:1orglaugh

Tru Dat Yo.

jesus christ, this is GFY not pre-school, mom isn't going to be here to hold your fucking hand get over it dipshit.

You have got to be one of the biggest idots I have ever had the displeasure of meeting here.


What the hell did that post have to do with anything.

hey.. ease up, i've lost weight recently..

:1orglaugh

Ok now that was actually pretty funny.

Dude that film has been out for ages. Why start a fuss now?

I can't fucking believe this... It appears all of you... ALL OF YOU, did not even acknowledge what this movie is truely about. The meaning seemed obvious, but all of you keep talking about the guns, and the crime, and walking into doors in Canada. That's all besides the point. The movie was about NONE OF THESE THINGS.

It was about VIOLENCE IN THE MEDIA. Fucking jesus christ, I can't understand how it could be more obvious.

And the point is brilliant. If any of you have taken any psychology classes you will know this movie is right fucking on. Violence in the media has a HUGE impact on behavior of society. Entire CIVILIZATIONS have erupted in crime, corruption, and murder all because of what people started seeing on television. It really is sad, and it's also sad everyone mistakes the movie as being against guns.

madcap...you are a true freaking idiot. how old are you, 12? Charlie Heston didn't kill the girl...but he has held NRA rallys in 2 cities where there were columbine-like shootings a couple days before. If the movie is rated R, ya gotta be 18. :)

Not all of us :)

pretty fucked up :(

The movie IS VIOLENCE IN THE MEDIA man. I dont think it was about gus or crime or anything. My posts were more to the point of him being a wacko and exploiting the people involved to make his point thats all.

WHAT??????

By showing him that picture he was incinuating that he or his organization had something to do with it. Otherwise what was the point of talking to him??

Michael Moore sure is a popular guy :P

mike just holds a mirror up to society and shows us all what is really happening.. gee, shock.. horror.. there's some fucked up shit out there! TONS of violence and hypocricy! His message can be confusing for a lot of people but it is consistant and if you really listen to a lot of what he has to say carefully, and chew on it for a while.. you'll realise that it actually is the aweful truth that not many like to hear.. a reason why many reject it immediately. his methods may shock some people, but the truth he uncovers is that much more shocking and would never see the light of day that it does if milder methods were used. :2 cents:

I hat the guy, but I do think he is smart.
I mean it is so easy to score against Bush and the American weapon Policy. He took a very easy way to become popular. I think he is one of the most irritating persons I have ever seen.

I agree to a point man but its not like we dont know what is hapening in the world or in our own cities. I know it is there and happens every day. I do feel sorry for anyone who is blind to the fact that things like this do happen everyday in every city in this country because i know they are out there and dont have a clue.

I just saw this on TV

after all the blahblahblah about it, it does seem most missed the point.

It really wasn't an anti-gun piece. You think it will be at first..
and maybe some pro-gun people just tuned out or turned it off..
but it slowly changes course.

It's about all the fear being sold to us. By the government who wants your support ... by the media who want the ratings ... And it's about how all that fearmongering results in an exagerated sense of danger.

Kindof a "no wonder why americans have their finger on the trigger"

He goes to Canada to try to prove that point. Lots of guns there.
But they aren't using them on eachother with the frequency that we are.
Why? He thinks it's because they feel safer.

He didn't harrass Charlton Heston for owning a gun.
He (MM) asked if he (CH) had ever been the victim of a crime.
CH said no. So MM asked why he needs a loaded gun laying around.
Why not at least take out the bullets?
again, it's this "constant imminent threat" theme.

The only thing he did chastize the NRA about was the fact that they always seem to show up after tragedys, while families are still grieving, to rally the troops to pre-empt any gun control movement. It's politicising death, and grossly insensitive.

Im not pro gun and never once said that i was here and i got the point of the movie.

My point about the heston thing was the way he went about telling him look at this picture. Weather he was rallying or not. He was not responsible for it and he has his views about freedom to own guns. Do you think there were not a buch of people at the same place saying "see this is why we should ban guns". That is most likely why he was there. Is it any less insensitive for the other side to push thier views on people after a siuation like that???

This was melodrama. Pure theatre. BUT i think the premise was he wanted CH to see that, while he's playing politics, there are real people going through pain and maybe he should give it a rest until the dead are buried..


Of course that is why he is there. That's the fucked up part. He's not fighting an anti-gun lobby. He's fighting the victims. He hears about a tragedy, and rushes into town to hold a pre-emptive rally, just incase some dead kids parent voices concern. Everyone knows the NRAs agenda. They're not saying anything new. Yes, they have the right to express it. But it's the total lack of tactfulness/respect they have, going into that sort of a situation to make their arguements that people find offensive. It's cheerleading at a funeral. It would be like going to NYC days after 9-11, and giving a speech about the folly of american imperialism. Even if your points are valid, it's just the wrong time and place.

the nra? from what i remember, the sessions after columbine were a planned annual thing. it wasn't that they were rushing into town to celebrate gun ownership in the wake of a mishap to capitalize on it...

I only saw this once and I didnt take notes :2 cents:
but even if that NRA rally was planned, it should have been cancelled/postponed. You don't go into town to celebrate guns immediately after a shooting rampage. IIRC even the city officials and everyone was pleading with them to postpone, and Heston cockily showed the letter and laughed.

MARILYN MANSON postponed his shows! lol

And the "already planned" excuse does not apply to the incident we were discussing re: the 6 year old girl who was killed by a boy her age. That tiny town was a shithole noone cared about. There was no reason for Heston to go there until after it got national attention for this death.

The NRA could have just as easily put a statement on their website.
No reason to roll into town with the "cold dead hands" routine.

btw - the other half of this piece was more fucked up IMO
re: the gov't forcing this girls only parent to leave her behind.

This is true...

despite the efforts of some in this thread who wish to rewrite history.

He exposed a lot of stuff. I think its fascinating to watch corpies sqirm when he comes knocking on their door.

:1orglaugh

The NRA did not run to MI after that incident.

Heston was not in Flint, MI until over a year and a half after that shooting appearing at a Bush capaign rally.

He was not there 48 hours later as the movie would have you believe.

Michael Moore is one the people that make me think that the US of A are not totally a fucked up country :thumbsup

If that's true, then I agree MM is reaching pretty far for this attack.
Seems silly to force this thing, when the exchange was in itself a total tangent from the main focus of the documentary. :shrug:
But I don't care enough to research if MM is presenting the story honestly, or if some stranger on a forum is presenting the story honestly.

btw - you're 4 posts from being 1337 :winkwink:

i heard the same, i think broke is correct.

i think part of the conflict of the film is with some of the "stretches" that moore apparently makes, then again i'm just spewing ideas.

:thumbsup Been watching documentaries for many, many years and Michael Moore's for probably a good ten years, the first documentary I remember was "Roger and Me" regarding the depression in Flint, MI. The next I actually remember was his documentary of finding his 70 something mother had been shot by an unknown intruder. His documenntaries do make you thinkl With Bowling for Columbine there were a lot of good points ~ regarding the pic of the child on Heston's property, what stood out more to me in that segment was the following of the 6-year old boy's (the child who killed the little gilr) mother as she rode a bus to work in a rich neighborhood leaving her son to others. The funniest thing and what truly stood out was the South Park animation of the history of the US! That was so friggin funny!! Had no clue the South Park creators were from Columbin as well! His new movie "Dude, Where's My Country?" I have not yet seen but sure look forward to! Guns's are truly the least of our problems! He has clip where Eddie Murphy ( at least I think that's who it was, memory failing me here!) gives a stand up about guns don't kill people, bullets do! and let's make bullets cost $100,000 or something and that will slow the murder rate in this country. He compares the US to several other countires,not just Canada. All in all it is a really good look at how comfortable some are in the world and how many others are never exposed to the "American Dream". It's a good documentary for a thinking mind~
Peace and Love, LadyHarley

i like michael moore...without people like him, who find a way to profit while enlightening people the world would be a much darker place.


Freedom to bear an ak-47 should be the last of your concerns...how about your electoral system? i mean, do you really believe in it? I would be asking a lot more questions then where the fuck are my guns if i was living down south.:2 cents:

what he said in the movie is kinda beside the point. Hes makeing a statement about the state the american society is in. Choose to beleave what you will. All i can say is come live in canada for about 2 years and you will see the diffrence in violence.

dont hate the player hate the game:1orglaugh :Graucho

kewl. ;)

I was wrong on the timeframe -- it was 8 months. But it was a Bush rally not an NRA rally.

Actually -- here's the image he cuts to on the NRA website that makes people link that rally with the girls death and the 48 hour timeframe:

http://www.taboothumbs.com/assets/im...hoursafter.gif

Amazing what you can see in MM films when you have the time.

:)

yikes! :warning

it's true..i know a bunch of people in the states who have no business owning automatic machine guns...if you guys knew them, you'd ask yourself why the hell they have them as well.


and they are tame compared to some of the dudes walking the street with a gun under their jacket

well, if they went through all the trouble to get a class 3 federal firearms license, i'm not too concerned about them owning them.

there's been what, 2 incidents in the last 70 years or so involving a violent crime and a legally owned fully automatic firearm.

ak-47's aren't all class 3 firearms, there is such a thing as a semiautomatic ak47.

"makeshift bed in the shabby crackhouse" "passing parade of strangers" "finds a stolen pistol" ... lol ... lots of questionable presentation on both sides IMO.

and what's the focus of this article?
Clinton was wanting safety locks and licensing.. and the NRA doesn't? :helpme

Pathetic when positions become so polarized that you're afraid to give even an inch of common sense. Reminds me of guys in wartime trenches killing eachother back and forth over a few feet of dirt.

At one time, I'm sure all are legally owned. Then they get passed on and/or stolen. You can't dismiss these weapons just bc of ownership issues. They should never be in distribution in the first place.

I'm cool with gun ownership for home defense or hunting.
But there's no good reason for my neighbour to own a weapon capable of killing dozens of people per minute.

i kinda liked bowling for columbine

although i will agree that its liberal propaganda

hahaha, don't worry, he won't do it where you live it, he knows better..

that again proves his point

this has been posted before I think, but people just ignored it. I'll repost: http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/