Bruce Willis says he's against new gun control laws

Actor Bruce Willis poses during a photo call to promote the movie "A Good Day to Die Hard" in Berlin on Feb. 5, 2013. / AP Photo/Markus Schreiber

Bruce Willis says he's against new gun control laws that could infringe on rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The star of the "Die Hard" movies also dismisses any link between Hollywood shootouts and real-life gun violence.

"I think that you can't start to pick apart anything out of the Bill of Rights without thinking that it's all going to become undone," Willis told The Associated Press in a recent interview while promoting his latest film, "A Good Day to Die Hard." ''If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn't they take all your rights away from you?"

President Barack Obama has proposed sweeping new gun controls after a December school shooting in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 young children dead.

Play Video

"A Good Day to Die Hard" premiere

Willis' fifth outing as wise-cracking cop John McClane, which arrives in theaters Feb. 14, comes as the "Die Hard" action franchise marks its 25th anniversary. The 57-year-old actor will also be seen firing away at bad guys in the upcoming sequels "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" and "Red 2," both due later this year.

But Willis believes "the real topic is diminished" when observers link Hollywood entertainment with high-profile mass shootings.

"No one commits a crime because they saw a film. There's nothing to support that," Willis said. "We're not making movies about people that have gone berserk, or gone nuts. Those kind of movies wouldn't last very long at all."

Willis added that he doesn't see how additional legislation could prevent future mass shootings.

"It's a difficult thing and I really feel bad for those families," he said. "I'm a father and it's just a tragedy. But I don't know how you legislate insanity. I don't know what you do about it. I don't even know how you begin to stop that."

[lorileib816]

When tens of thousands of people lose their lives each year to gun violence in the United States, more than 30,000 in 2011 alone, it may be time for us to take a new look at the second amendment and at the issue of "responsible gun ownership." http://eyeswideopen.org/?p=955

[vaoldman2]

According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.
Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.

In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.

In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.

[NannyStateResident]

To VAOLDMAN2 - How dare you try to confuse people with the facts!

[btrdb]

Obama may have proposed sweeping new gun laws following the slaying of CT school children, but he had the plan in place long before that happened. Am I the only one that can recall his "under the radar" comment to Mrs. Brady?? Maybe the rest of you are fooled by his "compassion" for children, but I only see exploitation, exploitation, exploitation of murdered children by the WH. It takes a sick mind to hide behind murdered children and use them as a smoke screen to further your demented cause, which is a disarming of America. Preservation of our Constitution and Second Amendment rights people...that's what our fight is about. Don't let Obama and his pathetic manipulation of slaughtered school children fool you.

[cbsblogger]

The Fergusons and Patricks believe our current gun laws need enforced, while the Feinsteins and Bloombergs want all the common folk disarmed. Why is that?

[vaoldman2]

Excellent question on people being disarmed or the right to buy semi auto guns or magazines. This administration is arrogant and out of control that no longer represents the people who elected them or defending the Bill of Rights. They out to destroy our Bill of Rights or erode them to the point that the Bill of Rights would be worthless. Then what would their agenda be for the citizens, unknown at this time, but we will not benefit from their actions and they will have full control over the citizens.

[SilenceEvermore]

I will certainly be supporting his films from now on.

Go Bruce!

[erasmus111]

I watched Piers Morgan and he had on a number of gun freaks. Two had important positions. I think one was the Attorney General, or something, of Texas. They all were saying how they were totally against background checks. I mean, what the hell does that say about them? Why on earth would someone be against that unless they had something to hide? The excuses they come up with are unbelievable!

Anyone who thinks there should be no backgrounds checks should have their guns taken away. They are obviously not thinking with all four burners, or they are hiding something.

[jpcmca2003]

You apparently didnt watch close....First of all the owner of the gun store was interviewed and answered all of Morgans questions...Greg Abbott( attorney Gen), Dan Patrick( state legislator) and Ben Ferguson( radio host) were explaining that current laws needed to be reinforced...Morgan interrupted so much,the segments would have in no way shown them to be"freaks"...Ted Nugent was a bit extreme but put a rude host in his place...
Please list the excuses that you heard them make!

[MyKinKStar]

Thank you JPCMCA2003, YOU paid attention!

[skeezix06]

Well. I won't be buying any more of his DVDs.

[erasmus111]

Me neither!

I watched a movie the other night, with him in it. He wasn't in it for long and he was killed off. He must have been getting hard up.

[MyKinKStar]

Give me a break! At least you know where he stands, but hell, it's not like you have bought any of his work up to now, so that's no threat. There are plenty of other idiots who don't voice their opinion, so now go about worrying about which of those you are helping make a living. Bahaha!

[jpcmca2003]

Bruce Willis only repeated what most logical people are saying..'You cant legislate insanity"....He didnt bash a certain party or a particular person, but now that he has made comments, most on here are saying they have lost repsect for him...Classic example of how you anti-gun folks wont accept anyone or anything said that is contrary to your beliefs!

[jpcmca2003]

The only unstable people are libs like yourself...Again,guns have been around for decades,the process of purchasing guns has been around for decades....The differnce now,you libs want to excuse people by finding some utopian social effect as the reason instead of personal responsibility....I am awake and I am logical...A freakin gun doesnt shoot itself...Talk about fantasy land!

[jpcmca2003]

I also see none of you on here telling Tony Bennett and CHris Rock to keep to their professions,like you are Willis....You all are typical Lib hypocrits that always think you are the "enlightened" ones...WRONG!

[winchester70]

The opinions of "celebrities" doesn't mean diddley to me, but as LBJ said of J. Edgar Hoover, "better to have him inside the tent ...".

[robert1129]

Willis has made millions from the Die Hard movies and games and other such products and continues to do so. Anyone thinking that he would say different in public is nuts.

[erasmus111]

That's right. For his career, he would be crazy to say otherwise.

But that being said, I've lost all respect for him.

[luadda22]

And ERASMUS, I don't know if he is going worry about loosing your respect for him, but I can hear him now "adios mf".

[DF68]

Stick to making films Bruce because rational and prudent intellectualism is beyond your grasp.

[wolfmagic2012]

How true that is. Looking at Hollywood republicans (Willis, Arnold, Eastwood, Stallone...) doesn't instill confidence in their intellectual abilities. They made their money on mindless violence in the movies and aren't about to grow a spine and bite the hand that feeds them.

[Dr_Pangloss]

At least Stallone said we should ban assault rifles. As he put it, "Do you think an army is going to attack your [bleep] house?"