapless victims as utterly and completely hopeless without any possible provision to defend themselves (which is not the case in the real world, either).
It is up to us to turn the light on for the good people of our nation. The idea of being armed and capable of defending yourself is simply not in many good people’s worldview … until we help them see the possibility.
aha–actually watched the vid. She said “1 in 6 women”, even worse. I’ve known scores of women, I worked in an office that specialized in domestic -violence divorces, I was also a prosecutor and among other things filed statutory protective orders for women. Even with all that, the proportion of women I have known that have even claimed to have been “stalked” doesn’t even remotely approach 1 out of 6, or 1 in 8 either. Just another BS Hollywood super-female cop show that beyond doubt promulgates the fantasies that Accur8 and others have already mentioned. But again, who knows, maybe it will backfire on them.
An interesting mental exercise is to watch the crime scenes on the shows critically — at what point does the whole plot break down if the helpless pathetic victim pulls a sort of Indiana Jones moment and just brings out his own weapon and ends the fiendish serial killer, etc’s murderous depredations with a well-justified DGU?
I recall a single episode of Criminal Minds…a single one where a victim put a stop to the suspect with a concealed weapon. He took a single shot in the last 3 minutes of the episode and it ended.
This episode occurred on a stopped train and the FBI agents, Prentice and Reed, were held hostage and helpless. One of the passengers weighed his options and used a chrome semi…could not see it well enough and put one in the guy justified and that was that.
How long has that series run and how many helpless victims has it had? Run that proportion as 1 in some big number and you’ll get the odds that a Stalker episode will end the same.
Yup–run those numbers, and then factor in the fact that Criminal Minds has no doubt shown more such instances than all the rest of current TV cop shows combined with that one scene.
Who knows? Didn’t we get the NFA in part due to the influence of 1930s ganster films featuring Tommy guns? Didn’t 1950s films about young toughs inspire switchblade bans? Any given movie featuring a particular breed of dog tends to spike sales of that breed over the following year, not to mention spikes in disposals of said dogs at the local pound when new owners realize they aren’t exactly like the professionally trained (or CGI) hounds in the movies.
So who knows? People are idiots and easily swayed. This stalker show is just as apt to influence people to demand even more firearms infringements to protect them from stalkers, like they saw on t.v., as it is to promote armed self-defense.
Special antistalkers squad? Really?
Whats next – special no-leave-baby-in-hot-parking sqad and anti-scool-bully squad?
Do they need armored vehicles too?