Next they should ban BEER commercials ( Like that would ever happen), then work to food with a lot of fat in them (Like Doritos), and what about those cute Coke commercials (Look at the chemicals and sugar content). They use the excuse protecting our children from . (They seem to forget that then constitution exists) Anyway what we need is more female nudity (Like Janet Jackson's WARDROBE MALFUNCTION.) Maybe they can get Miley Cyrus and her WRECKING BALL for the next Stupor Bowl.
Are they kidding? What is wrong with that commercial? I agree, they should ban beer commercials as they may cause OWI with possible car crashes. I think people and companies need to stand their ground on their beliefs instead of compromising them becuae of what "society" says or believes.
I gotta say this the commercial does not look superbowl worthy. It seems low budget, the voice-over is horrible. Don't get me wrong, I do thinks its BS that they wont allow a firearm company to run an add.
They are all a bunch of wussies that run out of bounds instead of taking a hit like a man. Show me a player who is half the man Earl Cambell was at his peak. I know he is a little messed up in the head now and his body was destroyed, but he was not scared to take a hit for our entertainment. It feels so good not to care who wins anything, period.
Daniel Defense Ad Rejected, but Bloomberg's Gun Control Spot Ran During 2013 Super BowlAs news continues to circulate about the NFL rejecting gun manufacturer Daniel Defense's Super Bowl ad because of the league's ban on firearm-related advertisements, attention is being drawn to the fact that Mayor Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns aired a firearm-related ad during the 2013 Super Bowl in a local market (Washington, D.C). And the details surrounding both advertisements seem quite similar.
For instance, Bloomberg's ad aired regionally rather than nationally. And when Breitbart News spoke with Daniel Defense's Jordan Hunter on December 3rd, he said Daniel Defense was likewise seeking a regional commercial slot for their ad.
According to The New York Times, because Bloomberg's ad was regional instead of national the spot for it cost hundreds of thousands of dollars instead of millions. Daniel Defense had allocated hundreds of thousands for their regional ad as well.
The big difference in the two ads is that Bloomberg's ad
--the Daniel Defense ad does not. In fact, the Daniel Defense ad does not even show a gun, save for the silhouette of one contained in their logo. Furthermore, Daniel Defense also aired an ad in the Georgia television market during the 2012 Super Bowl without complaints from the NFL.