In case you didn’t know – and since you’re probably not an under-informed, virtue-signaling celebrity half-wit, why would you? – June 2 is National Gun Violence Awareness Day. You’re supposed to wear orange to remind people that gun violence exists, and you think that stinks. (It’s also National Donut Day. Why not combine the two and get a donut with orange icing? “Gun violence bad. Sugary carbs good.”)
To mark the day – National Gun Violence Awareness Day, not National Donut Day – Daily Beast had a fawning piece about Julianne Moore and her tireless efforts to let people know she disapproves of gun violence. “As the Chair of the Everytown Creative Council, the actress has assembled a veritable who’s who of A-listers and artists to tweet and advocate on behalf of gun safety,” Daily Beast’s Amy Zimmerman wrote.
A who’s who of tweeting A-listers? Your days are numbered gun violence!
More from Daily Beast: “I was going through my address book alphabetically,” Moore recalled in a 2015 People interview. “That’s all I did. ‘Please, are you interested,’ and the response has been overwhelming. I’m so, so thrilled. Everybody feels this way about this issue.”
Wow, all her Hollywood pals felt the same way? “Kim Kardashian, Sarah Silverman, Spike Lee, and Chelsea Handler” all agreeing on politics? Who woulda thunk it?
“In the past,” Zimmerman wrote, “Moore has categorized Everytown as “not an anti-gun movement or a partisan movement. This is about safety.”
But now that Trump, a self-described “Second Amendment person”—who Moore has criticized and protested against—is President, the work that Everytown does has become more vital, and more controversial, than ever. “I think it’s really important for people to realize that the NRA does not work for gun owners, they work for gun manufacturers,” Moore emphasized. “This is a lobbying group, it’s about money…The NRA was the largest contributor to President Trump’s campaign.”
Moore has always been coy about her aims, playing Twitter footsie with unabashed gun-grabber Valerie Jarrett and then calling herself a “believer in the Constitution.” In addition, she refuses to admit the possibility that gunplay and violence in movies and TV might play a role fostering violence.
In 2015, MRC Culture analyzed the top 10 movies playing in theaters in the week immediately after the Roseburg, Oregon shooting. We found 334 separate violent acts; 121 acts of gun violence; 39 dead out of 142 total victims. The Hollywood Reporter reached out for Moore’s reaction. Here’s our summary of the relevant Q&A:
Moore objects to being lumped in with those calling for more gun control and explained her position to The Hollywood Reporter:
Second Amendment advocates say you are calling for more gun control. Are they correct?
I am an American citizen and a believer in the Constitution. But I believe that with the rights that the Constitution gives us, we also have responsibilities. I am committed to improving gun safety in the U.S. and reducing gun violence by advocating for background checks, gun licenses and safe gun storage, and by keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.
Sounds reasonable, if ineffective at addressing mass shootings. But Moore was corresponding with Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett’s boss just responded to the Roseburg incident by proudly politicizing the tragedy and saying, “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours – Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours.” Those “countries like ours” essentially banned hand guns. That sure sounds like gun control. Is there any daylight between Obama’s opinion and Jarrett’s? If so, please explain, Ms. Moore. Back to THR:
Are these Second Amendment advocates against what you call "gun safety?"
I actually think that a belief in the Second Amendment and a belief in gun safety are not mutually exclusive.
No, they’re not. Just ask the organization that does more than anyone else to promote and ensure gun safety, the NRA. But we digress.
Do critics who accuse Hollywood of glorifying gunplay have a valid point?
It is impossible to be killed by watching a violent movie, but unfortunately, it is all too possible to be shot and killed while sitting in a theater and watching any kind of movie.
So no. Predictably, Moore and her colleagues will not admit the possibility of their products having a negative impact on society. Meanwhile, Hollywood loves to remind us how it changed attitudes about the things it likes, like gay rights.
Sadly, some people do get to have it both ways.