"I wish violence was not necessary, but I think it is called for when you
have an opponent who seriously threatens you and is not responding to
reason or other non-violent methods of persuasion."

The above statement is so obviously corrrect that I cannot see why anyone could possibly object to it. That's why I own a firearm.

As for the depicion of violence and sex, I can only recall Jack Nicholson's comment on it during an interview. (I paraphrase, of course),

"You can show a man cutting off a woman's tit but you can't show him sucking it."

Actually, I dislike gratuitous depictions of sex in film for the same reason I dislike the use of gratuitous use of profanity in comedy or dialogue. It's bad art. It's not that I'm offended by sex or foul language, it's just a cheap way to get your audience's attention, or to get a laugh. But sometimes it really helps the story or the gag, and then I get very upset when it's censored. And those people who feel they have the right to decide where to make that distinction for my benefit really piss me off. I buy the ticket, I will decide.

The same can be said for violence. "Clockwork Orange" was a brutally violent and disturbing film, and sexually explicit to the same degree. But without that violence and sex it would not have made any sense, and it would have been a very poor movie. It HAD to be there.

Make it out for a hundred and I'll do it again.