My Take On "Bowling"

Burner · 09-27-2003, 04:07 PM

I'm in a weird position on this issue: I'm generally pretty liberal, but I'm against gun control. I stopped being for it when Reagan got into office actually, because it occurred to me that if he and his bosses in the Moral Majority had guns, it behooved me to have one also! Besides which, I'm an absolutist when it comes to the Bill of Rights, and I've never been able to buy the argument that in the middle of a bunch of clearly defined individual rights, they stuck in a provision for the National Guard. And finally, if there wasn't any other reason to be against gun control, there's the fact that it CANNOT work. The genie is out of the bottle on this one, I don't think there are even credible estimates of how many guns there are in the US and you'll never do anything more than get a few of them. It's one of the only things more hopeless than the War On Drugs, because at least with drugs you keep needing more of them, one gun can last your whole life.

Having said that, I thought "Bowling For Columbine" was a great movie. Moore certainly has a viewpoint that he's pushing, and a couple of places I thought weren't exactly fair(the most glaring being the "From my cold dead hands" bit right after the crying parents). But then, I was a member of the NRA for a year and then quit because I got tired of their incessant liberal bashing, not to mention the fact that the 2nd Ammendment seemed to be the only one they were interested in protecting. I have a hard time feeling real sorry for Chuck and co., especially since they were very quick to blame the whole thing on "cultural" influences.

I also think most of the other complaints about how the movie is false seem pretty nit-picky to me. Anybody who thinks that the Bush campaign wasn't behind the Willie Horton ad, whether they had their surrogates do it or not, wasn't paying attention in 88. And while it doesn't say that the B-52 bombed innocent civillians on the plaque, they did in fact drop bombs and there's no way they only hit combatants. Moore may well be spinning things his way, but he's hardly the only one, as you can tell if you watch Fox News for about 5 minutes. And finally, for those who attack Moore for not mentioning that Heston has Alzheimer's, he didn't announce that until well after the movie was made, and he doesn't seem to be significantly impaired in the interview.

What I find interesting is that I think Moore wanted the movie to be much more anti-gun than it is. From what I've read, he started researching it and finding out things like the fact that Canada has as many guns and fewer murders and was surprised to hear it. It seems to me that he adjusted his focus after that, even if he does still think that we need more gun control. He may put his own spin on things, but it seems to me that this was a pretty honest thing to do. In the end, the movie is more about raising questions than it is about giving easy answers, and that's a rare thing nowadays.

The movie is really a lot less about guns than it is about how we live in fear of things that probably won't ever affect us. I live near Greensboro NC and I don't know how many reports I've seen on local news about what will happen if terrorists attack us. Yeah right, I'm sure Osama's plotting the destruction of Greensboro right now. As NC goes it's a good size city, but I can't really see it as a major target when you have DC to the north and Atlanta to the south. But you can bet that a lot of people tuned into those reports to find out if the police were prepared to repel hordes of terrorists. I'm sure it's good for their ratings, but it's not what I'd call responsible journalism. To me this angle was the most important part of the movie, not the potshots Moore takes at an organization that is EXTREMELY capable of defending itself.

In short, the movie has its good and bad points, but I think that to just dismiss it out of hand is a mistake. Even people who despise it enough to put up web sites about it have said that Moore has some good points about media-induced fear and the interesting question of why we're so much more violent than others. I'd encourage people to watch it and seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.

Grojlach · 09-29-2003, 05:12 PM

Even though it might have been more in its place in this topic, well said, Burner! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Burner · 09-30-2003, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grojlach:
Even though it might have been more in its place in this topic, well said, Burner! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Well there's my first newbie mistake! Thanks for the tip and the kind words.

Burner

john · 10-01-2003, 05:50 PM

Burner,If you liked the movie read " Stupid White Men" a really good book! Explains the way Bush stole the election etc,and a few good stories about his "cabinet".

Burner · 10-02-2003, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by john:
Burner,If you liked the movie read " Stupid White Men" a really good book! Explains the way Bush stole the election etc,and a few good stories about his "cabinet".

I'm hoping to get it for Christmas or something. If you liked that, you should check out Franken's book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them". I read bits and pieces of it when a friend of mine bought it during a visit, and it was great! Chock full of information, and alternately hilarious and infuriating. The section on Ann(thrax) Coulter alone is worth the price.

Burner

john · 10-02-2003, 07:32 PM

Thanx for info I'll check out the local bookstore tonight,maybe even find a used one!

09-27-2003, 04:07 PM	#1
Burner Elite Waterdeep Guard Join Date: September 25, 2003 Location: NC Age: 61 Posts: 14	I'm in a weird position on this issue: I'm generally pretty liberal, but I'm against gun control. I stopped being for it when Reagan got into office actually, because it occurred to me that if he and his bosses in the Moral Majority had guns, it behooved me to have one also! Besides which, I'm an absolutist when it comes to the Bill of Rights, and I've never been able to buy the argument that in the middle of a bunch of clearly defined individual rights, they stuck in a provision for the National Guard. And finally, if there wasn't any other reason to be against gun control, there's the fact that it CANNOT work. The genie is out of the bottle on this one, I don't think there are even credible estimates of how many guns there are in the US and you'll never do anything more than get a few of them. It's one of the only things more hopeless than the War On Drugs, because at least with drugs you keep needing more of them, one gun can last your whole life. Having said that, I thought "Bowling For Columbine" was a great movie. Moore certainly has a viewpoint that he's pushing, and a couple of places I thought weren't exactly fair(the most glaring being the "From my cold dead hands" bit right after the crying parents). But then, I was a member of the NRA for a year and then quit because I got tired of their incessant liberal bashing, not to mention the fact that the 2nd Ammendment seemed to be the only one they were interested in protecting. I have a hard time feeling real sorry for Chuck and co., especially since they were very quick to blame the whole thing on "cultural" influences. I also think most of the other complaints about how the movie is false seem pretty nit-picky to me. Anybody who thinks that the Bush campaign wasn't behind the Willie Horton ad, whether they had their surrogates do it or not, wasn't paying attention in 88. And while it doesn't say that the B-52 bombed innocent civillians on the plaque, they did in fact drop bombs and there's no way they only hit combatants. Moore may well be spinning things his way, but he's hardly the only one, as you can tell if you watch Fox News for about 5 minutes. And finally, for those who attack Moore for not mentioning that Heston has Alzheimer's, he didn't announce that until well after the movie was made, and he doesn't seem to be significantly impaired in the interview. What I find interesting is that I think Moore wanted the movie to be much more anti-gun than it is. From what I've read, he started researching it and finding out things like the fact that Canada has as many guns and fewer murders and was surprised to hear it. It seems to me that he adjusted his focus after that, even if he does still think that we need more gun control. He may put his own spin on things, but it seems to me that this was a pretty honest thing to do. In the end, the movie is more about raising questions than it is about giving easy answers, and that's a rare thing nowadays. The movie is really a lot less about guns than it is about how we live in fear of things that probably won't ever affect us. I live near Greensboro NC and I don't know how many reports I've seen on local news about what will happen if terrorists attack us. Yeah right, I'm sure Osama's plotting the destruction of Greensboro right now. As NC goes it's a good size city, but I can't really see it as a major target when you have DC to the north and Atlanta to the south. But you can bet that a lot of people tuned into those reports to find out if the police were prepared to repel hordes of terrorists. I'm sure it's good for their ratings, but it's not what I'd call responsible journalism. To me this angle was the most important part of the movie, not the potshots Moore takes at an organization that is EXTREMELY capable of defending itself. In short, the movie has its good and bad points, but I think that to just dismiss it out of hand is a mistake. Even people who despise it enough to put up web sites about it have said that Moore has some good points about media-induced fear and the interesting question of why we're so much more violent than others. I'd encourage people to watch it and seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. __________________ <br />Honesty is my only excuse.

10-01-2003, 05:50 PM	#4
john Drizzt Do'Urden Join Date: October 6, 2001 Location: central coast of Ca. Age: 78 Posts: 653	Burner,If you liked the movie read " Stupid White Men" a really good book! Explains the way Bush stole the election etc,and a few good stories about his "cabinet". __________________ John

10-02-2003, 07:32 PM	#6
john Drizzt Do'Urden Join Date: October 6, 2001 Location: central coast of Ca. Age: 78 Posts: 653	Thanx for info I'll check out the local bookstore tonight,maybe even find a used one! __________________ John

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
8 year old "raped" and "buried alive" in FLORIDA ....	a_decent_1	General Discussion	38	05-29-2005 03:46 PM
Searching for "Star Blazers" aka "Uchuu Senchen Yamato," or "Space Battleship Yamato"	Skydracgrrl	Entertainment (Movies, TV Shows and Books/Comics)	3	12-17-2004 01:38 PM
Searching for "Star Blazers" aka "Uchuu Senchen Yamato," or "Space Battleship Yamato"	Skydracgrrl	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	0	12-02-2004 09:27 PM
Who are the "neocons" behind America's "empire building" and what do they stand for?	Chewbacca	General Discussion	20	08-27-2003 10:05 PM
status on "pool of twilight" & "EOB4, xanathar's revenge"?	manikus	Dungeon Craft - RPG Game Maker	0	05-03-2003 07:28 PM

09-29-2003, 05:12 PM	#2
Grojlach Zartan Join Date: May 2, 2001 Location: Ulpia Noviomagus Batavorum Age: 44 Posts: 5,281	Even though it might have been more in its place in this topic, well said, Burner! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)