Anti-Gunner Liam Neeson Is Done Being an Action Hero

Liam Neeson in a scene from “Taken 2.” (AP Photo/20th Century Fox, Magali Bragard)

Actor and anti-gunner Liam Neeson no longer wants to play the hero in action movies.

The Irishman said in an interview that he’s getting too old to be the gun-toting good guy dishing out justice to the drug dealers, killers, and kidnappers of the world.

“The thrillers, that was all a pure accident,” said Neeson. “They’re still throwing serious money at me to do that stuff. I’m like, ‘Guy’s I’m sixty-f—ing-five.’ Audiences are eventually going to go, ‘Come on.'”

There are two thrillers coming down the pike that Neeson’s already shot, “Hard Powder” and “The Commuter.” These are expected to be his last as he turns his attention to more dramatic roles.

“I’ve shot one that’s going to come out in January sometime. There might be another. That’s it,” said Neeson. “But not ‘Taken,’ none of that franchise stuff.”

In recent years, Neeson’s been sharply criticized by gun owners for his public statements supporting gun control.

“There’s too many [expletive] guns out there,” Neeson said in an interview with in Jan. 2015. “Especially in America. I think the population is like, 320 million? There’s over 300 million guns. Privately owned, in America. I think it’s a [expletive] disgrace. Every week now we’re picking up a newspaper and seeing, ‘Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.’”

And in 2014, Neeson refuted the idea that good guys with guns have the potential to stop bad guys with guns, arguing instead for European-style confiscation as a way to stop violent criminals.

“The National Rifle Association’s official response was ‘If that teacher had been armed…’ It’s crazy,” Neeson told The Independent. “I’ll give Britain its dues, when they had the Dunblane massacre in Scotland, within 24 hours the gun laws were changed so you could not have a handgun.”

Neeson also took a swipe at the way in which courts have upheld that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not contingent upon militia service.

“It is the right to bear arms which is the problem,” said Neeson. “I think if the Founding Fathers knew what was happening they would be turning in their graves with embarrassment at how that law has been interpreted.”

An action star that opposes armed resistance to those that would do others harm is the very definition of a hypocrite. It’s a real shame Neeson’s been able to make the money he has by portraying the very people he takes umbrage with: good guys with guns.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 64 comments… add one }
  • Steve February 1, 2021, 7:51 am

    It is 2021 and Neeson’s film “The Marksman” is in theaters where he is a former Marine, shooting rifles and handguns at human trafficking cartel members. Still making money on glorified gun movies. Also, with the 300 million guns owned in the US, there are only about 9,000-10,000 homicides by gun a year. That’s .003 of a percent, or less, that are used for evil. It seems many criminals are deterred by their “victims” being able to shoot back.

  • Eugene Grimes February 7, 2019, 3:05 am

    Hey, guess what guntards? They’re fucking movies! It’s not hypocritical for an actor to portray something they’re not! It’s their job! He’s entitled to his opinion. I may not agree with him, but I’m not gonna be a pussy and bitch & moan about boycotting a movie just because I don’t agree with actors’ political views! Geez!

    • mark nevels March 9, 2019, 3:04 am

      it is hypocrytical. ur a moron if u are denying that it is. he has the platform to speak real influence in the united states. rub elbows with the top 5% including Celebrities politicians and lawmakers. How does he use this platform to try to take away the rest of our rights so if you get ADU why maybe the rest of your family should get rid of their vehicles and start taking public transportation and same thing goes with the rest of the neighborhood and whoever else lives in your region that would make sense then there won’t be anymore do you was right because they made heroin illegal and now no one does it because it’s a legal right. You cannot own a firearm in Mexico so I guess they are not murdering people left and right over there with guns right because it’s not legal to have guns correct because laws work .ur a dumbass. worst part is, u dont even know it. just stuck on stupid. grind em till u find em. brain smokin….dufus.

  • loupgarous September 19, 2017, 3:34 pm

    Meanwhile, Mr. Neeson comes from Northern Ireland. If he had an honest bone in his body, he’d admit that some of the strictest gun control on Earth was totally powerless to prevent his homeland from being a battlefield, complete with bombings, home invasions, arsons, and murders done with guns.

    I’m done watching Neeson, or even buying videos or movies with him in them for my family. Gun owners who like their rights ought to do the same thing. P.J. O’Rourke once had the New Enemies List, so those who were tired to supporting liberal statist idiots knew whose movies to avoid and whose books not to buy. It’s time to revive that idea.

    Fortunately, gloating global warmist Jennifer Lawrence (who chose the landfall of Hurricane Harvey to blame the victims in Houston for their own plight, because apparently we just started having hurricanes after John Rockefeller started selling oil) did our work for us when her lasted movie, “mother”, became only the 12th Hollywood film to get a CinemaScore “F” rating in history – because life is occasionally good.

  • Mike Watkins September 18, 2017, 11:08 pm

    This Neeson douche is an excellent example of why I have made deliberate choices to give as little of my money (and time and attention) as possible to our so-called entertainment industry. Very rarely watch either movies or television, don’t even listen to radio much, and when I do it is likely to be the stations that play the music of the generally more America-supporting country artists. I also do not watch professional sports.

    I’m not exaggerating–my TV hasn’t even been hooked up in over a year. Of course there are drawbacks–I have to find the latest superbowl commercials online; I have no clue what the names of the characters are on popular shows; don’t recognize pics of current movie stars; have to determine for myself when to take a bathroom break or get a snack while surfing the internet. Yeah, I’ve suffered a LOT for my principles! (sarcasm, for those whose sarc detection is impaired)

    Use your brains for something other than receptacles for the crap put out by Hollywood et al, and you will definitely be improved by it.

  • Doc Love September 18, 2017, 4:24 pm

    Dear Lord what an opportunistic lout. Go back to where you belong you useless Hobbitt

  • WVinMN September 18, 2017, 11:12 am

    I wonder if the dumb, ignorant F__K is calling for a ban on the private ownership of vehicles, especially commercial sized trucks? I mean, why does anyone not associated with the “gubbermint” need such a large killing machine? F__K this a__ clown, and please, keep him OUT of my country!

  • Gary September 18, 2017, 9:46 am

    Just another Lucky Dishwasher that got a break to be an actor. Which in my personal opinion are “the dumbest group of morons in this or any other country!”
    Their opinion means less than Nothing!
    If WE wanted to live like the people do in England, we wouldn’t have had a revolution in this country to get Rid of Them! (Which WE never would have been able to WIN with rocks and pitchforks!)
    The same reason ALL governments want ALL citizens disarmed! THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE! UNLESS WE ALLOW IT TO!
    If we DO allow this to happen, then we Deserve what ever we get!

  • Sly September 17, 2017, 2:58 pm

    I take offense to be called too old, when do a man stop defending himself??. The British have no guns, they also have more terrorist attacks then any other Country. When we listen to people like this, its we that has the problem, i look over people with this type of attitude and don’t really care about what they have to say. They changed their self and their character everyday, they don’t know who the hell They are

  • max hoyle September 16, 2017, 1:01 pm

    liam nesson screw you, you are not welcome here, go home asshole! I DID NOT USE CAPITAL LETTERS ON HIS NAME DELIBERATELY!

  • Pete Dee September 16, 2017, 12:21 pm

    So he’s made his big bucks going against his “deeply held beliefs,” and now we’re supposed to believe he’s stopping only because he’s getting “too old!”
    I worked with a guy who was 66, recalled by his National Guard unit and sent to Iraq in 2003.
    Neeson is just another phony tough guy who’ll put on a uniform for a few million, but not for the real live protection of his fellow man!

  • James September 16, 2017, 3:04 am

    The thing everyone is missing is that Neeson is from Northern Ireland. He didn’t say a bloody thing when the IRA was killing innocent people by every possible horrible means known to man. The IRA killed innocent men, women, and children for just doing something like buying candy from a presumed loyalist shop keeper. Everyone was in, and still are in, the cross-hairs of the mental cases who demand a united Ireland by gun and bomb. This is regardless of the peace agreement that Clinton said, during her failed election, that she and she alone brokered. Neeson has said nothing against IRA commanders McGinnis and Adams for their past participation in the IRA. But he wants to suck the money out of the pockets of hard working American workers. Then he complains that the belief in the Second Amemdment by hard working Americans is wrong headed. Well if the good folks in Northern Ireland had the right to bear arms then the IRA would have been taken care of a long time ago. Now because of political correctness and tolerance the UK is under threat from the crazies from the Middle East. Who trained them to make bombs? The IRA did. Does Neeson address that? The answer is no. He is just like all of the Hollyweird scum. They have two interchangeable boddy parts their mouth and butt. They have no clue of what We The People go through on a daily basis in order to put food on the table.

  • elgavilansegoviano September 15, 2017, 8:21 pm

    …….He should be Deported!!,…..

  • Grant Stevens September 15, 2017, 2:40 pm

    Just another hypocritical thespian. Liam has obviously forgotten how Americans donated tens-of-thousands of sporting rifles, handguns and hunting knives to Great Britain when the Nazis wolves were at their doorstep. England has since become a totalitarian state that has trampled the unalienable rights of its citizens (subjects), and opened its doors to a horde of Islamic wolves who are destroying their nation from within. Perhaps Liam should return to Great Britain and beat these radical Muslims to death with his anti-gun rhetoric.

    • Mikial September 15, 2017, 7:35 pm

      Absolutely. I wish more people were aware of that fact. And now that GB is at the mercy of Islamic terrorists, they are re-examining their unarmed cop policy. Nothing could be more stupid in today’s world than to be unarmed in the face of terrorism and crime. Neeson is just another nobody who made a fortune by pretending to be something he is not . . . in other words, an actor. Why these guys think that somehow makes them an expert on everything is utterly beyond me. But of course, now that he’s gotten rich by pretending to be a bad a$$ action hero, he’ll decide to sit back and make a political statement. I wonder what a whiny Liberal like him would actually do if their daughter was kidnapped and sold to a Muslim like in his movie Taken? I can’t think of a more pure example of a hypocrite. Typical Liberal slime.

  • BC Snider September 15, 2017, 1:59 pm

    As a disabled Army & Navy vet, the son of 2 Detroit police officers, and a person who was raised in a crime-ridden state, I can honestly state that I would much rather be a man that defended his family/self/community & lived to tell the tale than a victim. Cain killed Able with a rock, so it’s NOT a weapons problem, it’s a mental problem. As evidenced by the recent terror attacks in England, and all over Europe, the bad guys will kill using any and all available means, so being against guns is a pointless stance. Being against VIOLENCE against the innocent is one thing, but attempting to prevent the innocent from defending themselves against the onslaught by denying them that right is not only stupid, it’s short-sighted & grandiose. Look at Switzerland; they have one of the highest rates of firearm ownership & virtually NO gun crime. In conclusion, while supporting Mr. Neeson’s right to spout off for brownie points, he’s simply flat-out wrong, and as he is NOT an American, his opinion is inconsequential. Add to that the fact he made his millions playing the people he claims to detest, and I find myself at a loss. If he is utterly opposed to gun culture, why doesn’t he donate every cent he made to relief funds & charities dedicated to helping survivors & their families & rebuild his fortune on a firm, (from his standpoint) morally defendable foundation? In fact, here’s a Celeb Challenge: If you ever made one red cent off anything that represents something you personally find reprehensible, why not donate every penny from said activity to the charity of your choice??? You may end up with less cars, private islands, & $5000 shoes, but you’ll feel better about yourselves, not to mention that when you spout your feeble opinions, they won’t have nearly the rancid stench of self-righteous manure that they do now.

  • jimmy vickers September 15, 2017, 1:37 pm

    Neeson needs to stay out of America and our constitutional rights if he feels this way, Simply remove his foreign ass , problem solved. PS: give back all the millions of dollars he made playing a gun toting bad ass instead of being a hypocrite.

    • Mikial September 15, 2017, 7:36 pm


  • JB September 15, 2017, 1:16 pm

    You are wrong……. totally wrong! We must guard our rights in this country and not let them be taken away by weak willed self righteous people like him and other foolish liberals!!

  • Leonard Feinman September 15, 2017, 1:00 pm

    Goodbye and good riddance. Liam is not John Wayne, and he is not much of an actor. He wants to make money, and Hollywood is paying him well. Actors are prostitutes, faking emotion that they don\’t feel. No more, no less. Why take advice or listen to the musings of a left-wing anti-American old guy.
    If Europe does not believe in self-defense, they will fall. We Americans have a proud heritage and the Brits tell us not to worry about them because they will \”muddle through.\” And, it is their head to lose.

    • Bruce Bluemel September 15, 2017, 1:55 pm

      How sad that a B rated actor can come to America to collect the big bucks like most actors and then condemn the very thing that makes that possible. I would suggest Mr Neeson, that you go back to your safe haven and leave our constitution alone. I admit, I liked your movies but now they seem hypocritical. I have a whole new opinion of you, one that doesn’t match the one I had previously. You obviously know nothing about America outside of the huge profits that you made here.

  • Leonard Feinman September 15, 2017, 12:59 pm

    Goodbye and good riddance. Liam is not John Wayne, and he is not much of an actor. He wants to make money, and Hollywood is paying him well. Actors are prostitutes, faking emotion that they don’t feel. No more, no less. Why take advice or listen to the musings of a left-wing anti-American old guy.
    If Europe does not believe in self-defense, they will fall. We Americans have a proud heritage and the Brits tell us not to worry about them because they will “muddle through.” And, it is their head to lose.

  • Allen Lawson September 15, 2017, 11:58 am

    Just another d— head. Nobody I knows could care less about his opinion. Canada is turning into a melting pot of a– holes . I do wish he would make one more movie about football and he would be used as a tackling dummy.

    • Peter Brown September 15, 2017, 2:09 pm

      d’head is accurate. Another of those “firing” propane powered “firearms”, desperately attempting to appear ‘tuff’and “baddd”.
      At the same time, when on a movie set, the part requires a move that the clown could suffer a boo-boo, they call-out, “STUNTMAN”. A lot of bs and typical liberal dreaming.

  • Joe Mannix September 15, 2017, 11:47 am

    Didn’t his wife die in a low speed ski accident? Maybe we should ban skiing. Or at least have a mandatory helmet law. Or, wait, I know! Maybe we should just stop talking about this idiot.

  • JoshO September 15, 2017, 11:29 am

    Anyone ever notice that so many of the loudest, most annoying people that seem to hate American aren’t even from here? This doosher is a Scott, Samantha Bee is Canadian, John Oliver is a Britt and that Daily Show kid is from South Africa.

    Seriously, if it’s so bad in the United States GTFOuta here!

    • C.G.A. September 15, 2017, 12:08 pm

      They don’t have the Second Amendment in Europe either, so he wouldn’t know the significance of it. The USA is the only country with that sort of right. The only reason he is here is to get $$$$$$$$$. He wouldn’t make that anywhere else. I think most actors are paid waaaaaayyyy more than they are worth. Most everyone in Hollywood in the movie industry is. He should keep his European opinion to himself. We are not Europe ( thank goodness).

  • Hummingbird September 15, 2017, 11:10 am

    He’s done with everything, as far as I’m concerned.

    • DaveGinOly September 15, 2017, 1:36 pm

      Has been done, IMHO, since he started spouting his anti-gun nonsense. Haven’t watched a movie of his since. And I don’t watch any movies starring, directed by, or produced by any anti-gun, anti-American loudmouth. They have a right to their opinions and their politics, and I’m exercising my right to stop supporting them, helping to make them rich and famous, and giving them the platform from which they work against my interests. My country and my rights are far more important than the value of their entertainment.

      • Joel Torres September 15, 2017, 3:33 pm

        I haven’t stopped watching his movies. I do it in a fashion that would not make him a stinky cent (if you know what I mean), and I pass them along too. I make the money of his A$$ for his idiotic comments.
        If he doesn’t likes our Constitution, then he can get the F()€£ out of here!!

  • WiscoGunner September 15, 2017, 11:07 am

    Mr. Neeson, if you don’t like America’s Rights, then get out of our Country! So sick and tired of you liberal hypocrites getting rich by acting in movies where you use any number of guns, killing scores of people while getting paid many millions of dollars and then you go home, count your money, and say, “Ok, I’ve made enough, time to go on a rant against guns.”

    You said this a year or two ago…or was it three years ago and yet you’ve made even more movies in which you tote your guns and kill who knows how many more people in your films?!! I would call that Hollywood blood money.

    If you believe in your anti-gun stance, then give away every penny of the money you’ve made in violent films in which you used a gun and give that money to the poor, hurricane relief or some other worthy cause and start from scratch making money only from movies you do in the future which feature zero guns and violence.

    Stop being such a hypocrite. The USA has plenty of airports. Find one and book a flight out of here. See you later…much later and never again at the movies.

  • Chuck M September 15, 2017, 11:03 am

    I don`t watch movies from people like this libtard. So I could care less what he thinks, or what he is doing.

  • PF Flyer September 15, 2017, 10:54 am

    Why doesn’t Liam put his money where his mouth is. Take the money he made where he used a gun in a movie and give it to gun victims, education, etc…!?

  • Charlie September 15, 2017, 10:39 am

    His movies have always been a 007 comedy to me.I don’t watch any more of his junk. Made his money on violence now bitching.Why don’t he give the money back? If he is honest in what he say’s he would return all the money as a crap actor. Not true to himself as most of these crap actors are.

  • Norm Fishler September 15, 2017, 10:36 am

    Were it not for Schindler’s List & maybe one or two others, I would have to give Mr. Neeson an “F” on his lifetime cumulative report card. In his defense, I will say that from where he comes from, differences in opinion are generally settled with their fists & (usually) the belligerents walk or are carried away to share a pint another day. But this is America & that’s not always the way things happen here. Culturally or in real time. Suffice it to say that Mr. Neeson is one of the recent additions of actors who’s films I will no longer watch.

  • Alan September 15, 2017, 9:55 am

    Well Liam, don’t let the door hit you in the fanny on the way out.
    Honestly, who cares?

    • BR549 September 15, 2017, 11:56 am

      I didn’t exactly see this liberal nitwit turning down parts that exploited violence.

      I’m left wondering how many theater-goers attend showings of this genre of movies in order to try to subconsciously work out their own personal survival strategies. Many people might assume that violence promotes violence, but I would suggest that at least a fair number of that movie going crowd was already predisposed to feeling already disempowered and vulnerable simply because of 150 years of legislative abuse that allows people to become disenfranchised from the society they live within.

      I seriously doubt that the UK has somehow turned into an island of total sheep, since they have their own action heroes who have become incredibly successful; actors like Jason Statham and Danial Craig, and a dozen more. If that many of their own actors are becoming that successful, it seems more than obvious that the Brits are undergoing very similar levels of citizen disenfranchisement, something that Liam Neeson appears to be CLUELESS about.

  • TJ Reeder September 15, 2017, 9:49 am

    I’ve nothing to say about this article because I see it as click bait. We all know what this asshole had to say about guns and our “American” right to own as many as we want so..Piffle.. I simply quit watching his movies a long time ago along with “Mr. Borne” and any of the others who spout such crap. Just as I stopped watching football because of the poor picked on black multi-millionaires. Their words and deeds only count to the fools who admire them.

  • Duane September 15, 2017, 9:41 am

    Ultimately, people can vote against leftist liberals like Neeson by not attending their movies at the box office!In thinking about his dramatic successes such as Schindler\’s List, would Mr. Neeson assume that success against the Nazis would be better carried out if all opposing parties were disarmed?While in our current political landscape Firearms are primarily for recreation, hunting, and self-defense, it is important to note that the second amendment was originally created to protect citizenry against an oppressive government, which is why the United States of America was founded in the first place! To be a bastion of personal freedom  that would safeguard these freedoms and protect us from tyranny — even the tyranny of firearm confiscation, etc., suggested by those such as Mr. Neeson.If Mr. Neeson employees bodyguards to protect him as most Hollywood celebrities do, I guarantee those bodyguards are armed.  This is an amazing double standard of the elite — that they have armed protection which they wish to refuse to all others…In closing, it is important to note that firearm ownership is the only thing which guarantees our citizenry\’s \”unalienable rights.\” Without firearm ownership, we would simply be sheep led to the slaughter,  and the ability of our citizenry to protect these rights would be null and void

  • Duane September 15, 2017, 9:40 am

    Ultimately, people can vote against leftist liberals like Neeson by not attending their movies at the box office!

    In thinking about his dramatic successes such as Schindler’s List, would Mr. Neeson assume that success against the Nazis would be better carried out if all opposing parties were disarmed?

    While in our current political landscape Firearms are primarily for recreation, hunting, and self-defense, it is important to note that the second amendment was originally created to protect citizenry against an oppressive government, which is why the United States of America was founded in the first place! To be a bastion of personal freedom that would safeguard these freedoms and protect us from tyranny — even the tyranny of firearm confiscation, etc., suggested by those such as Mr. Neeson.

    If Mr. Neeson employees bodyguards to protect him as most Hollywood celebrities do, I guarantee those bodyguards are armed. This is an amazing double standard of the elite — that they have armed protection which they wish to refuse to all others…

    In closing, it is important to note that firearm ownership is the only thing which guarantees our citizenry’s “unalienable rights.” Without firearm ownership, we would simply be sheep led to the slaughter, and the ability of our citizenry to protect these rights would be null and void

  • kimberpross September 15, 2017, 9:34 am

    He’s from Ireland, part of Isles, the part of the world that required the Founding Fathers to write in the Second Amendment. Some things never change, no surprise here.

  • BigC September 15, 2017, 9:09 am

    Just another brain-dead, Hollyweird POS! I guess he’ll just go back to his second favorite means of slaughter, the long-sword!!
    F’n HYPOCRITE!!!!!!

  • Michael Keim September 15, 2017, 9:06 am

    The founding fathers ran assholes of the British empire like Neeson out of the country

  • Brian September 15, 2017, 9:06 am

    I’m sorry but just like so many Hollywood elite ass hats that are willing to sponge every dime from unwitting moviegoers is disgraceful. I stopped going to movies 30 years ago and haven’t missed anything as far as I’m concerned. If your value system was so bruised from what you see/saw happening here sir why sell yourself to financially benefit from the very idea you despise? My “American” simple mind can’t process this. With all due respect sir, please take your twisted value system and your money made on such a deceptive premise and go back to the place where your hatred for guns will be less of a mental issue for you. Oh, and this free “American” who actually stands for something and believes in what this great country was founded on would like to inform you that you suck, SIR.

  • Jay September 15, 2017, 9:02 am

    To all those who believe in Our Constitution! We are being Dupped Big Time! If you haven’t noticed lately many States are enacting laws to counter already existing anti-gun laws! Ask yourself WHY?? In this way the government is setting us up. By doing this they are showing the citizens that The right To Bears Arms is not a right at all but is controlled by laws. If we allow this to continue once all these laws are in place, guess what, they can also be taken away! The only way to ensure our 2nd amendment rights is to demand that the Anti-gun laws are abolished and not just make up new laws to cover those up!! No new laws are needed to protect Rights but the eradication of existing anti 2nd amendment laws is!! Stop the insanity now!!

  • Lie I AM Needsom September 15, 2017, 8:57 am

    Some immigrants from VIOLENT northern Ireland need to Get The F out of the USA.
    Judge not lest ye be judged…… AN ACTOR is the last person to go to for political advice! They are trained liars.

  • Jay September 15, 2017, 8:53 am

    Here we go again, another Egowood actor spewing their anti-gun rhetoric after making millions tooting guns in their movies! Can anyone say Idiotic hypocrisy at it’s best? Neeson can not grasp that, The Right to bear Arms, isn’t a law but a human right, is he to lost to get back to where he came from?

  • Hugo September 15, 2017, 8:27 am

    Every time I hear one of these liberal douches whine about gun control, I buy another gun and a case of ammo. Yes, it’s spiteful and immature but what the hell. No wonder this was the a terrible financial year for Hollywood. They pump out crappy movies and liberal drivel.

  • CHRIS GEGERE a.k.a. \"G-gear\" September 15, 2017, 8:24 am

    It is Well, that the Regulation \”shall not be infringed\” part – is The Law! – Whenever it is infringed upon, it has something to do with the USA (or part of it) becoming a Police State. – And a Police State is not a Free State! – but a democratic rule – that trashes our Republic of protected Rights! – which disturbingly, some in the USA seem to prefer – by force! – And, all of this confirms the very necessity of the 2nd Amendment:\”A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.\”\”Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!\” – Ben Franklin.\”…in a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a \”pure democracy,\” the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.\”\”The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.
    The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to \”liberty and justice for all.\” Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy.\”\”Even though nearly every politician, teacher, journalist and citizen believes that our Founders created a democracy, it is absolutely not true. The Founders knew full well the differences between a Republic and a Democracy. They repeatedly and emphatically said that they had founded a Republic.
    Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution \”guarantees to every state in this union a Republican form of government\”…. Conversely, the word Democracy is not mentioned even once in the Constitution. *James Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with these words,\”Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths…\”*James Madison, Jr. (1751 – 1836) was the fourth President of the United States (1809–17). He is hailed as the \”Father of the Constitution\” for being instrumental in the drafting of the U.S. Constitution and as the key champion and author of the Bill of Rights.\”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.\” -James Madison. (Explanation of the 10th Amendment.)The Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (James Madison)\”Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate [State] governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple [Federal] government of any form can admit of.\” – James Madison, Federalist No. 46, The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared, New York Packet, January 29, 1788.Federalist No. 46 is by James Madison, the forty-sixth of The Federalist Papers. It was published on January 29, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. This document examines the relative strength of the state and federal governments under the proposed United States Constitution. It is titled \”The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared.\”Madison stresses that the federal and state governments are two totally different agencies. He articulates that they are separate yet can collaborate, and that the power lies in the people. The natural attachment of the people [militia] will always be to the governments of their respective states, so the federal government must be, in a sense, extraordinarily congenial to the people.
    In an effort to further dissuade fears over a national military force, Madison indicates that, at any point, the maximum force that can be brought to bear by the government to enforce its mandates is but a small fraction of the might of an armed citizenry: … … the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Ben Franklin was queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation. In the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention, a lady asked Dr. Franklin:
    “Well Doctor what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
    Franklin replied, “A republic…if you can keep it.”\”I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.\”
    (Do we? – We shall.)Sincerely,
    ______________________________(Write to your Representative.)

  • CHRIS GEGERE a.k.a. "G-gear" September 15, 2017, 8:22 am

    The Founding Father would not turn over in their graves these days. To the contrary:
    1) “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788.

    2) “On every occasion let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823.

    3) “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824.

    4) “The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.” -Thomas Jefferson.

    5) “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787.

    6) “…if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788.

    7) “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.” – Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787. (The Merriam-Webster Dictionary guy.)

    8) “Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” – Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789.

    9) “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778.

    10) “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” – Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789.

    11) “Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” – George Washington, First President of the United States.

    12) “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” – Patrick Henry, Governor of Virginia, American Patriot.

    13) “They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -Ben Franklin, American Statesman.

    14) “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” – Richard Henry Lee, American Statesman, 1788. – Lee initiated the Declaration of Independence (drafted by Thomas Jefferson, then edited by Congress).

    15) “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776.

    16) “Posterity — you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.” -President John Quincy Adams.


    • Ken Ellenburg September 16, 2017, 1:21 am

      That Sir, was beautiful. Thank you.

  • Dr Motown September 15, 2017, 8:12 am

    Maybe he can convince his Muslim comrades to give up their guns…

  • Infidel762x51 September 15, 2017, 8:09 am

    Don’t watch gun grabbers using guns even when they are on TV for free. Screw Hollywood.

  • Dave September 15, 2017, 8:04 am

    This Irishman needs to go back to Ireland.

  • Mr. D September 15, 2017, 7:32 am

    Who cares what this POS thinks….??
    It this thinking that is the reason Europe is a total fail and will be getting worse going forward.

  • Burnedone September 15, 2017, 7:29 am

    Guess it’s all special group awareness films for Liam from here on out. Wonder who he’ll try to portray as a helpless victim of reality first?

  • Steve September 15, 2017, 7:13 am

    I would bet he won’t tell how many guns in his house. I dispise any play actor that makes money from acing with guns then blackslides the anti-gun way.

  • LARRY TOOMEY September 15, 2017, 6:06 am

    you mean people go to see this FAKE PERSON PLAY ACTING.

  • JOSEPH C BURGE September 15, 2017, 5:52 am

    So when does he give back all those millions he made promoting guns?

  • Dr. Strangelove September 15, 2017, 4:38 am

    I haven’t watched any of his movies since he came out of the closet.

  • David Hamilton September 15, 2017, 4:07 am


  • David Hamilton September 15, 2017, 4:06 am

    Such convenient timing for good ole Liam, isn’t it? Made a ton of money selling himself to the gun violence Hollywood crowd, but now he’s too ‘old’ to continue? His ethics finally kick in? Or does he just have enough cash in the bank to ‘retire’. Whatever. His hipocracy is damning. He has zero credibility. I quite watching his crap movies years ago and had hoped others would too. My definition of a good day is seeing him leave the country with Mat Damon under one arm, Mark Wahlberg under the other, and towing Tom Cruise in a little red wagon.

    • Michael W Smith September 15, 2017, 9:06 am

      Why stop with there. There are more just like him.

  • Robert Smith September 14, 2017, 7:38 pm

    I guess Mr. Neeson will just have to go back to Shakespearean stage acting where he can stab, bludgeon an strangle people to death.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend