Guns on TV: Missing The Mark
by John LottThe Fox network’s “House M.D.” has never been very friendly towards guns. The last show of season 2 found House shot by a disgruntled former patient. In the ninth episode of season 5, someone demands medical treatment at the point of a gun. The just aired twelfth episode entitled “Painless” brings up guns again, though in a less dramatic and more subtle way with a character named Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein) going through the adoption process. When the child welfare official comes to check on Cuddy’s suitability to care for the young child, the first question the official asks is, “Any guns in the house?” The only other question was whether she had any pets.
Obviously the academic research shows that having an accessible gun in the home saves lives, but I had a more basic question: I decided to check to see if a question about guns was likely to lead the questions on one’s fitness to serve as a foster parent or to adopt a child. American Adoptions is licensed by the state of New Jersey to provide home study services for people preparing for adoption. Their home study guide has a lot of questions on a person’s criminal record (arrests and convictions), whether they have ever been reported for child abuse/neglect (seems more important than gun ownership), and marital status and history – but no questions about gun ownership.
It is surely not impossible that such a question would be asked, but making it the first of only two questions seems extremely unlikely and misrepresents what the actual process would involve (even taking into account that forms had already been filled out by Cuddy).
I recently noted that the TV show Monk had a great episode where Monk was unable to use a gun defensively because it was locked in a gun safe, but the very next episode had Monk’s assistant Natalie accidentally shooting Monk in the leg (the odds of that happening are incredibly low). The segment wasn’t all bad since it also showed Natalie protecting herself from a criminal threatening to hit her with a rock.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
37 Comments
House anti-gun? Not surprised. The show “jumped the shark” for me in season two, when House pursued his great love, now married. Forgave her for saving his life (but leaving him with a limp) and did not let the fact that she had a sick husband stop the pursuit. Only after he slept with her and she was ready to leave her spouse did he get buyer’s remorse….yeah, I like that he was “unlikeable” and did not follow cliches, until they started following cliches.
Likewise, had some hopes for Hugh Laurie; been a fan for years, and was glad he was getting a really great role after playing affiable idiots in support of Rowan Atkinson; then, like the most pathetic late bloomer, he throws in with the “in-crowd” and trashes Bush when he wins an award.
Figured he was a lib, since he is an ex of Emma Thompson; hoped he would show some of her class as well….oh, well.
Off to the range!
So, not
And thanks Mr. Lott, for “More Guns, Less Crime” and your incredible contributes to the self-defense movement. Good to see you here.
Yes, we were shouting at the television set ourselves with that ridiculous show. The gun question was a big eye roll, but the final scene where Cuddy leaves her child with a nanny to “babysit” House was too stupid to be borne.
Ann Coulter wrote a great chapter in her new book Guilty about the horrors that single moms visit upon society. I look forward to future House episodes where Cuddy’s neglected daughter is a drug addict, pregnant out of wedlock, and has a fascinating set of STDs. Everyone will be so sad.
I was visiting someone who had cable (thankfully, I don’t) I saw some sort of commercial for multiple shows on the same channel. They were 24, CSI-type shows, etc…. EACH one shows the main character in some sort of stylized way (It wasn’t even from some clip of the show – it was some staged thing with similar background). Of course, they all had to be overly-edited moving variously in slow-mo and fast forward but EACH one did the same thing – melodramatically raise some gun to firing position. This was about 5 different shows and they all did the same thing. Of course, they altered facing left or right – gotta have some variety, right?
Come on. This slick BS has got to go. Their glorification of waving guns around is as much a problem as what you describe. These Hollywood types can’t get it right so they swing from a sick glorification of characters waving guns around to petulant whining about the mere existance of guns. They aren’t opposing extremes, but a revelation they don’t understand the role of guns at all.
Gun rules for foster/adopt are: ammo and firearm separated and locked away. The question is weighted the same as, Does your house have enough square footage for the number of residents, and Does your pool have a fence. The Nanny State actually does something right every now and then.
J. – January 29th, 2009 at 6:51 am
Shouldn’t foster parents legitimately be asked, “What is your plan to protect these children in case you home is invaded?”
+++++++++
Nice one! The anti-gun stance is advanced by portraying physical threats as non-existant. I imagine if you were to post this question, the reaction would focus more on how “ridiculous” the notion was that such a threat exists.
I am a Fan of the show “House,M.D.” So I try to overlook the “lefty-Liberal” content. Even for it’s “anti-gun” snipes, They did have our hero save the life of a child that he was intent on killing. Actor Laurie is another disappointment as far as his anti bush screed.
What keeps me a fan of the show is because in the end, our hero is Right! No matter what the “Popular” opinion is, He sticks to his Ideas and he prevails!
Something Republicans should think about doing…………
to KM IN NV -
If you have guns for protection, better think twice about your practice of separating weapon and ammo. I followed the link to the research above and found this from noted researchers:
VI. Conclusion
Safe storage laws have no impact on accidental gun deaths or total suicide rates. The only consistent impact of safe storage laws is to raise rape, robbery, and burglary rates, and the effects are very large. Our most conservative estimates show that safe storage laws resulted in 3,738 more rapes, 21,000 more robberies, and 49,733 more burglaries annually in just the 15 states with these laws. More realistic estimates indicate across the board increases in violent and property crimes. During the five full years after the passage of the safe storage laws, the fifteen states face an annual average increase of 309 more murders, 3,860 more rapes, 24,650 more robberies, and over 25,000 more aggravated assaults.
The impact of safe storage laws are consistent with existing research indicating that the guns which are most likely to be used in an accidental shooting are owned by the least law-abiding citizens and thus are least likely to be locked up after the passage of the law. The safe storage laws thus manage to produce no significant change in accidental deaths or suicides and yet still raise crime rates because households with low accidental death risks are now the ones to most likely to obey the law.
Guns of course are not allowed in Europe, which is why there has been a real spike in knife attacks and murders. To me, any policeman will tell you that he cannot protect you, simply try to arrest your murderer.
So, if you want to defend yourself, your choice is what?
Re: House: Love the show and I ignore what I have to, which is the writer’s obsession with homosexuality and very very bad behavior on the part of my lunatic buddy House.
I read a theory a while back on the real reason that Hollywood hates guns: far too many of their plots just wouldn’t work with an armed citizenry. The theory gave a few examples of movies that would completely fall apart in the presence of guns:
Signs: “A bunch of hostile but unarmed aliens have just landed? Grab the shotguns, boys. We’re goin’ huntin’.”
Cujo: “So we were trapped in the station wagon with a rabid St. Bernard slavering outside the window. We could have been in real trouble, except for the .45 I keep in the glove compartment.”
I don’t remember any of the other examples, but I think there is something to it. In most movies, the innocent civilians are not allowed to protect themselves. They are supposed to stay in danger, providing suspense, until the hero and/or the McGuffin shows up to save the day. If instead the civilians were armed and fighting back, that would change the dynamics of things considerably.
J –
Wow, scarey stuff. I wouldn’t automatically say the country is safer like some would. In general it might be if you are vigilant and do things right, but if not it can actually be more dangerous.
Of course, one could say this is due to the “War on Drugs”, too.
Of course, as Steven Levitt observed in “Freakonomics,” if a social worker really wanted to make sure an adopted child would be safe, the first question she should ask is not “Do you own any guns” but “Do you have a swimming pool?”
Kids are FAR more likely to drown in the backyard swimming pool that to shoot themselves with Dad’s gun.
I never cared for the character myself. That doctor always looks like he needs a bath and a shave.
I wonder if they will ever show a homeowner saving themselves and family members by shooting a bad guy
The doc can always patch up the bad guy….
Zsuzsa, you may be onto something there. But that’s the result of either ideology or laziness. The reality of an armed citizenry is actually used quite often. Almost always in a negative or deux ex machina manner. Don Cheadle in the donut shop in Boogie Nights; the woman who shoots Tim Roth in Reservoir Dogs; the last bank robbery in Point Break; the cop bar robbery scene in Code of Silence; Anne Archer trying to find the shotgun shells at the end of Patriot Games; the redneck zombie hunters in Romero’s first two Dead movies.
You’ll note that in Code of Silence and Patriot Games, the armed citizenry idea was used effectively, once for comedy once for suspense. There’s no reason why other stories can’t acknowledge the armed citizenry reality, or use it to good effect in entertaining audiences. That is, if entertaining audiences is the filmmaker’s goal. Nowadays that’s a big if.
I used to be very anti-gun in college (I was also a Democrat, involved in all the usual activism and whining). When my child was young I would ask his friends parents if they kept guns in the house before I let my son go over for a play date. I used to tell people that I was more afraid of the tragedy of a child finding a loaded gun than I was of a home invasion.
Then I saw the chaos of Katrina, and the increase of gun crime by criminals on the street. I saw liberals protect and defend murderers and dismiss the families of the victims. I heard an engineer describe how, after The Big One that is expected in Los Angeles it may take MONTHS before the water supply is repaired in the city, because of the ancient infrastructure. Viewing how violent the citizenry gets when they simply DISAGREE with someone’s political views, I can only imagine what will happen when people feel desperate.
I have decided to buy a gun. But I will be trained how to use one before I do (although I’d better do it quickly – apparently guns are flying off the shelves since Obama was elected). I took my first class with my now teenaged son and we are studying how to be responsible, skilled gun owners. I have no problem with being registered, or tested, or having a short waiting period. But I will not be the unarmed one if I’m threatened in my own home.
Turns out I’m a great shot. Who would’ve guessed.
Glock Girl
That’s not the deportation we need in LA, mi hijo….
What statistics definitley show (and I encourage all readers to check this out) is that if the U.S could somehow remove/deport everyone of Scotch-Irish descent from this country our murder rate would drop well over 60%
If you’re living in the bizarro media land, anyway. It’s amazing how many leftards think TV and movies are reality.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
Maura,
When I took my female friends out to shoot for the first time, they are accurate shots. It just what women do! (and that’s another reason why “I Love Women!”)
So Maura, Defend yourself and protect your children, You go Girl!
–>Maura
I wouldn’t have needed to guess. Women usually ARE great shots; all that hand/eye coordination, and fine motor control. I have taught a couple of girl friends to shoot– when I was a cop — even one who “hated” guns. Once they hold it, and learn how to handle it, it gives them a great sense of power, and confidence. Guns are a great equalizer.
They used to say that the most dangerous weapon in the world was a US Marine and his rifle. I submit that an equally fearsome weapon is the well-trained, well armed woman defending her family, and her home. Do not mess with Mama Bear.
Something else to think about, you politicians, is all these well trained women coming back from the war, where they’ve carried a weapon with them 24/7 for most of a year, and seen the difference it makes. Do you really think they’re going to stand for having their gun rights legislated away? It’s one thing to marginalize guys like me, and quite another to ignore intelligent, experienced young women who want to be armed and safe back here.
I like House, mostly because I find the idea of a jerkish doctor who really knows his stuff amusing. However, I limit my liking to Greg House and the ficticious activities that go on about him and don’t bother extending it to Laurie. Not surprised to find out he’s just another assembly-line Lib.
In the show’s defense, it does feature some strong anti-abortion sentiments. The fetus-grabbing-House’s-finger scene from a couple season back is astounding.
I second this. I nearly broke into tears at that episode.
Too touchy. I find House anti-everything. That’s his personality. In last nights rerun Chase thinks its depleted uranium while Foreman thinks he must have went to medschool in France. LOL There are anti-Democrat remarks and anti-Bush remarks. At this point not believing in a political party seems smarter.
Nice, yet surprising to see Cuddy considering adoption. For awhile she was pursuing fertility treatments, which is fine and understandable for people who can afford it, but to adopt a child, another woman has to have chosen to give birth to him instead of killing him. Surprising that a popular television show would pursue that as a story line…previous TV shows with adopted children always set it up with “friends of the parents taking in older children after the parents’ untimely death.”
I think the episode of Monk where Natalie shoots him in the leg was more aimed at portraying Monk’s streak of bad luck then anything related to gun control. If it wasn’t for the gun, Natalie would have never caught the bad guy.
TonyG has the right idea. Where concealed carry is allowed, crime goes down. You don’t hear about any more Florida car hijackongs or killing of unarmed tourists in airport rental autos since the law was passed there. You may not know it, but crooks are not stupid, just dishonest. Crooks go for the easy mark, where guns are banned by their bretherin; crooked politicians. Actually, there’s not much difference.
I am a HOUSE fan and trying to catch up on all the old seasons via syndication (hooray for reruns!). I did NOT like the lesbian storyline of “13″ and am glad she’s getting involved w/ Foreman. Why do I like HOUSE? He doesn’t waiver and is focused to heal the patient via finding a solution and always seeking “the answer, WHY?” Yes, cold and calculating, and uses pain meds… (the use of PAIN MEDS is why my sister chooses NOT to watch the series). The fetus reaching for and holding House’s finger was compelling too. I personally am not a gun owner, but I do support the 2nd Amendment.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Guns on TV: Missing The Mark [...]
“… Chicks could show off their excellent aim while wearing bikinis…”
I can see where that might appeal, but I’m also thinking, “hot brass”. Ouch!
Art is imitating life. I know a family that adopted a child from Texas and one of the requirements was that he had to get rid of any guns in the house. We need to get that requirement off the books before it can get off our TV screen.
Hugh Laurie is intimidatingly talented. Sing, play piano and guitar, juggle, adopt an American accent, play a variety of roles. He’s been a solid lefty since back in the Thatcher days of “A Bit of Fry and Laurie,” available at fine youtube outlets everywhere. I’m not sure how much input he has over the episode plots, though. Like most of us, I’m wiling to overlook the political opinions of a gifted entertainer, as long as they don’t displace the entertainment.
It’s not just guns that mark this as a toxic show to conservative values.
Cutty having a kid, whether adopted or born, is not conservative. A person is selfish to purposefully bring a child into a single-parent situation unless there is no other option. How in the world is it good for the kid to have one parent? Sure, it can be done. Sure, it often works out. But the odds do not favor it being as good for the kid. Kids deserve two parents.
Not only is there sex outside of marriage, but there is repeatedly sex without any commitment whatsoever. Hey, wanna do it? There’s a broom closet here…
My wife and I are unable to have children so we’ve considered taking on foster children (and maybe later adopting).
Here in Colorado if we want to have foster children, I will be forced to give up my concealed handgun license (well I can keep it, I just can’t carry around the foster child, this includes at home, in the car and out in public), any firearms I keep will have to be not only locked but must be rendered inoperable (disassembled and/or trigger locked) and ammunition stored separately (which means I can’t keep a loaded handgun in a quick access safe for home defense). The only place an assembled firearm and ammunition would be allowed is at a shooting range (and possibly while hunting with the child … assuming that is allowed)
In defense of House, its clear that even though he has been shot he has no animus toward guns or gun owners (he owns a snub nose revolver and even used it once to shoot a cadaver so they could do some tests) and he also has demonstrated several times a disdain for overbearing government and nannystateism.
Keep in mind the show takes place in New Jersey so anti gun sentiment among many of the characters (especially hospital administration and law enforcement) would be an accurate depiction.
I would suspect that in New Jersey ownership of firearms is a disqualifier for fostering/adopting children (or at least there will be an extra inspection and special storage requirements).
Ah, the Virginia Tech gun canard. Guess what, if students on college campuses are packing heat, you might actually see MORE shootings. After all, college students have an unfortunate habit of getting roaring drunk and getting into stupid barfights over moronic things. Throw concealed weapons into the barfight mix, and there you go.
As for why leftist want us disarmed there are a handful of reasons.
First off, the left wants people dependent on government for everything, from our safety and security to our psychological well being to our physical health. Gun ownership tends to breed independence. They would rather see thousands of people die at the hands of criminals each year than one person stand up and put a criminal down.
When the people can take care of themselves, they don’t NEED the nannies of the nanny state.
Secondly, leftists grab for ANY power they can get, even if it doesn’t really gain them anything. Taking guns from the people is much easier than outlawing chocolate (for example). Eventually they’ll get around to chocolate but for now they see guns as the low hanging fruit.
First of all, do we not have freedom of speech in this country? Why can’t Mr. Laurie voice his opinion regarding the worst president this country has ever had? Second, he has never hidden his political stance. If you were familiar with him at all, you would know he is not conservative. Third, he’s not running around to every media outlet he can find and trashing Bush; he made ONE comment on Leno…and you people go berserk! Sensitive at all? Lastly, Mr. Laurie has been very vocal of his love for guns. He probably even OWNS one. *gasp* AND…he doesn’t own his American success to Murdoch or any other suit. If anyone, he should thank the viewers who give House its ratings and continued success!
Yeah, I know. Thanks for that, though. I just get tired of people jumping on the celebrity-bashing bandwagon when they know nothing about that celebrity. And I love Hugh, so I’m a little sensitive. lol And FTR, I agree about your comments regarding the show. I miss season 1 and 2 House. Even season 3, which is where its downfall started, was far better than the current season! House has lost some of the humanity that made the character interesting. But, well…you can’t always get what you want. lol
According to my wife, that episode was based on something that actually happened. She's a nurse who works at one of the local hospitals and said people there were talking about the actual event after the ep aired. It was a spowerful scene, and to me, it was about as strong anti-abortion statement as one could get.
[...] often goes after gun ownership. It only mentions people not having health insurance more frequently. In [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.