States United Against Gun Violence Tricks People into Watching a Snuff Film

Sorry, but tricking people into watching a snuff film is pretty ghoulish. If I were interviewed afterwards, I’d argue the people who arranged this were sick. It’s not that I am not aware that violence happens, or refuse to face the “consequences” of my beliefs, it’s that I don’t particularly want to watch murderers ply their trade. It’s not the guns that killed those people… it’s the murdering sack of shit behind the trigger. I get that argument has become tired and cliched, but it’s still true.

14 thoughts on “States United Against Gun Violence Tricks People into Watching a Snuff Film”

    1. Yep. But they tried to drive a certainly reality, and I intend to hold them to it. One way they are depraved, and the other liars. They can take their pick. For now I’m assuming it’s on the up and up and they are depraved.

      1. I don’t make the assumption that these aren’t actors. Paid? Maybe not, but there are enough gullible idiots out there. Sorry, I just don’t believe what the anti-gun shills are selling.

        Depraved, yes. “SEE THIS BEFORE BUYING A GUN.” Okay… and then what?

  1. Who goes to see a movie they NEVER heard of?

    If this WAS on the level, the only way it’s believable, there had to be a barker offering free tickets, because who drops $10+ for a movie you’ve NEVER heard of.

    Factoring that in, it gets VERY tenuous, until you realize their last “Expose” was 100% theatrical.

    1. Bingo. So we’re supposed to be made to believe that the people in the viewing audience who would just happen to wander in to see a rip roarin’ “gun movie” haven’t already seen the footage on YouTube I guess, too. Right.

  2. Also note they’re pushing the “We need to ban violent movies!” scheme.

    Which just shows that scratch and anti-gunner and you’ll find a censorious prude.

    And vice versa.

  3. I say the GOA ought to put out a rebuff- Cut the picture of the idiots getting tickets (bread and circuses) and then merge the audio with “please don’t”…

    Then cut together to all the hundreds of other clips with mommy/daddy/11 year old kid defends the homeland with a shotgun.

    Done. Time to move on.

  4. Since guns cannot commit violence, “gun violence” is the political left’s euphemism for what kind of violence?

  5. I have yet to find any evidence this is a real film or that such a film has ever been screened anywhere. I say it is fake BS and not an actual movie actually being shown in a theater with the general public as viewers and the viewers/interviewees are all actors hired for this (though the clips shown on the theater screen may be actual surveillance camera footage from actual events). This is definitely more disgusting crap propaganda from another Bloomberg funded front.

    Going off-topic…there actually are many movies with this title over the years with one being a great film-noir classic from 1949 (there is some very entertaining trick shooting early in this movie though and some interesting views on guns from the early post WWII era). It’s worth a viewing (I’ve seen it many times over the years on TCM when I still had cable). Clips can be found online. The movie is pretty realistic for the time.

    Here’s a clip to give you an idea:

    The lead actress playing Annie, Peggy Cummins, was definitely (to use the language of the time) a doll and impossible to take your eyes off of her–wow! (image of drooling cartoon wolf with tongue wagging and eyes popping out of his skull goes here)

    I think this was one of the first movies to have actual extended car chases filmed on the street with a camera in the car while it is on the road. Often the interior scenes in most movies up to that time were actually a car in a sound stage (or mock-up of a car) with the through the car window exterior being projected filmed images. It gives this movie unusual realism for the time.

  6. I would not have even flinched. That stuff was tame compared to Bestgore and Liveleak, which also doesn’t make me flinch.

Comments are closed.