Actor Bruce Willis came out in support of the Second Amendment this week. The Hollywood actor says he’s against new gun control laws proposed by Democrats and Barack Obama.

WTOP reported:

Bruce Willis says he’s against new gun control laws that could infringe on Second Amendment rights. The “Die Hard” star also dismisses any link between Hollywood shootouts and real-life gun violence.

“I think that you can’t start to pick apart anything out of the Bill of Rights without thinking that it’s all going to become undone,” Willis told The Associated Press in a recent interview while promoting his latest film, “A Good Day To Die Hard.” ”If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn’t they take all your rights away from you?”

Willis’ fifth outing as wise-cracking cop John McClane, due in theaters Feb. 14, comes as his action franchise marks its 25th anniversary. The 57-year-old actor will also be seen firing away at bad guys in the upcoming sequels “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” and “Red 2,” both due later this year.

But he believes “the real topic is diminished” when observers link Hollywood entertainment with high-profile mass shootings like those last year in Connecticut and Colorado.

“No one commits a crime because they saw a film. There’s nothing to support that,” Willis said. “We’re not making movies about people that have gone berserk, or gone nuts. Those kind of movies wouldn’t last very long at all.”




Disable Refresh for 30 Days

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled for your setting to be saved.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

1 2 3

  1. Bravo, Bruce. I support all your films. You’re a real man. Demi was a fool.

  2. Great! Finally someone in Hollywood with brains.

  3. Finally someone in Hollyweird with a brain and common sense… for leftists start with the name calling trying to intimidate him ….

  4. Appreciate your thoughtful comments Mr.Willis not what we have come to expect from Hollywood. Note that Taxi Driver apparently was an excuse for one wingnut.

  5. ++

    there are very few stars i heart, Willis is one of them..

    thank you Bruce..


  6. ++


    February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004

    Ronald Reagan Birthday Tribute


  7. ++

    there they go again..


    matter of fact, we’ve had it since 1934..


  8. Oooh… a critical thinker, one who uses facts and reason… SEXY
    (and he aint bad on the eyes either, gotta love that ‘real man’ look!)

  9. I love the Die Hard movies, and enjoy all Willis’s films. But saying, ”If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn’t they take all your rights away from you?” is just plain silly.

    We greatly restricted the availability of fully automatic weapons in 1934. Did that violate the 2nd Amendment? Was is a domino to registration and confiscation of pistols, rifles and shotguns?

    In the appended video Willis spent most the time talking about movie violence. Do you agree with him that we should never censor movie violence?

  10. ”If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn’t they take all your rights away from you?”

    This makes no sense to me. They banned fully automatic machine guns in the 1930’s.

    That was changing one law. And 80 years later they still haven’t taken “all of your rights away”.

    Really don’t understand your paranoia and fear. At all.

  11. ++

    Jeffery #11 February 6, 2013 at 5:45 pm

    no, what is plain silly is believing that more gun restrictions will
    stop mass attacks by a mentally ill person on violent tendency
    producing psychotropic drugs..

    [Psychotropic drugs “prescribed for school
    children cause violent behavior,” Healy stated.

    The drugs are widely used in the U.S. as antidepressants by doctors
    working in the mental health field and increasingly by primary care
    doctors, he noted.

    Healey insisted the problem today is that doctors working with schools
    to control the behavior of children are inclined to prescribe SSRI drugs
    without serious consideration of adverse consequences.

    “The pharmaceutical companies made these drugs with the idea of
    making money,” he said. “There’s a wide range of problems when it
    comes to looking at these drugs for children. Very few children have
    serious problems that warrant treatment with pills that have the risks
    SSRI drugs have.”]

    much more at link..

    know what else is silly, nay, extremely disturbing??



  12. And how the heck would you know that for sure, bg?

  13. ++

    jharp #12 February 6, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    could be we know the truth about Obama
    and his IslaMarxist bought and sold media..

    not to mention the familiar “history repeats itself” adage..

    All the different names and forms herein are merely the dynamic of one
    theme: The Collective v. The Individual. And in the Age of Aquarius, the
    individual is the hunted and despised outcaste. God help us every one.


  14. ++

    Ann Ominous #15 February 6, 2013 at 6:40 pm

    are you saying that i and millions of other citizens (approx 50%
    of whom now own a gun/s), know something that Obama and his
    entire administration are totally uninformed on this issue?? 8O

    bottom line:

    that Obama knows is “common sense” logic, that
    Obama does not know “makes no sense at all”..


  15. “We’re not making movies about people that have gone berserk, or gone nuts. Those kind of movies wouldn’t last very long at all.”

    He’s right about that part. However…

    “No one commits a crime because they saw a film. There’s nothing to support that,” Willis said.

    While it may be true that no one has committed a crime in direct response to viewing a film, to believe that people aren’t influenced by what they see in film and tv is naive. Advertising wouldn’t be a gazillion dollar industry if that were true. Product placement in films wouldn’t be coveted and controversy wouldn’t surround the practice if that were true.

    I haven’t watched any Bruce Willis films; they’re just not my thing. Assuming, however, that Willis plays the good guy and that the good guy’s cause is just (in other words, he’s not playing protagonists, fighting to save those poor Islamists or Commies from that evil America), he needn’t defend himself, at least not to me.

    Don’t get me wrong. I appreciate his pro-2nd Amendment stance and his being vocal about it. He’ll face some backlash from Hollyweird, that’s for sure. However, our God-given right to bear arms, as protected by the 2nd Amendment, and the influence of action movies on viewers, if any, are two distinct and separate topics and issues.

  16. bg,

    I rarely read your tedious posts, but I saw my name…

    Why change the subject? I didn’t post the video, GP did. I merely pointed out how wrongheaded Wills’s statement was.

    Concerning weaponry used to murder children at Sandy Hook… links please.

  17. #11 Jeffrey

    One of the reasons confiscation and or more restrictive gun laws hasn’t happened is the constitution. The government is always going to do what it can to take power. It’s the nature of the beast. Just take a look at other countries that don’t have our constitution but rather depended on the judgement of the lawmakers to have the people’s interests in mind and with the correct course of action. Australia and the UK are very recent examples of tyrannical authority, played as keeping the people safe, taking guns after incremental steps with stricter gun laws.

    We have a buffer. We are also determined to assert our attitude to keep that buffer.

    You are all right, those who say “they’re not going to take your guns,” but it’s the fool who can’t see their attempts to try.

    We were also told that we could keep our health insurance. We were also under the impression that the government would respect our religious freedoms. How much has to be given away before you all realize freedom isn’t guaranteed?

    What was that one of our president’s said about a thousand years of darkness?

1 2 3


© Copyright 2015, All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions