Hollywood has responded to the rampage at a Connecticut elementary school by pulling back on its offerings, and one star says the entertainment industry should take some responsibility for such violence.
Fox pulled new episodes of "Family Guy" and "American Dad" that were to air Sunday to avoid potentially sensitive content. The originally scheduled episode of "Family Guy" had Peter telling his own version of the nativity story. The "American Dad" episode told the story of a demon who punished naughty children at Christmas. Both series plan to substitute reruns.
In addition, Fox confirmed that a schedule repeat of "The Cleveland Show" for Sunday was swapped for another rerun of that series out of the same concern, and premieres for Tom Cruise's "Jack Reacher" and the family comedy "Parental Guidance" were postponed after Friday's shooting rampage in Newtown, Conn., that ended with 28 people dead, including 20 children as well as the gunman.
If people wouldn't watch the shows they wouldn't be made. Ultimately the responsibility lies with the consumer/viewer. There are options for decent programming.
This is an absolutely meaningless gesture. Until we start locking mentally defective people up like we did in the olden days, we will continue to have these sorts of massacres. Too bad the ACLU has put a stop to locking up the crazies.
Quote: steph wrote in post #3If people wouldn't watch the shows they wouldn't be made. Ultimately the responsibility lies with the consumer/viewer. There are options for decent programming.
I used to like some of the shows like Criminal Minds, CSI, but now they're all so dark and intense, I find myself choosing something cheesy instead. A good book tops it all.
Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #4This is an absolutely meaningless gesture. Until we start locking mentally defective people up like we did in the olden days, we will continue to have these sorts of massacres. Too bad the ACLU has put a stop to locking up the crazies.
There's different degrees of mental illness. Who's to decide if they need to be locked up or not?
Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #4This is an absolutely meaningless gesture. Until we start locking mentally defective people up like we did in the olden days, we will continue to have these sorts of massacres. Too bad the ACLU has put a stop to locking up the crazies.
Quote: steph wrote in post #3If people wouldn't watch the shows they wouldn't be made. Ultimately the responsibility lies with the consumer/viewer. There are options for decent programming.
I used to like some of the shows like Criminal Minds, CSI, but now they're all so dark and intense, I find myself choosing something cheesy instead. A good book tops it all.
I have basically started watching Netflix and British shows. They still rely on stories with plots.
The methods used before worked, it was that simple and the homeless problem was addressed. The crazy lady down the road from me died a few years back, and she chased me with a ax more than once. She was one of those turned out a mental hospital by the liberals. She just did not understand that when calves got in her yard I had to get them back and she would not let me fix the fence.
Quote: Olivia wrote in post #6 There's different degrees of mental illness. Who's to decide if they need to be locked up or not?
The Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 criteria is whether the person is "a danger to self or others." If so, that gets you a mandatory 72-hour hold in California, supposedly during which time a more thorough evaluation can take place.
Unfortunately, unless the person appears REALLY whacked out at the time of the placement, that rarely happens...at least by my anecdotal observations.
Quote: nerd wrote in post #10Ncis, love abby, other than that discovery and history, scifi.
But...but...what about "Person of Interest?" What a guy! The episode where he aquired the dog that only responded to dutch was terrific. Love that guy....
Quote: Olivia wrote in post #6 There's different degrees of mental illness. Who's to decide if they need to be locked up or not?
The Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 criteria is whether the person is "a danger to self or others." If so, that gets you a mandatory 72-hour hold in California, supposedly during which time a more thorough evaluation can take place.
Unfortunately, unless the person appears REALLY whacked out at the time of the placement, that rarely happens...at least by my anecdotal observations.
More often than not they are just released.
If you had a mentally unstable person in your house, wouldn't common sense tell you to lock up the guns?
Quote: Olivia wrote in post #6 There's different degrees of mental illness. Who's to decide if they need to be locked up or not?
The Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 criteria is whether the person is "a danger to self or others." If so, that gets you a mandatory 72-hour hold in California, supposedly during which time a more thorough evaluation can take place.
Unfortunately, unless the person appears REALLY whacked out at the time of the placement, that rarely happens...at least by my anecdotal observations.
More often than not they are just released.
If you had a mentally unstable person in your house, wouldn't common sense tell you to lock up the guns?
A determined person will find a way to get a weapon. Most of these mass murderers are extremely intelligent.
RIGHT'S RIGHT 
Print view
Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:49 pm
reply
