Perhaps... but, a 5-second clip of a NICS telephone call would have added entertainment value - and realism. I'm guessing they left it out to create social-media-buzz regarding the inaccuracy.
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ozark and gun purchase.
- Thread starter Prof Young
- Start date
JoeSixpack
New member
I never seen the show, But remember when their was hysteria about glocks and how they could pass thru metal detectors. (no they really can't)
I remember politicians & anti gunners making this claim when the gun ban time come rolling around.
Now its' unclear to me whether this was brought on by the glock (at the time) unusual polymer design.. or Die Hard II where they mention a mythical "glock 7" made of porcelain.
I remember reading about the history of knife bans and how a major argument in the debate to ban things like switch blades and butterfly knifes was based in (iirc the 50's) depiction of youth gangs and their weapons of choice.
So clearly we know that politicans are not only swayed by but also use movies as their primary form of education on weapons in general.
Anyway the Glock 7 scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecwK3UMxoxQ
The company that supplied the weapons for the movie tried to warn them about the glock 7.. but it fell on deaf ears, it's unclear as to why.
http://diehard.wikia.com/wiki/Glock_7
I remember politicians & anti gunners making this claim when the gun ban time come rolling around.
Now its' unclear to me whether this was brought on by the glock (at the time) unusual polymer design.. or Die Hard II where they mention a mythical "glock 7" made of porcelain.
I remember reading about the history of knife bans and how a major argument in the debate to ban things like switch blades and butterfly knifes was based in (iirc the 50's) depiction of youth gangs and their weapons of choice.
So clearly we know that politicans are not only swayed by but also use movies as their primary form of education on weapons in general.
Anyway the Glock 7 scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecwK3UMxoxQ
The company that supplied the weapons for the movie tried to warn them about the glock 7.. but it fell on deaf ears, it's unclear as to why.
http://diehard.wikia.com/wiki/Glock_7
Armorer Mike Papac, whose company Cinema Weaponry supplied all of the firearms used in Die Hard 2, has commented, "I remember when we did that scene, I tried to talk them out of it. There's no such thing as a gun invisible to metal detectors, and there shouldn't be, but they wouldn't budge. They had it written into the script and that was that."
Aguila Blanca,Considering the source, not all that amazing. And not so much "inaccuracy" as "propaganda," i.e. disinformation.
I'm going to have to take issue with G-ManX regarding ignorance. "Ignorant" means "unknowing." The Hollywood types are not unknowing. They know about the Second Amendment, and they know we can't stroll into a Wal-Mart and walk out with a machine gun. So their intentional misrepresentations of reality are not "ignorant," they are malicious misrepresentations.
Remember Hanlon's Razor? "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"[ I ascribe to that theory. In this case, I don't believe the misrepresentations can be adequately explained by stupidity (or ignorance). I think we have to accept that they are due to malice, not ignorance.
Maybe you missed my additional post, but this will now be the second time you’ve got this wrong. You can take issue all you want, but that will not change the fact that you fail to understand the fundamental concept as I have meticulously spent time explaining it to you.
Nevertheless, I will attempt one more time...
The problem at its core is that you have taken my post and created rules for everyone which insists the gun scene was created either by “ignorance” or “intent”, and that we must choose one or the other.
However, I never presented my comment to this forum as a question of “ignorance” over “intent”. I simply stated that one (“ignorance”) led to the other (“intent”). I then clarified as much in a follow-up post to you.
Yet you chose to disregard that and continue to hijack my comments by insisting everyone must still make this choice based on your personal rule and inability to comprehend my comment. Since I am the owner of my content, I know the intent of what I wrote. I can assure you once again, you have it absolutely wrong.
We know the overall liberal anti-gun Hollywood mentality is caused by their lack of comprehension, understanding, and failed knowledge of this Nation’s history - which led to the need and right to bear arms to begin with. Their inability to grasp such a necessary right to maintain a free state can be summed up as nothing other than sheer “IGNORANCE” caused by misinformation.
Thereafter such “IGNORANCE” is still the reason they choose to “INTENTIONALLY” create deceptive gun scenes in support of their false anti-gun narrative. Simply put, one does lead to the other. Or in other words, “ignorance” does lead to “intentionally” deceptive acts.
Just because certain knowledge is available to all persons, does not confirm they are in command of it. A person or group can still be “ignorant” when they chose not to become intimate with such extraneous knowledge which might otherwise prevent them from supporting such bad causes.
However, this lack of knowledge or “ignorance” in such matters in no way hinders their ability to still “intentionally” carry out deceptive acts in support of such misplaced causes, especially when it comes to the anti-gun agenda.
Though long, I feel the following would be a good read for most. There are too many comments now to address everyone individually, so I am making a blanket statement which I hope will address most of your comments.
No longer just a conspiracy theory, I could get into the facts which have exposed the government, military, and CIA intelligence control over Hollywood production companies used to produce content designed to manipulate America into a certain frame of thought. Such control has gone on for decades. But instead I only mention it as a primer to open your minds.
If factions of our government have been exposed for doing it, then please do not let your guard down for even a moment to presume others in Hollywood don’t intentionally do it as well; and more often than you would imagine.
They actually put a great deal of thought into injecting their personal political statements into their so-called art of film making. These artists view their works as an extension of themselves and thus it would be impossible for their films not to reflect their misguided political stances.
This fact is easily confirmed by anyone that has ever watched a version of a director’s film narration or read a director’s interview, particularly over a controversial film. Such interviews always reveal the tell-tale signs or even flat out confessions to their intentional political messages. Most live in such an elitist liberal Hollywood bubble that they think it’s expected of them.
Not only with anti-gun sentiment, but their overt political statements are further evidenced by their insatiable desire to balance their films packed with gender, sexual orientation, and racial mixes of such grand disproportions that come nowhere close to what we actually see in the real world.
When such great thought obviously goes into those liberal aspects of every production, it makes no sense to think that the same amount of thought wouldn’t also be put into their anti-gun scenes. But even I do not care for generalizations, so I will get specific...
The show in question –“Ozark”, stars Jason Bateman as the lead actor. In addition, this particular episode #9 was also directed by Jason Bateman (Hollywood made sure to make a big deal that he directed it). In conjunction with that, Jason Bateman is well-known as an anti-gun activist who goes out of his way to participate in anti-gun commercials and other anti-gun activism.
Whether you knew this about Jason Bateman or not, anyone watching this particular scene would agree it still appeared to be an exceptionally precise scene; and even more so to gun enthusiasts. So once a knowledgeable viewer sees how Bateman took the time to show everything except the NICS call, it becomes overtly obvious he is trying to intentionally make an anti-gun statement through deception.
Simply put, once you see the scene there would be little doubt that Bateman intentionally left the NICS call out and made the rifle fully automatic; and all for the sole purpose of giving the less knowledgeable viewers the impression it is easy to buy a machine gun from a big-box store in America, when it is not.
The preciseness of the scene offers very little value to the storyline otherwise.
I understand other commenters who have not yet seen this episode and say Hollywood often leaves things out in the interest of time, ratings buzz, sloppiness, or even exaggerate a scene for fun. But trust me, once you understand Bateman’s anti-gun background and then see his directed episode, most will agree this was definitely an intentionally misleading statement by a Hollywood anti-gun activist doing his part to spread more liberal rhetoric.
For those that may question the veracity of my assessment, you need look no further than the purpose of this thread. It was created by Prof Young whom I respect for having the courage to even ask his question.
My point being - is that even as a senior member on this gun forum since 2007 Prof Young still had to ask the question about the scene in this episode. The reason is because the scene Jason Bateman directed was deceptively very convincing, and that was not by accident.
Hollywood is a dangerous liberal propaganda machine. And because they are the biggest source of our entertainment, they also possess the most power to manipulate our minds. They can and have done immense damage to our gun rights, which is why we must remain ever vigilant and promote conversation such as this forum offers.
No longer just a conspiracy theory, I could get into the facts which have exposed the government, military, and CIA intelligence control over Hollywood production companies used to produce content designed to manipulate America into a certain frame of thought. Such control has gone on for decades. But instead I only mention it as a primer to open your minds.
If factions of our government have been exposed for doing it, then please do not let your guard down for even a moment to presume others in Hollywood don’t intentionally do it as well; and more often than you would imagine.
They actually put a great deal of thought into injecting their personal political statements into their so-called art of film making. These artists view their works as an extension of themselves and thus it would be impossible for their films not to reflect their misguided political stances.
This fact is easily confirmed by anyone that has ever watched a version of a director’s film narration or read a director’s interview, particularly over a controversial film. Such interviews always reveal the tell-tale signs or even flat out confessions to their intentional political messages. Most live in such an elitist liberal Hollywood bubble that they think it’s expected of them.
Not only with anti-gun sentiment, but their overt political statements are further evidenced by their insatiable desire to balance their films packed with gender, sexual orientation, and racial mixes of such grand disproportions that come nowhere close to what we actually see in the real world.
When such great thought obviously goes into those liberal aspects of every production, it makes no sense to think that the same amount of thought wouldn’t also be put into their anti-gun scenes. But even I do not care for generalizations, so I will get specific...
The show in question –“Ozark”, stars Jason Bateman as the lead actor. In addition, this particular episode #9 was also directed by Jason Bateman (Hollywood made sure to make a big deal that he directed it). In conjunction with that, Jason Bateman is well-known as an anti-gun activist who goes out of his way to participate in anti-gun commercials and other anti-gun activism.
Whether you knew this about Jason Bateman or not, anyone watching this particular scene would agree it still appeared to be an exceptionally precise scene; and even more so to gun enthusiasts. So once a knowledgeable viewer sees how Bateman took the time to show everything except the NICS call, it becomes overtly obvious he is trying to intentionally make an anti-gun statement through deception.
Simply put, once you see the scene there would be little doubt that Bateman intentionally left the NICS call out and made the rifle fully automatic; and all for the sole purpose of giving the less knowledgeable viewers the impression it is easy to buy a machine gun from a big-box store in America, when it is not.
The preciseness of the scene offers very little value to the storyline otherwise.
I understand other commenters who have not yet seen this episode and say Hollywood often leaves things out in the interest of time, ratings buzz, sloppiness, or even exaggerate a scene for fun. But trust me, once you understand Bateman’s anti-gun background and then see his directed episode, most will agree this was definitely an intentionally misleading statement by a Hollywood anti-gun activist doing his part to spread more liberal rhetoric.
For those that may question the veracity of my assessment, you need look no further than the purpose of this thread. It was created by Prof Young whom I respect for having the courage to even ask his question.
My point being - is that even as a senior member on this gun forum since 2007 Prof Young still had to ask the question about the scene in this episode. The reason is because the scene Jason Bateman directed was deceptively very convincing, and that was not by accident.
Hollywood is a dangerous liberal propaganda machine. And because they are the biggest source of our entertainment, they also possess the most power to manipulate our minds. They can and have done immense damage to our gun rights, which is why we must remain ever vigilant and promote conversation such as this forum offers.
Last edited:
I just watched the episode (I actually am quite enjoying the show). It was irritating in the aspect of the gun purchase. I was particularly offended (I'm a little snowflake here) when the counter guy instructed him to change an answer (are you buying this gun for yourself) and knowingly participated in a straw purchase.
When young Byrde fired the Mini-14 the first time it looked like a bump fire to me. The firing rhythm was off. That could just be more Hollywood dreck - who knows.
When young Byrde fired the Mini-14 the first time it looked like a bump fire to me. The firing rhythm was off. That could just be more Hollywood dreck - who knows.