Rosie, Rosie, Rosie. Tisk, tisk, tisk. The fact that you have been a highly vocal supporter of the “Guns are evil, let’s take them away form everyone” faction makes the above unconscionable. How the hell can someone who lead the Million Mom March, attacked Charlton Heston on your show and repeatedly hammered home the point that guns are bad take the above action? You say:
Well, guess what? That’s what most gun supporters say! Guess what again? Most of us can’t afford to hire bodyguards to protect our adopted out of wedlock children! When we say that this leads us to believe that our Constitutional right to carry a weapon is a good thing, you dump on us. You just killed your credibility, lady. From now on, when you are talking, I aint listening.
People who take stern moral stands and then violate them for their own best interest make me sick. You either have the courage of your convictions or you are just full of sh…hot air. I guess I’ll be calling on Rosie the next time I want to fill a balloon. And what’s up with this quote?:
I said the following in another gun thread and never got an answer from the folks who advocate gun control.
I entered this whole debate with my MMM thread without a firm opinion and willing to be convinced either way. So far, the control crowd hasn’t said anything that makes me believe the outlawing of guns will have any positive effect on society. Their arguements seem to boil down to “guns are bad, they kill people”. I need more than that. Wanna try again?
Dude, my opinion of Rosie O’Donnel is so low that if she put forth the opinion that dipping one’s eyes in acid where bad for you, I’d be at the chemical store tomorrow.
Yeah, a., who the **** is Rosie? The only people who know her are “television-addled bozos with barely enough brains to spit.” (I think that’s the Cecil quote, don’t have the exact quote in front of me.)
Having said that, I will now leap to Rosie’s defence. She’s probably worth about $80 million due to her great ability to distribute television commercials, the cost of which is passed on to the consumer. So, like it or not, she’s our Rosie, bought and paid for. She and everything she owns, including her child, are no doubt heavily insured and almost certainly the insurance company takes some interest in her well being. She has almost certainly received serious threats and she probably has no choice but to have some expensive security services - or her insurance will be cancelled. If she has no insurance no-one will finance her artistic ventures. She probably has no choice and now the poor clown has to sweat a leak to the press from her vast food chain of hangers-on. Cut the bitch a little slack.
Whenever any celebrity takes a firm stand on anything (except for the “politically neutral” issues, like Michael J. Fox’s “quest” to find a cure for Parkinson’s… but that’s another thread), I automatically question their integrity. Chances are, the superstars, of which Rosie is arguably one, have PR people to tell them what to support and what not to support. So it really isn’t Rosie against guns, it really wasn’t Rosie supporting the Million Mom March, it was her PR person.
When she attacked Tom Selleck on her show, she said she didn’t think firearms should be legal at all, for hunting, recreation, or anything…little did she know that rifles AND handguns are available at your local KMart, which she is or was a spokesperson for. The next day, she read a prepared statement taking back everything she said about hunting, and delivered the “qualified” person line. Endorsments are hard to come by, I guess…
Quote from Al Zheimers: She has almost certainly received serious threats and she probably has no choice but to have some expensive security services - or her insurance will be cancelled. If she has no insurance no-one will finance her artistic ventures. She probably has no choice and now the poor clown has to sweat a leak to the press from her vast food chain of hangers-on. Cut the bitch a little slack.
I agree. And I don’t blame her for taking these precautions.
But if she’s going to be this prude about it, she shouldn’t of been up at the podium at the Million Mom March preaching that guns are bad, guns kill, guns are evil, etc. She should’ve just stayed home, looked through some child adoption catalogs, and kept her fucking mouth shut.
**
When she attacked Tom Selleck on her show, she said she didn’t think firearms should be legal at all, for hunting, recreation, or anything…little did she know that rifles AND handguns are available at your local KMart, which she is or was a spokesperson for. The next day, she read a prepared statement taking back everything she said about hunting, and delivered the “qualified” person line. Endorsments are hard to come by, I guess…
**
Yes, and she’s no longer a spokeswoman for Kmart for that very reason. Also, Rosie is very opiniated, usually states what she thinks, and has made it quite obvious that unlike other actors, she can think for herself. These are Rosie’s beliefs, not her PR agent’s.
I’m not going to get into whether or not Rosie belives that guns shouldn’t be legal or not, because I had never heard her say that, but then again, I don’t really watch her shoe.
However, I do want to address the OP. Just because some one is for gun control and then makes "licensed and qualified"statements, does not make them a hypocrot. That’s why they are called gun control advocates and not gun prohibition advotaes. They want certain controls on guns like the user being qualified and licensed to own a gun. They don’t want law enforcement to lose their eapons, they don’t want law abiding citizens to lose their weapos, just want the weapons ion the hands of those who would use them responsibly.
Beaker: Most anti-gun groups are in favor of banning the private possession of ALL handguns. There are SOME indications that some of the larger groups are in favor of banning ALL (private)guns. Note, I said “SOME indictations” not proof positive. I posted a link in the Gun Control thread here in GD a couple of weeks ago. Rosie is just another Hollywood hypocrite, ie “Guns are bad- except when I need them. The teeming millions have no right to do … because I am so much more privledged and they are not smart or civilized enuf to do what I do”. I have no real prob with the Bodyguard, but it is being hypocritical and elitist, like with Kennedy’s bodyguard being arrested for illegal weapons in DC.
First of all, let me state that I am the last person who should critisise anyones spelling. My disgraphia make me an english teachers nightmare. I say the following with a huge wink and a smile. But:
Made me laugh my as off. Keep watching the shoes!
;););););););););););););););););););););););););););););)
I don’t think she’s being particularly hypocritical–this is just one of those unfortunate instances when idealism meets reality. Here’s the thought process I see (Rosie’s thoughts, not mine):
–I think the world would be a better place if we threw every firearm in America into the bottom of the Atlantic, and then made it illegal to own one.
–Unfortunately, we’re not going to do that anytime soon, and it is still legal to own a gun.
–There are plenty of crazy people out there. Some of them have guns. Some of the armed crazy people have made threats against me and my family because of my position on gun control.
–As it stands, I have to protect my kids against these armed crazy people, and it would be hard to do so without a gun.
Now, I do think it would have been somewhat more hypocritical if she had bought a gun herself. Instead, she has hired someone who is (presumably) licensed and trained in the use of his gun.
To me, this is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is saying, “Everyone else should do this, but I have no intention of doing it myself.” Rosie is saying, “Everyone should do this, but if everyone else is not going to do this, then I can’t either.”
I think it does point out a flaw in her reasoning, though, and in that of many gun-control advocates–even though no guns might be the safest situation, it doesn’t necessarily follow that fewer guns=safer.
Ah, the bitter irony: she is so against guns that she must get a gun to defend herself.
Here’s her thought process as I see it:
–Guns can be used to hurt and kill people. They’re so awful, no one should be allowed to own one.
–But, gosh darn it, they are handy for defending oneself against an assailant.
–Therefore, I should employ someone with a gun to protect me, while speaking out against anyone else (who can’t afford a private armed bodyguard) owning a gun to protect himself.
Seems like hypocrisy to me.
One supposed part of her current backtracking and “well, if you’re trained and licensed it’s OK” is that, if it became known that her bodyguard was unarmed, she might be seen as an easier target for violence. Apparently, she can’t see that, if criminals knew that every law-abiding citizen was unarmed, we would ALL be easier targets for violence.
Guess it’s okay for Rosie to look out for Numero Uno and to hell with the rest of us.
So Rosie has a right to defend her kid with a gun, but the poor family living in Watts across from the Crack House should go to jail for doing the same?
Just another case of the rich and powerful feeling that their ‘needs’ are somehow different than the needs of us common folk.
Hypocrisy, n. The feigning of beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or posess. (American Heritage Dictionary.)
Seems to me that there’s a real question here of what Rosie believes. Does she believe that her bodyguard should have a gun, but poor families in Watts shouldn’t? I haven’t seen anything in this thread supporting that statement.
One thing that may also be possible here is that, as a result of the threats she’s received, her beliefs have changed to some extent. I’m not saying it’s so, but the possibility seems to be far from eliminated here. And changing one’s positions due to experience is hardly hypocritical.
Max, that irony cuts both ways. After all, the threats probably come from a bunch of presently law-abiding citizens who claim that if anyone’s going to shoot us, it’s going to be a member of the criminal class, not a law abiding citizen who got a bit hot under the collar.
**
First of all, let me state that I am the last person who should critisise anyones spelling. My disgraphia make me an english teachers nightmare. I say the following with a huge wink and a smile. But:**
Don’t worry, I don’t feel offended. I do this so often that my friends have labeled my typing as Beaklish.
But what exactly does owning a gun accomplish? While 17 people die in Japan of gunfire a year, we have thousands among thousands of people dying in the same vein.
I feel the world would be a brighter and happier place if guns are abolished. Maybe because I consider myself a mental empath, but if I ever killed anyone in self-defense, for protection, or even by accident I would be overwhelmed with grief and sorrow. Till this day, it boggles me how anyone could wield a gun and intend to use it on another.
Unless there are little Gnomes totting hand grenades and semi-automatic attack rifles. Then and only then, should personal gun possession should be allowed. The NRA ought to be slapped for protecting an amendment that was implemented in light of ongoing war time. People still need cotton picked in the south, surprised they aren’t advocating the slavery, least their logic would be consistant.
To stay somewhat on topic, I am a fan of Rosie myself. I feel that she is one of the few celebrities who has the conviction to say what she feels. That is what I find admirable about her, and that’s why in ratings she is probably going to supercede top mega talk show host like Oprah. (She might have already did, I really don’t know) She is one of the few individuals in TV, who gives a damn about our youth, and actively supports them. Bout time there one celebrity who doesn’t blame children and teens for all of society’s ills.
…I sorta like the British system, where you have to register yourself as a collector in order to possess guns…which means you CAN, but you have to be fairly educated about their use first. The problem is not that people in general have guns, but that idiots and psychopaths get their hands on them. I personally own an L1A1 (though I am no gnome) which I use for target shooting only and protection, though I don’t suspect many robbers are coming my way.
I think that when Rosie said “qualified”, she meant “needs a gun to do their job.”
I don’t thik she wants to take guns away from soldiers and policemen. I don’t. But I (like Rosie) would like to see them wrenched from the sweaty palms of civilians, who are far more likely to kill their nearest and dearest (or selves - successful suicides go up astronomically when a gun is around), than someone dangerous, which is the type person a bodyguard/police officer would go after.
It sounds like you’re more than a bit misinformed when it comes to guns. For example, in the 25 years from 1968 to 1992, American gun ownership increased almost 135 percent (from 97 million to 222 million), with handgun ownership rising more than 300 percent. These huge increases coincided with a two-thirds decline in accidental gun fatalities.
And Criminologist Gary Kleck’s studies of gun ownership show that a gun in the home is more than THREE TIMES more likely to be used for self-defense than to commit crimes.
I suggest you read a couple of these links:
