Mel Gibson Addresses Guns in America: ‘It’s Out of Balance at the Moment’

Actor, director Mel Gibson.

Actor, director Mel Gibson. (Photo: Reuters)

Actor and director Mel Gibson jumped into the gun debate, albeit obliquely, in a recent interview with Fox News while promoting his new movie “Hacksaw Ridge.”

When asked about the issue, the 60-year-old movie star said, “Well, I understand where it comes from, the right to bear arms because the Revolution and that stuff and tyranny and the right to defend yourself, and I still agree with that, but it’s kind of out of balance at the moment.”

“…Something has to be done in order to stop some of the heinous violence that has [occured] just like sporadically and shockingly…,” he continued.

When prompted for specific solutions, Gibson didn’t offer any.

“I don’t know what the answer to that is…,” he explained. “It’s going to take someone smarter than me to figure that out.”

To be fair, Gibson didn’t parrot the usual cliches about “background checks” and “bans on assault weapons.” Maybe he is smart enough to recognize his own ignorance on the subject or maybe he just didn’t want to prompt pro-gunners into boycotting his new film by voicing support for a specific anti-gun policy measure.

Then again, maybe Gibson is open to non-conventional solutions to combat violence, such as getting rid of gun-free zones and empowering more law-abiding citizens to rely less on government and take responsibility for their own safety by exercising their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Doubtful, but who knows.

In any event, Gibson’s new movie “Hacksaw Ridge” highlights the true story of Desmond T. Doss, a U.S. Army corporal and combat medic who earned the Congressional Medal of Honor during WWII.

Doss was a conscientious objector to the war due to his faith as a Seventh-day Adventist. He refused to carry a firearm or kill an enemy soldier. Nevertheless, Doss served heroically, transporting 75 wounded men to safety, one-by-one, during the Battle of Okinawa.

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

{ 51 comments… add one }
  • Bisley October 29, 2016, 9:52 pm

    Gibson and others who are actually concerned about public safety (not the socialists in government who push most gun control under the pretense of public safety, intending to disarm everyone so they can rule us) need to understand that there is no answer. There have always been, and always will be, people who are mean, crazy, criminally inclined, etc., and are likely to kill for profit, sport, ideology, religion, or whatever. Laws only effect the law-abiding, not the criminals, nuts, terrorists, etc. No law, or combination of laws can disarm these people, laws can only take away the means of the rest of us to defend ourselves from them (and more important, the means to discourage government from taking everything we have and enslaving us). Heroin, cocaine, methamphetamines, etc. have been outlawed — how’s that working out? Anyone who wants them, and isn’t concerned about the law, can buy all they desire — guns would be no different.

    As SuperG says above, locking up the known crazies in asylums would help a little, along with public executions of murderers within a few months, rather than several decades (if at all). But, on the whole, there is really no way to identify, or stop the great majority of these people.

  • John Stitch October 29, 2016, 2:23 am

    I have to say the are a lot of good people and there are a lot of good things I read here to day. I am a vet,was in the army at17, love my country it’s hard to seen what going on ,the brothers in arms that served this country , so we would have the rights to live in the land of the free. .we must vote.and stand up and be counted. We are the people , we can not,and won’t let the take our freedom to bear arms away. we are Americans we do not give up .so let’s get out and vote. to keep our rights, our forefathers never gave up and I sure as hell won’t, if you don’t. God bless America. We need to get the people we know to vote

  • Cleophus October 28, 2016, 9:35 pm

    How can a man who made movies like “Braveheart” and “Patriot” not understand the 2nd Amendment and the right of self defense?

  • Alan October 28, 2016, 6:06 pm

    Well, he IS right with the out of balance comment.
    Most, if not nearly all the mass shootings have been done by people on or coming off psychotropic drugs.
    Drugs that require one to be committed to mental facilities in 22 other Countries due to their serious side effects like violence and paranoia, but WE let them run around free.
    Our problem isn’t a gun problem, it’s a Big Pharmaceutical lobby problem, it’s a problem of seriously disturbed people being allowed to roam free while on drugs with well known side effects.
    But that’s not P.C., now is it?

    • Jeter Bentley October 28, 2016, 9:17 pm

      Another Hollywood “genius” looking to contribute his 2 cents to the frey.

    • Stuart November 1, 2016, 2:54 pm

      The last two mass shootings were done by ISIS Jihadis yelling Allahu Akbar.

  • Richard Hilton October 28, 2016, 5:58 pm

    Another hypocrite that got rich using gun violence in the movies telling us that guns are the problem. Hey when you get done getting drunk get up out of the gutter and go back home we don’t need you here anymore no one cars what you have to say any more that we do with Liam Neeson just a bunch of hypocrite’s

  • Steve October 28, 2016, 1:53 pm

    what I don’t get about this movie is that I thought all medics were non-combatants and didn’t carry guns, hence it’s a violation of the rules of warfare to fire at them? is that true?
    or do they carry guns, and just don’t use them while acting as medics, but if they need them, and do pull out their weapon, the enemy is justified in engaging them?
    or was the guy in the movie just completely personally opposed to himself using guns, even in basic training, etc.?

    • Dave October 28, 2016, 5:07 pm

      What don,t you get? O.K. let,s go over it a again. Listen up. Medics don,t carry guns or try to kill people,and yes ,it is against the rules of war to shoot at a medic,but , SURPRISE! The enemy doesen,t care about the rules of war and shoots at medics anyway. Now do you get it.?

      • Jim October 28, 2016, 6:12 pm

        You’re right, Dave. But try not to ease up on the sarcasm. The guy simply asked a question. He’s not the enemy.

        • Jim October 28, 2016, 6:13 pm

          Oops, I meant, TRY TO ease up on the sarcasm… Long day.

        • GREGORY BURRIS October 30, 2016, 4:39 pm

          Gee, Dave, lighten up on Jim and go after Mr. Hilton and Mr. Bentley who neither have a clue. They obviously didn’t get anything from the article and what Mr. Gibson was said.

      • ExSoldier October 28, 2016, 8:35 pm

        When I was an active duty Infantry Officer all medics were issued the 1911A1 45cap sidearm which they were allowed to use for self defense or to protect the wounded they were caring for. Everybody has the RIGHT to self defense, especially from an enemy who doesn’t give a dann for the “rules of land warfare!” My guess is that the rules haven’t changed, just the gun brand and the caliber.

    • October 28, 2016, 8:43 pm

      Medics Cary guns all the time in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Muslims will kill you just for being an American.

  • Leighton Cavendish October 28, 2016, 1:32 pm

    What can be done?
    They can start by focusing on the areas where most of the illegal guns are. They know where the shootings are happening by using the gunshot detectors ALREADY in place in most larger cities.
    Train K9s for guns/powder/drugs (already being done). Send a dozen or more of these teams into the trouble spots. When the dog alerts, that is probable cause to stop and frisk. No more random stops.
    Video tape everything of course.
    Find a gun? Check for permits (if necessary in that state)…check age of suspect…check if suspect is able to own a gun legally…check gun serial number against stolen guns…etc .
    Illegal gun? Use the suspect’s ID…get a judge to issue warrants for any addresses found..any vehicles tied to the name and/or address…go to them and search…and search any persons in those dwellings/vehicles…
    Continue as necessary.
    Repeat.Repeat.Repeat where/when necessary.

    • Alan October 28, 2016, 5:04 pm

      Whoa, whoa, whoa! Aren’t you suggesting they act by profiling?

      Of course you are, because that totally makes sense! The politically correct term “profiling” is the liberal’s folly that allows illegals and other types of criminals to continue to do what they do.

  • nick October 28, 2016, 1:05 pm

    Sorry to have to say as I USED to like Mr Gibson but the ONLY THING that is “Out of Balance at the Moment”, is Mr Gibson himself! ALWAYS LOVE TO SEE the “Movie Stars” who made their bones with a gun in their hands and, are now, “Sorry to say it but I do NOT BELIEVE in guns”. The very DEFINITION of the word HYPOCRITE! Disgusting!

    • Kenny Smith October 28, 2016, 3:22 pm

      I think Mel Gibson is like those ignorant liberals who believe in themselves having plenty of guns and other weapons to protect them and their families , but other people should not own any guns . In other words as someone else stated he is a Hypocrite. He is another one who I quit watching on TV or the movies, just like Matt Damon he is against guns, but uses them to get rich, real piece of work these guys !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Vote for Trump so we can keep our guns .I enjoy shooting occasionally at the range or at my brothers house, and I want my guns for protecting my family also, I have never had any bad intentions with my guns and never will, so why should I have to suffer because of bad people, its not right. Just say no to Hillary !!!!

  • Kathy October 28, 2016, 10:32 am

    Mel Gibson has already proven himself unreliable and unreasonable. If you dont believe me check out his mug shots whilest spouting anti semetic rants.

    • Kirk Augustin October 28, 2016, 11:59 am

      That is not really fair. Mel Gibson is not anti-Semitic, but was just narrowly referring to Hollywood where there is an inordinate control over money and power by people who just happen to be Jewish. Jews can be proud of working together, but that can be a problem to others when it leads to a monopoly. So it is up to Jews to prevent discrimination, not people like Mel Gibson who simply become the victim of it.

  • Bob October 28, 2016, 10:09 am

    I’m totally against asking any celebrity for an opinion, why would their’s be better than anyone else’s?

    • Kirk Augustin October 28, 2016, 12:01 pm

      The point is not whether their opinion is better, but that they are more well known so it is then easier to tell what their opinion really means and is worth. An anonymous opinion in contrast, is worth nothing because you don’t know anything about who it is coming from, what preconceptions they may have, etc.

  • Mike October 28, 2016, 9:59 am

    Well, he was near banned from Hollywood. He has to try to fit in (As low as that is) to make movies and get along.
    Still, there is no excuse to give up freedom. You are either for it or against it.

    • Kirk Augustin October 28, 2016, 12:03 pm

      And do you think it is legal or fair for Hollywood to near ban him?

  • rt66paul October 28, 2016, 9:39 am

    Mel Gibson was born in this country and lived in Australia when they did have gun rights. The gun rights were affected a long time after he came here.

  • R U Fuluvit October 28, 2016, 9:32 am

    Gotta agree with Gibson on this, we are kinda out of balance. Too many laws & too many regulations controlling too many guns.

    • Dave Hicks October 28, 2016, 10:12 am

      The Bill of Rights should stand as is. “The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” . The balance is off because “We the people” have given away our rights.

  • Steven October 28, 2016, 9:02 am

    FYI Mel Gibson was born in Peekskill NY, and moved to Austrailia with his family at age 12.

  • My. Casull October 28, 2016, 8:46 am

    America has taken God out of our country and calls evil good and good evil. We teach our children that there are no absolutes and if it feels good it is okay to do it! We reward people for being lazy by government programs. We have generations that have never worked and single moms nearly exceed married ones. Children grow up with no father present and we say that is normal! If there are no morals in the home or in our schools and government we are just reaping what we have sown. Half of the people in America are takers and few are givers. We critize successful people and want them to pay “their fair share”. Who determines what a fair share is? Is the lazy who determines what a hard working person should pay? I think if you don’t have any skin in the game (you don’t pay taxes) you should not be allowed to vote. When our country was founded only land owners could vote. Most Americans don’t know that the second amendment was passed so the citizens could protect themselves from an oppressive government. That is why if the government had high capacity magazines so should the citizens have them. Thomas Jefferson said “an armed society is a polite society “.

    • JTH October 28, 2016, 10:11 am

      Well written. Thanks

    • Phil Fagerstrom October 28, 2016, 11:12 am

      Well spoken. I wholeheartedly agree!

    • Alan October 28, 2016, 5:22 pm

      Perfectly stated…morals are in the toilet, ignorance runs rampant, laziness is acceptable and even rewarded, big money runs our government…which way are we headed? Not up, that is for sure.

    • Don Schimpff October 29, 2016, 1:36 pm

      Excellent. You should post it on all the media: facebook, twitter, etc., etc… so the underinformed citizens can see the light.

      And send it to “Letters to the editor” of your newspaper. Common sense, like this, needs to be shared with everyone.

  • Jack October 28, 2016, 8:01 am

    C’mon. He’s promoting a movie. . . .about faith-based gun control and what it accomplished. Of course he’s gonna’ say, “Who, me? I don’t know.”

    Term limits. But, how to do that at this late date since the ‘system of multi-millionaires’ is so entrenched at the trough of middle class income tax. Career politicians are lazy bastards supported by equally lazy and cowardly, half-assed writers who have the gall to call themselves journalists. Nothing will change.

    Mel was a 1%-er with a brain who made really stupid mistakes. But, he also made some admissions and is moving on. Then again, Hollywood brainlessness has a huge propensity to forgive some really bad stuff in the name of entertainment. We’ll know more later. Right now, he doesn’t want to piss in anyone’s cornflakes since he’s on a promotional roll. But, given the subject matter of his new project I’d sure say he leans way left on gun control, i.e. “look at what one man did without guns”. Yeup. Out-of-balance for sure, Mel. I don’t know the man but it seems he’s NOT with us on 2A.

    • Michael October 28, 2016, 8:57 am

      Gibson has no idea what it means to believe in something, he is imported Hollywood elite from a country which has almost no gun rights.

      • Andrew October 28, 2016, 11:19 am

        He was born here, and only lived in Australia for a time when they had rights almost as good as ours.

  • Cyrus October 28, 2016, 7:24 am
  • Ro Gal October 28, 2016, 7:20 am

    I think Gibson makes a fair point. He “gets it” about our 2A rights, but when he uses words like “out of balance” tell sme he truly does not understand the issue or solution AND he admits it. Enforcing the current firearms laws we have, implement mandatory jail time for crimes with a gun, and allowing our police to take measures to remove guns form criminals and gangs would be a very good start. Also, he should have mentioned shall issue CCW in ALL states.

  • RetNavet October 28, 2016, 7:10 am

    His comments “I don’t know” and “It’s going to take someone smarter than me ” would be perfect if he had prefaced it by saying “I can speak for the entire libtard population of Hollyweird by saying”

  • Chuck Matson October 28, 2016, 7:04 am

    Come-on Mel, grow a backbone! Tom Selleck has more guts and backbone than any of these pukes! Just my two cents worth.

  • robert October 28, 2016, 6:14 am

    Uhh w.W.II? And he carried 75 in okinawa?

    • chris October 28, 2016, 8:10 am

      April 1, 1945

    • Carl Nash October 28, 2016, 3:10 pm

      Do not doubt Desmond T. Doss was a principled all-American hero and recipient of the Medal Honor. He served as an Army aid man in the battle of Okinawa during which he treated and carried 75 wounded soldiers to safety making numerous trips to under intense enemy fire to accomplish this feat. His MOH citation:
      Rank and organization: Private First Class, United States Army, Medical Detachment, 307th Infantry, 77th Infantry Division.
      Place and date: Near Urasoe Mura, Okinawa, Ryukyu Islands, April 29, 1945 – May 21, 1945.
      Entered service at: Lynchburg, Virginia
      Birth: Lynchburg, Virginia
      G.O. No.: 97, November 1, 1945.
      The President of the United States of America, in the name of Congress, takes pleasure in presenting the Medal of Honor to Private First Class Desmond Thomas Doss, United States Army, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action above and beyond the call of duty from April 29 – 21 May 1945, while serving with the Medical Detachment, 307th Infantry Regiment, 77th Infantry Division, in action at Urasoe Mura, Okinawa, Ryukyu Islands. Private First Class Doss was a company aid man when the 1st Battalion assaulted a jagged escarpment 400 feet high. As our troops gained the summit, a heavy concentration of artillery, mortar and machine gun fire crashed into them, inflicting approximately 75 casualties and driving the others back. Pfc. Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying all 75 casualties one-by-one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands. On May 2, he exposed himself to heavy rifle and mortar fire in rescuing a wounded man 200 yards forward of the lines on the same escarpment; and 2 days later he treated 4 men who had been cut down while assaulting a strongly defended cave, advancing through a shower of grenades to within eight yards of enemy forces in a cave’s mouth, where he dressed his comrades’ wounds before making 4 separate trips under fire to evacuate them to safety. On May 5, he unhesitatingly braved enemy shelling and small arms fire to assist an artillery officer. He applied bandages, moved his patient to a spot that offered protection from small arms fire and, while artillery and mortar shells fell close by, painstakingly administered plasma. Later that day, when an American was severely wounded by fire from a cave, Pfc. Doss crawled to him where he had fallen 25 feet from the enemy position, rendered aid, and carried him 100 yards to safety while continually exposed to enemy fire. On May 21, in a night attack on high ground near Shuri, he remained in exposed territory while the rest of his company took cover, fearlessly risking the chance that he would be mistaken for an infiltrating Japanese and giving aid to the injured until he was himself seriously wounded in the legs by the explosion of a grenade. Rather than call another aid man from cover, he cared for his own injuries and waited 5 hours before litter bearers reached him and started carrying him to cover. The trio was caught in an enemy tank attack and Pfc. Doss, seeing a more critically wounded man nearby, crawled off the litter; and directed the bearers to give their first attention to the other man. Awaiting the litter bearers’ return, he was again struck, by a sniper bullet while being carried off the field by a comrade, this time suffering a compound fracture of one arm. With magnificent fortitude he bound a rifle stock to his shattered arm as a splint and then crawled 300 yards over rough terrain to the aid station. Through his outstanding bravery and unflinching determination in the face of desperately dangerous conditions Pfc. Doss saved the lives of many soldiers. His name became a symbol throughout the 77th Infantry Division for outstanding gallantry far above and beyond the call of duty.

    • Alan October 28, 2016, 6:00 pm

      And your point, Robert?

  • Joe McHugh October 28, 2016, 6:14 am

    Mel Gibson had the perfect platform for promoting the control of those who misuse firearms, instead of resorting to the simplistic and ineffective control of those guns. Perhaps he was just interested in promoting his movie and was smart enough to realize that his new movie depended on male attendance. Let’s face it, it’s mostly American guys, not gals, that support the right to keep and bear arms. Although a growing number of females are buying handguns for self-defense.

    Whatever, Gibson’s true feelings are about the Second Amendment, he stayed on the right side of the argument for the moment.

  • Jay October 28, 2016, 5:52 am

    The solution is actually very simple. You make the punishment for crime the most horrendous and scary thing a human can face, then only those who do not deserve to breath air, will prove stupid enough to commit a crime! Those can be put 6 foot under! We law and weak punishment are the number one reasons for criminals! They know a slap on the wrist is their punishment!

    • Jay October 28, 2016, 5:54 am

      Sorry, meant to type Weak laws etc…

  • Jeffrey L. Frischkorn October 28, 2016, 5:18 am

    There’s a lot to be said about the remark “I don’t know.”

  • Chris Case October 28, 2016, 3:38 am

    Mel was quite honest! He said, “I don’t know”. If more Hollywierd people would be that honest, maybe we wouldn’t need to Boycott them!? Right-On, Mel Gibson!

  • Tom Horn October 27, 2016, 10:01 pm

    What’s, “out of balance,” there, Mel. You mean sheep, to: intelligent reasoning human beings? Or, Millionaire dollars supporting gun control, VS: patriot dollars supporting 2A? Maybe he means blathering idiot Hollywood stars being interviewed, VS: someone with a clue.

  • SuperG October 27, 2016, 11:44 am

    I liked his response “I don’t know”. If more people would say that, more progress would be made, as then they would go try and learn or shrug their shoulders and walk away. In the end, Ronald Reagan’s action in closing the asylums and relaxing the mental health laws of this country will be seen as the real culprit, but we are decades away from seeing that. Currently, “our” government wants us to believe that is the gun, that evil inanimate object of death, that is to blame for all of our troubles. But why wouldn’t it want you to believe that? If they said it was the lack of mental health treatment, then it would be admitting it was wrong in the first place, and that would open them up to even more lawsuits. Things will change when we get real leaders instead of career politicians.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend