For those of you who only "heard about" Bowling for Columbine. You have no excuse now. It's out for rental or purchase.

..."From my cold dead hands!"... :kapow:

I enjoyed watching it, however I really think that it was very bad with the stories/examples and conclusions. In a free country with over 290 million people, then you can always find extremes (both people and situations). But I guess if you need to sell movies today, then you got to go extreme and being one-sided.

IMHO Michael Moore is overated (being opposite, and just picking the easy battles is not hard), but he is fun to watch - just like Bill O'Reilly from Fox News.

... and the libertarian right remain predictably silent. :biglaugh:

Is silence what you predict? You must not spend enough time here EC.

I think eveyone stance on Moore is clear.... Rolo sums up my option very well. Moore is a propagandist - but its cleaver and cute.

Mike, clever and cute editing go a long way in the media. Whether it be TV programs, movies, documentaries, and most importantly... the news.

B for C relies heavily on clever editing I'll admit. But it's underlying message depicts a real gun issue based on factual numbers.

A propagandist? Moore is no Ilya Ehrenburg, or Josef Goebbels. He's more of a whistle blower.

EC - please don't get me started on the lying piece of human offal Michael Moore
we all know BfC is satire and Moore unjustly and undeservedly accepted an Oscar for his satire (it's not a documentary)

Just in case you forgot

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

and John Fund of the Wall Street Journal exposed Moore for what he is (sorry I can't find the link to the article right now)

The gun issue is quite simple. Most places in the US do not have problems with guns.

This is what pisses me off with all these gun grabbers. And make no mistake, their self proclaimed goal is the removal of all gun ownership rights (reasoning to be debated later I'm sure).

Now, there is a simple solution to all of this. Keep the Federal Gov't out of it! PERIOD!

If gun violence is a problem in your city and the people of that city or state think that gun control will solve the problem, then pass the law at that level.

Why should law abiding folks like me, who live in an area where everyone has a gun yet there is little to no gun crimes, have to be subject to a Federal law?

Moore Exposed

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestcont...h_20030425.html
"the Oscar SHOULD be revoked for another very simple reason: It wasn't a documentary; it was a fairy tale.
Academy Rule 12.1 requires that films in this category be "non-fiction." Moore broke this rule over and over again by inventing facts, fabricating events and staging scenes.
Indeed, even the title of Moore's "documentary" is based on a falsehood, as explained by Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund.
"It refers to the bowling class that the Columbine killers supposedly took the morning they committed the murders," writes Fund. "The only problem is that they actually cut the class."
National Review Online columnist Dave Kopel rips apart, point-by-point, "Bowling for Columbine" and contends that "no artist has ever demonstrated the film elite's hyper-sensitive preference for political correctness over truth as thoroughly and as well as has Michael Moore." "



http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110003233
"Mr. Moore is naturally a big hit among the French. The jury at the Cannes Film Festival created a special, one-time only award to honor his film and then gave it a 13-minute standing ovation. "Not since Gore Vidal and Norman Mailer have we seen such a successful export of anti-Americanism," observes Andrew Sullivan in London's Sunday Times. "

Vick, Michael Moore is an idiot. I'll give him credit for exploiting other idiots for financial gain, but that's where it stops.

I can't believe that some people are comfortable aligning themselves with Moore's thinking.

Wig - agreed

Moore, if nothing else showed that Snake Oil salesmen can still prosper and just how gullible and ready to be lead some people are

Well that and Moore is a scumbucket that will stop at nothing (including exploiting and lying about tragedy) to become infamous

Random thoughts on this topic. I haven't seen this film; probably never will. I think that the hoopla surrounding Moore's film has probably ruined any chance I could give it a fair viewing.

I'm neither anti-gun nor an idiot. Call me a former civil disobedient who has read some Marx, but I don't believe the 2nd Ammendment guarantees anyones right to rocket-propelled grenades for sporting purposes any more than I believe that we should try to collect all the guns.

I'm inherently distrustful of a film with such a blatant preordained bias; unlike some people - Fox News viewers come to mind immediately - I don't want information chopped up, processed, and spoon-fed to me in palatable bite-sized pieces. Not having seen the film, I can't make a fair judgement - but from what I have read about it, both pro and con, makes its claims to documentary status dubious at best.

At the same time I NOW have a certain temptation to see it. When I start hearing the usual suspects tossing around the usual bullshit ("blah blah blah anti-Americanism blah blah blah"), it makes me think there might be more to it. After all, there were folks who tossed THAT criticism around about Gary Fucking Cooper in that noted piece of Marxist cinema, "High Noon."

Just an observation ... some of the same people screaming so shrilly about the falsehood of the title (since they skipped the class that morning) are the very same folks who don't seem to object to the President of the United States crossing his fingers and saying "I didn't say it was true ... I said that the British say it." So when a lot of people find their panties in a knot and start screaming, they're not screaming because it's biased. They're screaming because it has a bias opposing their own.



Last edited by PornoDoggy at Aug 25 2003, 09:19 AM

:okthumb:

my feelings EXACTLY!

:okthumb:

my feelings EXACTLY![/b][/quote]


Yeah this pretty much sums it up! haha

PD - it's really is a lot more than just the title of the satire - that's just a quick and obvious example

Moore should be stripped of the Oscar - for too many reasons to even get into

Yeah, it's nice to sum it up in a sentence or two. :awinky:

I'll gladly take his Oscar, shove it up his fat sweaty ass, and buy him a one-way plane ticket to France where they love him and his bullshit.
How's that sum it up? :P

Would you turn the Oscar sideways before shoving?

Whoa whoa whoa,

So if someone represents the minority he's a bullshit artist and a fat fuck?

Let's travel back in time and look at Michael Moore's first films, Roger and Me and The Big One. This was before the notoriety and the fame. His style of journalism has not changed since he began, albeit financial success and mainstream acclaim he's never changed. His earlier movies are along the same lines. Is he finding the lowest common folk in his films? Hell yeah, that's the point of social commentary, who speaks for the little man anymore? Michael Moore grew up in the shitty parts of Flint, which make the ghetto parts of Detroit look hospitable; I live here don't bother debating me on this. Has he grown more and more cynical, yes, however his reactionist style of journalism has not wavered. So fault him for whatever you will but he hasn't changed his style since the days of Roger and Me, this has always been his style, financial motivations apart.
Who else attacks the mainstream so aggressively and gets away with it?

Is he a radical who is finally getting his point across? Yes probably, who else could embody so well how easy it is to get a gun in Michigan, open a CD get a rifle. Do I agree with everything he says, hell no, I'm a card carrying member of the NRA, as is a large % of the population.

You don't have to agree with a person 100% to love that they challenge everything our fore fathers set forth for us, in any other county he would have been assassinated years ago.

So in conclusion, though I don't believe in all his modus operandi behind exposing the system, I do believe he knows enough about it to get it to work for him.

One other point before I depart:

What are the qualifications for receiving the Oscar?

Isnt' it advancements in film and popular culture? Or is the Oscar now based on how well you like the points of view of the filmmaker.

Seems there's quite a few filmmakers who've pissed off Hollywood lately, do we stip them of their Oscars.

This is still the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. Support independant fimmakers.

Toolz, he deliberately lied, set up fake situations and exploited them, made up his "factual percentages" and took things well out of context to make them suit his "facts" in that film.

I don't care if he's a minority or speaking up for a minority - I care that his film is a steaming pile of bullshit and the majority of people who watch it embrace it as non-fictional truth.
And then to further that incorrect notion, the fucktards in Hollywood gave him a non-fiction AWARD for that piece of trash.

Does he come out and openly say it's not a true documentary? No - only when he's pressed really hard about it, and then he side-steps and says that he's a comedian and if people don't bother to check that first, then it's their fault that they get swayed by his illogical reasoning. Yet he accepts an Oscar for it and accepts speaking engagements and spots on tv shows as the champion of the anti-gun movement... when he's nothing more than a comedian who lied and made things up and is continuing the farce.

Vick - but of course. Without lube, even. :gbounce:

Carrie,

Back thine own bullshit truck up, what was an example of bullshit and outright lies in his film?

And hey don't throw me on the anti-gun side, I own 11 of my own so start a better argument than that.

Gladly :)
Please read:
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

I'm not throwing you on the anti-gun side, I'm throwing *him* on the anti-gun side.
The anti-gun folks have made him their poster boy and he's had numerous speaking engagements and talk show appearances based on his anti-gun stance.

How does his anti-fact based reporting differ any from the reporting throw out by Fox News?

If you're gonna bullshit, don't do it 100% do it 150% at least then it's obvious :)

Carrie, if you want to piss all over me on on Moore, ICQ is 92440098 :)

Have YOU seen the film?

Or are you merely parrotting what you have read on oh-so-many right wing websites and pronounced daily on right wing AM radio stations?

Saddam never had that kind of problem with filmmakers, you know. There are times I think some of the more rabid little right-wingers were glad to destroy his regime out of jealousy. No annoying Congress, no anti-Iraqi democrats, a press so docile it makes Fox news look like a critic of the Administration ... a fucking pipedream for some folks.

Stick the Oscar up his ass? What would you stick up Bush's ass? Last time I checked, the lies in Moore's film ain't got nobody killed yet.

Tell you what ... why don't you spend the money you would pay to send Moore to France and buy YOURSELF a ticket to some place on the planet that is more to your liking. North Korea comes to mind.

Ah, one of the great benefits of our FREE country, we're still allowed to say whatever we think however unpopular. Kudos to Moore for moving SO far away from the norm he offends most.

Where is all the complaining about the religous right spouting their holes? Ah that's right they don't have fancy editing to get them an Oscar, at least he's not blaming 9/11 on Satan.

Can't wait for Moore's next film, Fahrenheit 9/11, all about how GWB has pissed off OBL for the last 20 years and finally felt his reprecussions, of course that will be entirely fictional and merely fancy editing to get tell the story here wants us to hear *cough* mainstream media.





Last edited by Toolz at Aug 26 2003, 02:11 AM

The problem with this debate is that it does not even begin to address the real issue involving guns...

Do guns cause people to commit violent crimes / deaths?
Is it possible to pass laws that will actually eliminate gun violence?
Is making the possession of guns illegal going to be any more likely to Succeed than criminalizing illicit drugs?
Is it fair to have more gun control laws at the Federal level when it is clear That gun violence in Ellijay GA is not a problem, but in DC it is?

And where the implications of the gun control movement really get critical... is the gun control crowd really about control or are they about eliminating all guns?

1. No, violent people could use any weapon, knives, bats, etc do we outlaw everything that COULD be a weapon? I have a heavy computer speaker here I could beat someone to death with if I had to.

2. Hasn't worked yet

3. Probably not

4. Exactly, so the farmers and ranchers suffer because inner city probs with guns continue to rise, do you need something like this for the inner city? With an accurate range of 500 yards I highly doubt it, but why restrict my right to own it on my farm?

http://www.tooley.us/ar15.jpg

Toolz,

This is my only point in this debate. I think alot of problems could be solved if as a country we looked to the States or local gov't for these laws and not the Federal gov't where it is too broad.

I may be wrong, but I bet any state or local gov't that passed severe gun control laws would find that gun crime goes up. In fact, I think this is already the case in DC.

When a criminal is looking to perpetrate a crime (with or without a gun), he is more likely to do it in a place where he does not think there are going to be victims with the means defend themselves.

Yes ... there are SOME people out there who have as their agenda eliminating all guns.

There are also some people out there who have as their agenda eliminating all restrictions on the types of firearms private citizens can own.

Once again - there are an awful lot of people who hold positions in between the idiocy of the two extremes.

Ellijay, GA - Washington, DC
Total Distance: 627.87 miles
Total Estimated Driving Time: 10 hours, 44 minutes

I don't know what to think about that one, Wig - I've been reading your posts as long as I've read Oprano and I know for a fact you are not stupid.

Agreed. It comes down to which extreme you believe is the largest threat.

Is it politicians who are trying to give the public a"right to rocket-propelled grenades"? Yes, the ones in the hip pocket of the NRA (just beating you to it). ;-))

Or, is it the politicians who would be more than willing to eliminate hand guns for instance. I don't think it is unreasonble to conclude that Hillary, Schumer, Kennedy, Feinstein, etc. would support an all out ban if the political winds were behind them (even if it was incremental).

The fact is, we have laws prohibiting the possession of grenades, explosives, automatic weapons, etc. and I see no politicians taking issue with it.

And to re-emphasize. I am not trying to change anyones mind regarding how they personally feel about guns. I support their decision to live somewhere that guns are totally illegal if that makes them feel safe.

I just wish that they would have the same respect for me and 80 million other Americans who do not want to lose the right because of a FEDERAL law.


Please explain as I have no idea what your point is.

Broken record time
I've said it before and I'll say it again

Toolz - the reason the Oscar should be taken back from Moore is BfC is SATIRE it is not a documentary. The Oscar was awarded from a documentary

As for the issue of guns, I think Americans should have more guns!!!
In fact large cities should be walled in and guns should be given to all inner city dwellers and let them shoot each other. Call me in 10 years to send in clean up squads

Actually ownership of firearms helped America liberate it's self from England and I know these are different times but .... you go with who brought you to the dance

For all we know private ownership of firearms may save America again :salute:

and for the record I don't own any firearms and haven't shot a gun in over 20 years

I can't claim to know the stands of Clinton, Schumer, Kennedy, Feinstein, et al, regarding gun control. I do know that I think your assumption that they wish to pry the guns from your hands is based on 9 parts rhetorical paranoia for every one part factual evidence.

If you really mean it when you say then I would suggest you have your vision checked immediately. Every single piece of gun control legislation is under constant attack by the NRA and like shills for the gun manufacturers. While my use of an RPG as an example was admitedly absurd, it's a minor step down to clips for fully automatic weapons - and the fight over maintaining restrictions on those things is very public.

Your claim that you don't understand what the significance of my posting the distance between Burbia, GA and Washington DC is suprising. Guns you've got tucked away in your bedroom or your bunker are the lifeblood of theives who cart them anywhere in the country and sell them on the black market. Guns purchased legally at Bubba's guns and books in Podunk, AR (every purchase includes a free copy of The Turner Diaries!) end up in robberies in California, murders in Maine, and very possibly soon to an alQaida cell in ????.

So while the attempts to put a local spin on the question of gun control makes sense in a nostalgic sort of way, considering that Madawaska, Maine to San Ysidro, California is a couple of days by car, it just don't make no sense.

Okay, so you can know the NRA's intentions, but I cannot reach a conclusion on Fienstein, et al??

I clearly stated that IMO the largest threat is from the incremental steps of those that would rather see guns eliminated (or severely limited) versus those that attack this type of proposed legislation.

We all know there is legislation being introduced to place more laws on guns. We all know there are many existing laws for guns. Please show me some legislation that is being introduced that would deregulate automatic weapons, explosives, RPG's and on up to the rest of your exaggerations.

It occurs to me that you are more paranoid than I am.

Let me get this straight. The black market for guns is formed primarily of weapons stolen from law abiding citizens located in Burbia by criminals who then use them or sell them to be used in robberies and murders and possibly Al Qaida??

Yup, that makes sense... a thief, being the intelligent and coy fellow that he is, makes his way 674 miles to Burbia, GA to steal a gun, so he can go back to DC and sell it to someone in LA who will rob someone else, who will then sell the gun to someone in Maine who will murder someone before selling it to an Al Quaide operative.

Not only are you more paranoid than I am, you are much more fanciful.

Haven't you read the Ellijay paper? Mass quantities of our guns are being stolen every day! :blink:

Shoot - I don't even recall hearing about then being stolen when I LIVED in the burbs. :unsure:

Haven't you read the Ellijay paper? Mass quantities of our guns are being stolen every day! :blink:

Shoot - I don't even recall hearing about then being stolen when I LIVED in the burbs. :unsure:[/b][/quote]
Peaches,

Pretty far-fetched theory, huh?

Of course, the real question is still not answered.... which is, will eliminating the traffic of weapons from Bubba to the criminal, by taking away Bubba's guns, actually eliminate the black market for guns altogether and hence have a positive affect on gun crime?

If the answer to this is no, then PD's reasoning is moot anyhow. All it would accomplish is to penalize people like you and me.

I guess people who are blinded by their ideology don't care. :(

I will not express any opinion on this subject, however:

http://www.chronicle-tribune.com/news/stor...ews/704355.html

" Indiana ranks 19th in the nation in the number of reported gun thefts, with more than 48,000 gun thefts "

So only the top 20 states would account for probably more than a million stolen guns per year.

That, my friends, is alot of guns.

Alex

"Indiana ranks 19th in the nation in the number of reported gun thefts, with more than 48,000 gun thefts -- an average of about 22 guns per 1,000 households -- reported to police around the state in the last decade, according to a report by the Washington-based Americans for Gun Safety Foundation.

B)

hell, down here, IF you dont have a least one bird gun, one deer rifle, one snake gun, maybe a couple handguns for target shooting and at least one bow your not shit :ph34r:


oh, I have none of the above

An opinion from someone not giving an opinion that was a misleading opinion all along.

How surprising. :yowsa:

Look, numbernuts ... the NRA's stand on gun issues is a matter of public record. As recently as this spring they were quite vocal in their opposition to an extension on the ban of certain kinds of weapons and clips (and I'll concede the hairsplitting point that this is more evidence of laws against weapons). If you would like to do a compare and contrast to the public records of the NRA and like minded folks as compared to the public record of the politicians you mentioned, you would have to spin pretty fucking hard to back up your assumptions.

I did not say that gangs of criminals make their way from urban areas to the suburbs specifically to steal guns in most cases, and anyone with a 5th grade reading comprehension level would understand that. While you may think you are clever in implying that thieves are stupid, they quite often are just the opposite. Have you done any reading at all on the black and gray markets for weapons?

Is this the great libertarian mind at work? Legal restrictions on weapons ownership will not stop all weapons crimes, therefore restrictions on weapons ownership are absurd. It follows logically that restrictions on larceny will not stop all larceny; restrictions on homicide will not stop all homicides; restrictions on the abuse of children will not stop all abuse of children.

Let's just eliminate all the laws. :wnw:



Last edited by PornoDoggy at Aug 26 2003, 02:40 PM

By the way... Carrie and whoever else showed this URL:
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

This page is nothing more than an extension of opinions expressed in this thread. Any one of us could have written it.


I'm surprised at the level of defensivness that B for C creates among those who feel it's their right or whatever to arm themselves.
Satire? No, I don't believe that this film is a satire. The numbers and stats given in the movie are real. Black is black. White is white.

Guns kill people, people kill people... whatever. People with guns kill other people. The more guns that are available, the more people who will be killed by them. And since many (too many) Americans figure they need to arm themselves against their neighbour, people will continue to needlessly die at the hands of people who own handguns and automatic military weaponry (for sport only!).

And Alex... now that I have lured you back to Oprano, do you mind answering the question I already posed?

Do you believe eliminating weapons transfers from Bubba to the criminal (whether they are stolen or sold) will actually eliminate the black market for guns altogether and hence have a positive affect on gun crime?

And further, in your opinion, will the criminalization of all guns in a country with 300 million guns, actually prevent gun crime?

Hey fella, you are the one with the fanciful stories.

I am not defending what the NRA does or does not do. My point, which has been pretty clear, is that gun control does nothing to prevent gun crime. Criminalizing guns will have no better affect on gun crime than criminalizing drugs have had on drug use.

All it does it create more of a black market than already exists.

Criminals don't care about gun laws. That's why they are called criminals.

Chris, you are not much of a critical thinker are you?

Show me where I said "restrictions on weapons ownership are absurd."

I have ackowledged the existing laws and have offered the opinion that creating more will not help curtail the problem. I have not offered support to repealing any laws and have even stated that I respect anyones decision to live in a jurisdiction that has outlawed all guns.

I have commented on the creation of more laws at the federal level and how it will unfairly affect me personally.

That is it. Put that in your 50 year old pipe and smoke it until your next protest. :nyanya:

I admit it... I am nuts about numbers. :D

You do mean you are not anti-gun nor pro-gun, right?

Yeah, you are a model of objectivity and moderation.