Did you know smoking was a part of the criteria the MPAA addresses when deciding a film? It happened in 2007. But these people don't think the motion picture industry goes far enough. Their argument is based on the hypodermic needle model. That is, kids see Brad Pitt smoking a cigar and instantly, they drag their brainwashed behinds into a 7/11 and buy themselves a pack of Swisher Sweets.
Do you believe it is the responsibility of the motion picture industry to provide entertainment to kids, free of any items that might offend your moral sensibilities? Or do you believe children should be legally permitted access to all content, regardless of exposure to sex and violence and smoking and fatty foods?
In 2004, GKC Theaters (now out of business) attempted to introduce a system by which kids under 17 could attend films Rated R without parent supervision. Some parents loved this idea because they wanted the freedom to send their kids to the theater to see rated R movie without being forced by the MPAA to go with them. Some parents complained because they were afraid of being hoodwinked by their kids. This article cites a concerned parent saying ...they'll go see what they want to see with the card. They'll tell you they're seeing 'Billy Elliot,' but will see 'Kill Bill,'
Crazy kids can't help themsleves! If the state doesn't protect the children from themselves, who will? Parents?