Video Chain getting Gun Crazy over Moore

[LincolnMcGrath]

Funniest thing about this story is that I found it in American Riflemen. Hey, it was the only thing in the mens "library!"

I was going to post the text from the A R for this post, but could`t find it at NRA or at the Hardy site. I found it at the Yellow Scene site. Not only did A R censor and spin the article, the parts they used were almost word for word.

Is this legal? AR story was in the legislative section of the magazine! Cover to cover this mag. was spin, rhetoric, fear inducing tripe.

http://www.theyellowscene.com/thINK.html


After a lengthy run in theatres, the Academy Award-winning documentary Bowling for Columbine has just been released for rental. Customers at Longmont’s Showtime USA Video might be surprised to discover that their rental fee earns them more than just a video tape or DVD. Affixed inside each box is a pair of stickers that read: “for a critical analysis of this documentary, please visit www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html ” There, one can read David Hardy’s scathing critique of Moore’s film, which the former attorney for the NRA accuses of being fictional: “It makes its points by deceiving and by misleading the viewer. Statements are made which are false. Moore leads the reader to draw inferences which he must have known were wrong.” The webpage criticizes Moore’s statistics, logic and editing techniques. It also provides links to supporting documents, and Hardy’s own publications in support of the second amendment.


Customer Karen Treanor-Brown discovered the stickers when she rented Bowling for Columbine the first week it was available. “I had never seen anything like it before in any other video we’d rented from them, and we’ve been almost weekly customers for quite a few years.” Her response was to write a letter to Showtime’s owner, as well as post an email to the political activist group, Longmont Citizens for Justice & Democracy(LCJD), to which she belongs. Another member, Don Boyer, who is also a longtime Showtime renter, took issue with the stickers. Upon reading Treanor-Brown’s email, he went down to the store, took a box to the counter, and asked the clerk to remove the stickers. When the clerk refused to do so, and refused to let him remove the stickers himself, Boyer cancelled his account.


“I went to Showtime a lot,” says Boyer “and there were many movies with strong opinions on their shelves. There was never, in my experiences, any denouncements, signs or other indications that Showtime agreed with or disagreed with the movie contents. In effect, Showtime is telling its customers that they should not believe what is in the movie. I don’t care if Bowling for Columbine is a documentary or a diversion. My judgment is made from seeing, listening and evaluating all data. I will not let other people do my thinking for me.”
Mr. Boyer’s response was one of three negative responses the store received since Bowling for Columbine hit the shelves on August 19, all of which were made by members of the LCJD. There have been no positive responses.



EDITTYPO

[Terwilliger]

1. Moore really did scare the hell out them, didn't he?

They know his passioned analysis (call it whatever you want) from the movie affected them more than the gun legislation of the last 30 years. They're absolutely petrified that a narrative like that in Moore's movie could sway an entire nation to move away from the gun fixation, and seek better ways thinking with respect to social issues.

It's really quite funny to see the gunny reaction.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

10. wait until his 911 documentary comes out

Oh, it's going to be fun.
:bounce:

[Guaranteed]

118. Seriously.

There's so much about the BFEE that people don't know. It's going to knock their socks off. They won't even believe their eyes and ears.

I bet it'll be all people talk about for weeks.

[LincolnMcGrath]

119. Will it get stopped like the Reagan miniseries?

That thing wasn`t even really all that damning.

[LincolnMcGrath]

120. kick

[0rganism]

12. Doubly amazing, since Bowling wasn't even "anti-gun"

The movie does make a vicious attack-by-association on the NRA, and I think it gains many of its critics for this alone. Some people appear to freely interchange "2nd Ammendment" and "NRA", such that anything which critiques the latter must be threatening the former.

If anything, Moore's film is a thrashing of mass media, pop culture, and unprincipled lobbyists. Those are some powerful enemies.

[Fescue4u]

14. wasnt anti-gun?

lmao...

Yeah, and Schindlers list wasnt anti-german either.

[Kellanved]

15. Schindler's list wasn't Anti-German

I'd never consider it to be - ant it seems that the vast majority shares that opinion.

[Fescue4u]

16. you're joking right?

Of course I don't mean anti-german of today, but it sure as hell was anti-german of 1941!!!

[Kellanved]

17. the hero ...

was German as well.
The movie is historically accurate (if one ignores a few details) - I don't see how that constitutes an "Anti". The actions shown have really happened.

[Fescue4u]

20. Thats a good point.

indeed he was.

[0rganism]

27. Nope, it wasn't anti-gun. You have a problem with that?

The first part of the movie, perhaps the first fifth of it, is dedicated to exploring the fact that gun ownership does not correlate to homicide rates globally. And as another has pointed out to you, Schindler's List wasn't anti-German. It was anti-Nazi. The protagonists were all Germans.

Of course you're welcome to lyao as much as you like.
:freak:

[Fescue4u]

35. Semi agree

The first half was actually pretty good and balanced. I enjoyed it in fact.

But then it wigged out in the remaining 25% with some pretty ridiculous pronouncements and few outright falsehoods.

The treatment of Heston was shameful.

[Terwilliger]

44. what did he do to Heston? he asked him fucking questions

is it illegal to ask questions? I guess Heston is simply a lying Republican fucknut, and you have an awful lot of sympathy for him.

Now...what was it in the last 25% that was a ridiculous pronouncement? Anything?

[Fescue4u]

56. Two examples

The first is where Moore proclaims that the NRA went to Detroit 4 days after a little girl was killed..when it was actually many months.

Of course that point wasnt nearly as concise, it was drug out of about 20 minutes, but the entire basis was fraudent.

In terms of the Heston interview. Watch the clock, its highly edited and Moore actually blames the Detroit murder on Heston (WTF?)..then gets ridiculous by leaving photos of her on his property...almost as if Heston pulled the trigger.

I don't care for the Republicanness of Heston, but I do appreciate his civil rights work. Both as crusader for people of color (in the 60's), and as a crusader for firearm civil rights.

[Terwilliger]

67. yes...he's gun nut #1 and you love him...I know

Moore proclaimed that Heston went to Detroit four days after the shooting of the kid. He did? Did he say that?

Blames the Detroit murder on Heston? Now where did he say that? He never said that Heston was responsible for that shooting.

I think he left the photo on the property for dramatic effect, but Heston did walk out of the interview when pressed about the circumstances of the shooting.

And the racist comments that Heston made are unequivocal. I'm sure Moore made him say that, too.

[Fescue4u]

70. Heston is not a racist

As I said he's done alot of civil rights work (not firearm related) for African Americans in the 60's

No, I don't think Moore said "4 days later", but he did caption it as 4 days later..which is essentially the same exact thing.

[Terwilliger]

78. captioned what...what event was captioned as four days later

Heston's appearance? You mean the guy with Alzheimers is allowed to make speeches?

And you can say that Heston isn't a racist all day, but I thought his purpose was pretty damned clear in the movie...without an explanation for the disconnect between the US and other countries for gun-related violence, he decided to blame it on brown people.

[Fescue4u]

87. That the NRA showed up in Detroit 4 days later

Come on, keep up with the conversation please!

And you can say that Heston is racist all day, but I thought his comments were pretty clear about how white people have been pretty horrible to black folks through the centurys, and how the result is violence against blacks.

You see the glass as half empty, I see it half full.

His comment was neutral, but could be interpeted either way...
In light of that, its only fair to look to the subjects actions. I believe that Heston actions in the civil rights movement is evidence enough!

[Terwilliger]

93. who's comments?

Heston said that in the film? Where are you coming up with this?

[vernon_nackulus]

115. This is all conjecture...

Can you provide a link that shows it was several months later, and not four days, please? I would really appreciate that.

Thanks,
Vern

[LincolnMcGrath]

116. Morning Vern!

Welcome to DU.

[vernon_nackulus]

117. I love that!

:loveya:

[LincolnMcGrath]

72. "america is violent because of ethnicity"

Or something similiar.

[Fescue4u]

83. Indeed

Have you seen what White supremist have done to black folks? Ever heard of lynchings?? That stuff is real, horribly so.

Recognizing the wrongs of the past (or the moment) committed against minorities is not a sign of racism.

[LincolnMcGrath]

91. I interpreted his comments differently

[DoNotRefill]

63. It's disengenuous....

to use somebody with Alzheimer's disease as the butt of a joke because he can't argue coherently.

That's the equivalent of having a debate with Nelson Lund on the pro-gun side and Jim Brady for the anti-gun side. While some people might find such a display amusing, in reality it's just pathetic.

[Terwilliger]

69. Hmmm...and that was known to Moore?

I believe it was only last year that Heston announced he had Alzheimers. I think he did it to deflect the embarrassing appearance he made in BFC.

[Fescue4u]

71. Yes it was

It was certainly known to Moore before the movie was released.

[Terwilliger]

74. really?

How do you know that? Because it fits your arguments?

Besides...are you saying that everyone with Alzheimers is an idiot that should never be talked to?

[Fescue4u]

76. If Moore didnt know

Then he had his head in the sand and is an idiot.

Moores well connected and not an idiot....ESPECIALLY when the subject is the focus of a multimillion dollar movie...that HE is funding/producing.

Come on, even I give Moore more credit than that!

[Terwilliger]

80. You're now crediting Moore because it fits your conclusion

Why was Moore supposed to know, and why is it incumbent on Moore to drop that scene from the movie? Heston seemed pretty damned coherent to me.

[Fescue4u]

84. Why was he supposed to know?

Because he's smart.

I bet if you spend $10 million of your own money on a subject, you might actually keep up on the news.

If moore required to drop that scene? Of course not! No, nothing but morals and decency require it.

[Terwilliger]

86. oh right!

give me a break

So Heston is a doddering old fool who shouldn't speak? I wish you'd tell the NRA that. They exploit him all the time.

[Fescue4u]

88. He has stepped down.

Last I heard.

[DoNotRefill]

98. And the Brady Campaign doesn't exploit Jim's condition?

That's odd....I remember seeing him wheeled across the stage at the National Convention in 2000 to give a speech, IIRC.

[Terwilliger]

105. umm...

the NRA is exploiting Heston's condition? I said they were exploiting Heston for allowing a known Alzheimer's-like symptomatic man to give speeches about the NRA and guns.

[DoNotRefill]

123. Nope...Heston stepped down...

Moore was exploiting Heston's condition.

[Terwilliger]

90. here's a link

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/09/heston.illness/

August of 02 was when Heston claimed that he had Alzheimer's-like symptoms (has there been any confirmation?)

Later that month Moore showed BFC at Telluride.

So, he should have stopped the movie and edited out all the Heston scenes because Heston had "Alzhemier's-like" symptoms? PUH-leez.

I think Heston released that info so that his appearance in BFC could be downplayed.

[DoNotRefill]

94. Because it got HUGE media attention several months before BFC...

was released. It made CNN and a bunch of other "mainstream" news outlets. Moore would have had to have been completely out of contact with the media to have missed it.

[Terwilliger]

96. I've looked at the story

He had symptoms. Has it ever been verified?

[Fescue4u]

100. Alhzheimers cannot be verified conclusively until after death

Thats just a medical fact.

Its diagnosed by symptoms which get progressivly worse. Generally towards the end, there is no need to conclusively verify it anyway.

[Terwilliger]

107. so you say

Reagan has Alzheimer's...it's medically verified and he's not dead. Nice try though.

[Fescue4u]

110. Look, Im not trying to play games with the disease

My grandmother died from this just 6 months ago.

My understanding (which could be wrong), is that conclusive proof cannot be obtained until after death.

However, the symptoms can become so severe, that no other diagnosis is reasonable to assume.

As I've said in other threads, Im an engineer, not a medical professional, and Im not familiar with the specifics of reagans case.

If you wanna call that spin, fine, whatever.

[Terwilliger]

112. Do you honestly believe that the man featured in the film

was without his faculties? He was coherent and lucid. He was very specific when he blamed gun violence on a class of ethnicity. Pretty good for someone deep in the thros of the disease, eh?

[DoNotRefill]

Ummm....

Heston made his official announcement on August 9th, 2002, although his condition was known publicly before that. BFC was put into limited theatrical release October 11, 2002.

[Terwilliger]

95. so Moore should have stopped the film b/c Heston had symptoms?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/09/heston.illness/

Did you think Heston was pretty lucid when he talked to Moore?

[DoNotRefill]

101. Actually, no, he wasn't.

He apparently had trouble keeping focused on one thought. This MAY have been due either to Alzheimers, or the editing process.

Having watched my grandfather die of Alzheimer's, maybe I'm more sensitized to the effects of the disease than you are.

[Terwilliger]

108. or its a convenient excuse

to try and defuse the impact Heston had in the film

[0007]

111. Mose's has no problem inciting the NRA crowd, Michael was too sharp,

for this dimwitt. So Heston just gets up and walks away. Which is his style when he's lost.

[DoNotRefill]

124. You might want to read up...

on the affects of Alzheimer's disease....

[0rganism]

113. So because the movie treated Heston "shamefully", it is anti-gun?

Mr. Heston is ONE MEMBER of the NRA -- albeit he was in a leadership position at the time of the Columbine massacre. The NRA itself is composed of a subset of America's gun owners. Showing segments that are perceived as anti-NRA or anti-Heston would hardly make the film anti-gun.

That said, Mr. Heston's leadership role pretty much opens him up to inquiry of the sort Moore did. If he speaks for the NRA at massive rallies and in national ad campaigns, there is absolutely no reason he cannot speak for the NRA in person. Now whose fault is it that Heston comes across as a feeb? Should Moore have forgone or cut out interviews with the man who led the NRA during the Columbine tragedy because he's got Alzheimer's?

By the way, "first half" plus "remaining 25%" = "three quarters". Did you take a break during the second half of the movie to buy popcorn and use the john? Cos there was some very critical material in the parts prior to Heston, I'd hate to think you missed it.

One important element Moore explored at about that time was the news media's promotional fascination with violence and fear. The message they were conveying was more shameful than anything Moore did to Heston: "be afraid, afraid to go outside, afraid of strangers, afraid of not watching the TV, afraid of the poor, afraid of minorities, afraid of the weather, afraid of damn near everything that doesn't come in a three-piece suit with plenty of hairspray."

Moore's film is about how a culture of fear itself creates periodic upheavals of irrational violence. It is not an anti-gun film.

[LincolnMcGrath]

114. periodic upheavals of irrational violence

Well said O. I truly did not feel it was anti gun. It was anti-US-media to a degree.

[RummyTheDummy]

128. Personally, I think Bowling had less to do with the NRA and

more to do with the fear culture Bush pushes like a drug dealer pushes smack. Bush wants the people of this country to be addicted to fear and I thought Moore did a great job of showing that.

[LastTime2BeFree]

18. seek better ways thinking with respect to social issues

How far are we away from people not wanting to own and shoot guns do yuo think? Ten years? A hundred or moore?

[Terwilliger]

24. we're as far away as you want it to be

Maybe these things will change if we have enough Moores spreading the good word.

[LastTime2BeFree]

45. I like to go out plinking with friends

I hope you don't support banning that activity. You don't do you?

[Terwilliger]

51. Please, don't be an idiot on my account

[Fescue4u]

59. Do you think that folks who go out plinking are idiots??

Hope this is not part of your "bring in the votes" platform.

[LastTime2BeFree]

77. I will try not to be

Do you support innocent plinking or not?

[MadHound]

2. Sad, laughable, and predictable at the same time

The Hardy Law site has been disproven and debunked as a propaganda piece. It is funny though to watch the gun nuts get their panties in such a wad over Bowling. If they would watch the film closely, they would see that it isn't neccessarily against guns, but against the choking fear permeating our society, and then having guns thrown into the mix. But heaven forbid, there can't be anything even percieved as anti-gun without a rebuttal, no matter how cracked it is.

Showtime is probably owned by some group closely tied with guns. It would be interesting to find out.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

5. exactly

they missed the whole goddamn point of the movie. which was that it is not the guns in our culture that cause the violence, but something much deeper and scarier.

[bryant69]

3. This is a little shady.

But pretty legal, I would think. IF they were honest though they'd also put in a critique of David Hardy's work.

I like Bowling for Columbine, but I hardly think it's unassailable. Some of the things Moore did in there are very questionable--but others are right on the money. An informed viewer should get all the information to make a judgement call, not just a "What a liar Moore is" webpage.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[markbark]

4. Small nitpick....

the hardylaw link has a trailing "."

the link should read www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html


:hi:


--MAB

[LincolnMcGrath]

7. Veddy much thanx to you!

[AP]

6. Activism idea: little stickers with www.democraticunderground.com and

www.buzzflash.com and www.mediawhoresonline.com on them, and put them everywhere: video rentals, shopping carts, wherever.

[LincolnMcGrath]

8. I love it.

But only if it`s legal?


I wonder how the gun supporters feel knowing they pay dues for plagiarized articles?

[youngred]

9. trying to avoid the NRA blacklist I imagine

:eyes:

[proud patriot]

11. Moore should be informed of this

:eyes:

[LastTime2BeFree]

19. I'm sure moore can afford to have his lawyers look into it

If I had his money I would not care either.

[Fescue4u]

21. I doubt Moore has a case..

But I bet the video distributors does.

I wouldnt be suprised if there is something in the contract that forbids stuff like this.

[Fescue4u]

13. Wow! That anti gunner sure is afraid of the truth

or a balanced viewpoint.

pretty funny.

Bravo for the video store.

[LincolnMcGrath]

23. "Bravo for the video store."

? :shrug: Are you serious wit dat :shrug: ?

[Terwilliger]

26. yes, he is

[LincolnMcGrath]

28. He likes others to do his thinking for him?

Bravo for censoring me?!? :eyes:

[Terwilliger]

29. only thing I'm sure of...

is his absolute allegiance to the 2nd amendment

[Fescue4u]

32. Indeed.

The Bill Of Rights is dear to my heart, as it is most Americans.

[LincolnMcGrath]

33. Is a waiting list too much regulation?

"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed"

[Fescue4u]

36. Yes.

In exactly the same manner as a waiting period to get an abortion is.

[LincolnMcGrath]

39. allRighty then

[DoNotRefill]

52. A right delayed is a right denied....

eom

[LincolnMcGrath]

61. Should explosives be

free to all? Claymores? Grenades? Do I have a right to own nukes? I always wanted a tank.

I had to wait till 16 to drive legally! Even though I started driving around 11-12. My rights were denied!!

[DoNotRefill]

66. Please cite..

the constitutional right to drive. It simply doesn't exist.

[sangh0]

122. Please answer the question

instead of distracting by dwelling on a minor mistake.

[DoNotRefill]

125. "minor mistake"????

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!

[Fescue4u]

68. No, you must pay for them.

Want a Claymore, Grenade, Nuke, tank? do the paperwork and its yours.

I know of a guy in my city who owns a tank. Grenades and Claymores are legal to. Just get the ATF paperwork, and pay $200 tax.

Want a nuke? Well the paperwork is a little more and the cost is a bit steep, and you'll have a hella time finding a seller.

But guess what? There is no law outlawing private ownership of them. (indeed they are frequently manufactured by private companys, before being shipped and sold the government)

[LincolnMcGrath]

75. But the paperwork is making me wait

It aint right. I want my law rocket today!

[Fescue4u]

79. File suit in your local Circuit court then.

Are do you suggest that everything the government is doing right now is 100% constitutional.

[DoNotRefill]

103. actually, §922(o) was just struck down within the past 2 weeks....

by a 3 judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals as being unconstitutional in a case involving possession of a homemade machinegun. This wasn't on Second Amendment grounds, but rather on ICC grounds. we've yet to see the fallout of that. In theory, if you reside in the 9th circuit and comply with State laws, you can now build a machinegun at home out of muffler pipe without doing paperwork on it for your personal use. I DO NOT advise this, as it well and truly sucks to be a test case, and eventually this will end up before SCOTUS.

[Fescue4u]

34. Im not sure I understand...

Actually I know I don't understand.

How were you censored?

[LincolnMcGrath]

37. Do films about Jesus have a disclaimer/sticker?

*Jesus may not be real: No living American has ever met Jesus:


What do you consider the sticker on the video?

[Fescue4u]

40. Information

Maybe even inappropriate information, or misplaced.

But not censorship. How can anything that adds to the content be censorship?

And actually, a great many documentarys have disclaimers that some of the events reenacted with dramatic license.

[Terwilliger]

25. BLEH

you have provided nothing that makes Moore some anti-gun liar...I think you gunnies just project your insecurities

[Fescue4u]

38. Indeed!

Guns enable us all to protect our insecuritys from criminals, runaway governments etc.

As I said earlier, we've gone over the Moore falsehoods in other threads, and both of came away unconvinced by the other.

No need to repeat that now.

[LincolnMcGrath]

41. My favorite gunny quote

"I keep em to protect me from the gov`t."


An Apache helo can level your whole neighborhood in seconds.

[Fescue4u]

43. Well thats true

And the truth is that one guy with a gun is not going to stop or hinder an army.

That guy will be dead quickly.

But, 80 million guys with small arms can certainly stop or hinder an army.

Need an example? Take a look at Iraq, vietnam, or Afghanistan (in the soviet era)

[Terwilliger]

46. Here's an example

If the government comes after the guns, the gunnies who grab their guns will not just shoot at the government...they'll shoot at everybody else too.

This whole notion that guns will protect citizens from the government is laughable.

[DoNotRefill]

55. why would they shoot at everybody else?

Haven't they read Mao? something about the fighters swimming in a sea of peasants...If they just started shooting everybody, they'd quickly be identified and killed, wouldn't they? That's no way to run an insurgency....

[Terwilliger]

73. ok...so the big "Turn In Your Guns" push comes around

and all the people who are NOT in the government gather in...oh, I dunno...Keokuk, Iowa to get together and plan their defense of the Constitution.

Do you really think this is likely?

[Fescue4u]

81. Likely?

Dunno.

But its irrelevant.

[Terwilliger]

85. How is it irrelevant?

The gunnies are always talking about why the government can't have a list of their guns because that would mean the government would know how many guns they had when the military came to get their guns.

It's irrelevant now?

[Fescue4u]

89. Because..

Whether or not people choose to utilize their civil rights, has no bearing on whether those people should have same civil rights.

Just because you refuse to exercise your civil right of arms ownership, doesnt mean that you don't have it.

[Terwilliger]

99. So it's a civil right to keep your gun off a registry?

It's a civil right to challenge any regulation of the country's most dangerous "safety device"?

[DoNotRefill]

104. Only if you're a felon.

At least one registration scheme was struck down as unconstitutional because it required felons (along with everybody else) to register their guns, a violation of the 5th amendment right against self-incrimination.

[Terwilliger]

109. hahahah

must have been an Ashcroftian judge

[DoNotRefill]

126. Sorry.....

IIRC, it was in the 1970's....

[LincolnMcGrath]

50. Nam had plenty more than guns

Iraq and Aphgan. are hitting us with rpgs, mortars, and grenades.

[DoNotRefill]

54. Uh huh....

tell that to the Iraqi teens who shot and cut the throats of those two US soldiers.....

[LincolnMcGrath]

65. I heard about the cinder blocks/cement.

I heard they were pulled from there vehicle.

[Terwilliger]

42. you've not gone over anything

because there's no proof that Moore lied about anything in BFC...the highly debunked hardlylaw.net notwithstanding

[Fescue4u]

48. My debunker is better than your debunker.

;)

I've read the debunking of the Hardy Law Debunking and came away bunked.

Moore's movie is actually a good piece of work.

Ironically it uses sensationalism and fear to decry how the media uses sensationalism and fear....and then concludes that with all this sensationalism and fear, that no one should have guns.

Its good piece of work because it fools so many who don't see the irony.

[Terwilliger]

53. once again....ZILCH

back to the drawing board, eh Fesky?

[Fescue4u]

57. Havent seen alot from you either Terwilly..

[Terwilliger]

62. nothing, eh?

Well, I'll refer to this thread next time I see you whinnying about the "evil Michael Moore" :scared:

[Fescue4u]

64. And likewise...

I'll refer to this when you refer to the great all knowing Michael.

[Terwilliger]

82. Well, see...he put out this movie where he says a lot of stuff

and you have yet to prove any lying or misinformation on his part

[Fescue4u]

92. Yes, but you didnt post the transcript in this thread

Hence it must not exist. (according to your standard)

As I've said, you and I have gone over it in the past (and sadly I've been drawn into reposting a portion here).

We disagree on this issue clearly. Get over it!

But hey, just because Im don't feel like going over the entireity of it...don't let that stop ya!

[Terwilliger]

97. You're the one making claims against Moore

without anything to back it up

[DoNotRefill]

47. Moore ALMOST told the truth.

He came right to the cusp of it, and then backed off. Gun control has historically been about whites being afraid of blacks, and moving to disarm blacks out of fear, while retaining the right to keep and bear arms for themselves.

It's hard for any rational person who knows the history of gun control laws to come to the conclusion that gun control laws have not historically been racist in intent and implementation.

For a brief example, in the 1940's, the Florida Supreme Court held that a white person couldn't be convicted of violating that state's concealed weapons law, since the purpose of that law was only to disarm minorities. I'm not kidding. They actually said that. :grr:

For anybody interested in reading more about this subject, may I suggest "Freedmen, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 1866-1876" by Halbrook, ISBN# 0-275-96331-4. It talks about Reconstruction and the Second Amendment. It'll open your eyes and probably shock you.

[Terwilliger]

49. where did he not tell the truth?

or is this more creative editing on the part of the movie watchers?

[DoNotRefill]

58. Nope...He hinted about it during the cartoon...

about how the whites were scared of blacks. He didn't come out and actually SAY that gun control has historically been used to disarm minorities.

[Terwilliger]

60. I see

so, if he doesn't mention that early gun control attempts were about keeping guns out of the hands of minorities, he ALMOST told the truth?

I think he told the truth and simply left out the caveat that you wanted him to add so that you could slam gun-control.

[0007]

106. Moore got his point across, I don't know what these folks

are trying to say do you?

[LincolnMcGrath]

22. Now that I`m awake again........

:grouphug:

[Wonk]

30. In the interest of being "fair and balanced" they should include a sticker

with this url as well.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/8/12/171427/607

Here's an old thread from the Gun Dungeon about this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=4693

[LincolnMcGrath]

31. Thanks for the DU link

and the kuro5hin link as well!

[LincolnMcGrath]

102. Night ya`ll

Off to work I go.

[politicat]

121. Huh... This is also a company that is in major copyright violation.

They separate the disks in multi-disk sets and rent them out individually. (This is a violation as the disks are sold as a single unit, and renting them out individually constitutes multiple use of a single piece of media, just like putting copies of Photoshop on all the computers in your house with only a single license number is copyright violation.) We noticed it with Finding Nemo the other night and complained.

I'll have to go in and check the one here in Lafayette for those stickers.

Politicat

[WoodrowFan]

127. Titantic Video

When Titantic came out on video some 'family' video store (in Texas?) got into trouble with the studio for renting 'edited' versions. The store owner edited out the sex scenes to make it suitable for family viewing. I've also heard of anti-abortion groups adding propaganda to the end of some tapes. I wonder if this would fit the same type of activity that the film studios would frown on.

[Frangible]

129. Well, the movie is inaccurate

To some degree. But what isn't? You have to take everything with a grain of salt.

The point the movie makes isn't anti-gun. It even shows that guns don't cause crime, so I have no idea why people are hyperventilating over it.

Ironic, isn't it? That Moore did more to convince Americans that guns don't cause crime than the frickin NRA did?

Yeah, so we know guns don't cause crime now, but it's a deeper problem in our society. Too bad we don't walk the walk, just talk the talk.

Maybe when people stop worrying about banning useless cosmetic features on scary looking "assault weapons" (oh nos! a drive by bayoneting!) and start trying to fix the DEEPER PROBLEMS WITH SOCIETY things might change.

But hey, fixing deep rooted problems with society is hard. And something people don't want to think about. Blaming an inanimate object is much easier.

[LincolnMcGrath]

130. Is it innacurate when it shows

guns don`t cause crime?