catapult magazine

I don’t know what all you film nuts think about Michael Moore, but i just saw his new film, “Bowling for Columbine”, which is an interesting exploration of guns, crime, gun laws, fear, violence, America, and the NRA. Anybody else seen it? What did ya’ll think?

wow, now I’m confused.

I read Moore’s response in it’s entirety and I agree with Dan, someone is lying. I appreciate the fact that Moore went to great lengths to answer to some of the allegations about his movie, although it does seem (as stated in several posts) that he is quite immature in the manner of his response.

I wasn’t there. I don’t know for a fact anything. I agree that going after the NRA does single you out for persecutuion…but all the more reason to get your ducks in a row prior to opening your mouth.

I am not a die hard advocate of gun control…but neither am I an advocate of the insane assortment of fire arms on the market today (and how easy it is to obtain them). I believe in the right to bear arms, as is constitutionally provided, but I think that there should be a limit on what sort of weaponry is available to the public…and even manufactured. Everything in moderation I suppose.

Well said Jabird

Maybe we need some new group. Not the NRA and not the groups that want to ban all weapons (though I am not sure there are such groups — maybe i am just assuming there are because of what the NRA says) but some kind of reasonable moderate gun-control group. Or is there such a thing already — a group lobbying for both the consitutional right to bear arms and some sensible limitations on what sort of arms we can bear. Anybody know?

I don’t really understand why it should be a “constitutional right” to bear arms. I really, really don’t get it.

here’s a review (unfavourable) of Moore’s new book:

“Mr. Moore has marshaled all of his impassioned, populist bluster to effecting that change. That makes “Dude, Where’s My Country?” a bumper sticker that doubles as a book."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/06/books/06MASL.html?8hpib

It is a “constitutional right” because it’s part of the Constitution of our nation.

A simple reason why this is a good thing: Government can not always be trusted (as I think both sides can agree. Imagine, if right wing conservatives are as close to Nazis as most liberals claim, when they are in control of the government, what’s to keep them from taking over everything and keeping political prisoners?

Anybody remember “Red Dawn”!!

Sorry if some of you are blushing, but this here redneck just couldn’t stay quiet anymore. :-)

So let’s assume the US government does abuse its power. How does the fact that lots of citizens have lots of guns make any difference? Will those gun owners be in agreement when the abuse has gone too far? Who or what will they attack with their guns? Without attack helicopters and laser guided missiles, I don’t think they’ll be able to get at the president. Maybe we should put the right to own attack helicopters and laser guided missles in the constitution (just to keep the president accountable). This is the logical direction of this pro-gun reasoning.

Resistance to tyrannical regimes is most effective when citizens rise up without using violence. Guns don’t solve anything. And constitutions can be changed.

By the way, I’m fine with people owning guns for hunting. Cause we don’t have enough wolves to keep deer populations down.

Yes, I understand that “constitutional right” implies that it’s a right outlined in the Constitution. I think that’s fairly self-explanatory.

My question was: why?? What kind of thinking and/or justification went into this?

Are you saying that people own guns so that if the government turns corrupt, gun-owners will be able to save the country? What a pleasant thought.

Just a question out of curiosity, since I really don’t know. How much training does a person need to have before they’re allowed to own a gun? I’m somewhat embarrassed to admit that I’ve actually been to a gun range (in Canada, no less!). After an afternoon of shooting, I was rather dismayed at what horrible aim I had, and how HARD it is to handle a gun. The friend I was with assured me that I had “excellent aim for a beginner”—and I don’t think he was patronizing me.

My point is that, if I’m an average shot, then I don’t want anyone like me anywhere NEAR me who owns a gun and thinks they can “save” people in a situation, or is fully prepared to whip out a gun in “self-defense.” I want to be able to walk around in this country confident that I’m not going to lose my nose with a random whizzing bullet.

Is that in the Constitution? The right to be far, far away from guns?

Absolutely. You have every right to move to Britain.