Normally I steer clear of legal and political issues, but after seeing these television commercials, I got thinking about this. The one that comes to mind is where these GI's are swimming through this swamp, coming out of the water with assault rifles, and flying away in a helicopter. The voice-over states "Someday you'll go to a job interview and the interviewer will ask if you work well under pressure. Try not to laugh." It bothers me that the same government that wants Hollywood to stop glamorizing firearms in films tries to entice recruits with visions of geared-up, painted faced young men bearing high tech assault weapons. Is there a difference? Seems to me that if it is to the advantage of the government, it's okay, but if not, then not.
As a side note, do you think that effectively disarmed nations tend to have a more feeble military? And nations with more liberal gun laws a stronger military?
Thanks for your thoughts.
As a side note, do you think that effectively disarmed nations tend to have a more feeble military? And nations with more liberal gun laws a stronger military?
Thanks for your thoughts.