In a controversial move, Hollywood has joined forces with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to push a gun control agenda on television, all under the guise of promoting firearm safety. This partnership has been prominently showcased in CBS’s hit show, S.W.A.T., where actors are seen modeling what the Brady Campaign calls “responsible gun ownership.”
One notable scene features actor Shemar Moore’s character, Daniel “Hondo” Harrelson, meticulously locking up his service firearm after returning home from a shift. Moore commented on the scene, saying, “I’m big badass Hondo, and I get out there and take down bad guys, but when I come home…I own a firearm, but it’s safe, it’s protected.”
This scene, and others like it, are part of the Brady Campaign’s “Show Gun Safety” initiative. The campaign’s website lays out its goals: to use creative storytelling to model responsible gun ownership, highlight the consequences of reckless gun use, and limit scenes involving children and guns. Brady claims this approach will help address what they term America’s “gun violence epidemic.”
According to the Brady Campaign, “Guns are prominently featured in television, art, music, and movies across the globe, but only America has a gun violence epidemic. In America, we have more guns than people. Every year, over 40,000 people are shot and killed. Our nation’s gun violence crisis impacts nearly every fabric of American life. It will take a comprehensive approach to end this epidemic, and changing the culture and behaviors around firearms must be part of the solution. The creative community can play a powerful role in leading those solutions.”
However, the statistics presented by Brady are misleading. The figure of “over 40,000” gun deaths annually includes suicides, which make up over 60% of firearm-related deaths. According to UC Davis, in 2019, 23,941 of the 39,707 firearm deaths were suicides. This leaves approximately 15,766 deaths from gun violence— a significantly lower number than Brady’s narrative suggests.
Critics argue that the collaboration between Hollywood and gun control groups like Brady is less about promoting genuine firearm safety and more about pushing an anti-gun agenda. They point out that responsible gun ownership and safety are already deeply embedded in the ethos of many gun owners and organizations.
Moreover, they highlight the selective portrayal of firearms in Hollywood. While shows like S.W.A.T. now depict characters locking up their guns, there is a conspicuous absence of scenes that demonstrate the use of firearms for self-defense—an aspect of gun ownership that is crucial to many Americans. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and other pro-gun groups argue that this one-sided depiction skews public perception and undermines the right to self-defense.
The Brady Campaign’s “Show Gun Safety” initiative also calls for limiting scenes involving children and guns, citing that guns are now the leading cause of death for children and adolescents. However, this statistic includes older teenagers involved in gang violence, a detail often left unmentioned.
In summary, while the Brady Campaign and Hollywood claim to be promoting safety, their actions reveal a more complex agenda. By selectively presenting gun use and omitting key statistics, they risk misleading the public and promoting a biased narrative that does not fully represent the realities of gun ownership in America.
In a concerted effort to burden lawful gun owners, the gun control lobby and anti-gun politicians are pushing for heavy taxes on firearms and ammunition across several states.
This movement is spearheaded by California, where Governor Gavin Newsom signed an 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition into law last September.
The legislation, the first of its kind at the state level, aims to fund so-called violence prevention programs and trauma services.
Governor Newsom’s decision has set a precedent, inspiring similar bills in at least seven other states, including Colorado, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Washington, and New Mexico.
These proposals, modeled after California’s tax, seek to impose additional financial burdens on firearm manufacturers and retailers, with the revenue directed toward various public health and safety initiatives.
In Marlyand, Dr. Thomas Scalea, head of trauma at the University of Maryland’s Cowley Shock Trauma Center and gun control proponent, testified in support of an 11% tax on firearms and ammunition sales. Highlighting the financial strain caused by treating gunshot victims, many of whom are uninsured, Dr. Scalea argued that the tax would align resources with the “burden of the disease.”
This coordinated push by anti-gun forces is part of a broader strategy to impose stricter controls on gun ownership through financial disincentives.
Proponents argue that these taxes will help address the gun violence epidemic by providing much-needed funds for community safety initiatives.
Critics, however, see this as a thinly veiled attempt to curtail the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens by making firearm ownership prohibitively expensive.
In stark contrast, Texas is taking a different approach.
Texas Gun Rights is leading the charge to oppose these punitive measures by supporting legislation that would create a permanent sales tax holiday for all purchases of firearms, ammunition, and firearms accessories in the state of Texas.
This effort is not new; it builds on the work of Texas State Senator Brandon Creighton, who introduced SB 228 in 2015. Senator Creighton’s bill aimed to exempt firearms, ammunition, and hunting supplies from sales tax during the last weekend in August only. Unfortunately, the measure died in the House under the leadership of former anti-gun Speaker Joe Straus.
The upcoming 89th legislative session in 2025 will see Texas Gun Rights fighting to revive this measure, not as a one-time event, but as a permanent fixture.
The proposed permanent tax holiday would serve as a countermeasure to the heavy taxation efforts seen in other states, ensuring that Texans’ Second Amendment rights are protected and that firearm ownership remains accessible to law-abiding citizens.
As the battle over gun control continues to heat up, the contrast between states like California and Texas highlights the deep divisions in the national conversation about firearms.
While some states move to restrict access through heavy taxation, others, like Texas, are steadfast in their commitment to preserving gun rights and ensuring that citizens are not unduly burdened by excessive taxes.
The fight is far from over, but one thing is clear: the struggle over gun control in America is intensifying, with both sides preparing for a prolonged and contentious battle.
Leave a Reply