Topic: Talk about your Sales Promotions!

[aquadorhj]

... little too flashy ad for my taste, but if I were shopping, they would get my feet on their front steps.

I would take the gun. :p 

[initial_D]

What kind of gun(s) can $250 buy anyway?

[tpl]

If I lived in a place where owning and carrying a gun was part of the culture I'd carry one as well AND I'd make sure I was good and accurate with it.
Probably wouldn't need a free cheap gun from a car dealer.

Now I would not dream of living in such a place  but:

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

[Sir Osis of Liver]

If I lived in a place where owning and carrying a gun was part of the culture I'd carry one as well AND I'd make sure I was good and accurate with it.
Probably wouldn't need a free cheap gun from a car dealer.

Now I would not dream of living in such a place  but:

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

Never understood that aphorism. Texans (or Philadelphians, Palestinians, Afghanis), for example, are more polite than...who exactly?

I had guns when I used them. No use for them now, I'd take the money.

The point of Bowling for Columbine was that the culture of fear in the US is responsible for the high level of gun related fatalities. Those sites finding fault with his movie generally miss this point entirely, then go on for pages splitting hairs about how this or that was edited or taken out of context.

And no, we never lock our doors in the day either.

[tenpenny]

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

I haven't particularly noticed that in any of the major US cities I've been in. 

[Cord]

The point of Bowling for Columbine was that the culture of fear in the US is responsible for the high level of gun related fatalities. Those sites finding fault with his movie generally miss this point entirely, then go on for pages splitting hairs about how this or that was edited or taken out of context.

Sounds like this author grasped that point quite clearly:

9. Fear. Bowling probably has a good point when it suggests that the media feeds off fear in a search for the fast buck. For an interesting analysis of this, showing how crime news skyrocketed (largely displacing international coverage) even as crime fell, click here.

Bowling cites some examples: the razor blades in Halloween apples scare, the flesh-eating bacteria scare, etc. The examples are taken straight from Barry Glassner's excellent book on the subject, "The Culture of Fear," and Moore interviews Glassner on-camera for the point.

    Then Moore does exactly what he condemns in the media.

    Given the prominence of schoolyard killings as a theme in Bowling for Columbine, Moore must have asked Glassner about that subject. Whatever Glassner said is, however, left on the cutting-room floor. That's because Glassner lists schoolyard shootings as one of the mythical fears. He points out that "More than three times as many people are killed by lightning as by violence at schools."

This is as close as Moore comes to having a thesis, an explanation for homicide rate differences. But here he falls flat on his face. As one of his interviewees notes, over a period when homicide rates were falling, media coverage of murder increased by 600%. Okay, flip it around. When media coverage of homicides increased 600%, homicide rates fell. So much for Moore's explanation. In fact, so much for all of his attempted explanations. During the 1990s, homicide rates in the US went into their steepest decline in decades, with handgun homicides leading the way. That was the same period that saw the welfare reform laws, the bombing in Serbia, several million firearms sold each year -- everything, in short, that Moore condemns. (For one source, just go back up the page to the FBI statistics: between 1997 and 2001, firearm homicides fell from 10,729 to 8,719, and 1997 was after the biggest drop had occured.

I suppose we might go farther, and ask if Moore's film is not illustrative of what it condemns. Moore argues that the media (a) distorts reality, and (b) hypes fear of other Americans, because (c) fear is good for a fast buck. Moore distorts reality, hypes fear of other Americans ("are we nation of gun nuts, or just nuts?") and, well, made several million fast bucks.

These types of deceptions are hardly of the "splitting hairs" variety:

While we're at it: Bowling shows footage of a B-52 on display at the Air Force Academy, while Moore scornfully intones that the plaque under it "proudly proclaims that the plane killed Vietnamese people on Christmas Eve of 1972."

    The plaque actually reads that "Flying out of Utapao Royal Thai Naval Airfield in southeast Thailand, the crew of 'Diamond Lil' shot down a MIG northeast of Hanoi during 'Linebacker II' action on Christmas eve 1972." This is pretty mild compared to the rest of Bowling, but the viewer can't even trust Moore to honestly read a monument.

(As Spinsanity notes, Moore goes even farther in his add-on DVD. There, he tells us, "And they've got a plaque on there proudly proclaiming that this bomber, this B-52, killed thousands upon thousands of Vietnamese -- innocent civilians.")

[Mitlov]

Firearms are legal.  The place where I get my brakes done also sells tires, and you get free beef with every new set of tires.  It's a promotion, giving away a popular-and-legal commodity with an expensive purchase.  Should my wife get upset about the free beef promotion because she's a vegetarian?

As for Bowling for Columbine:  The bank gave vouchers to go across town and pick up your free gun at a firearms shop, once you had passed all the necessary checks.  The walking-out-of-the-bank-with-the-gun scene was staged, and the bank got quite upset about it.  That's pretty typical Michael Moore, like arguing that the "no foreign objects allowed" banner at a Lockheed Martin plant is xenophobic, when in fact it simply means that you can't eat your lunch or play or iPod on the assembly line.

[dr_spock]

I think some of us Canucks are envious of your Constitution's 2nd Amendment, the right to bear arms. 

[tenpenny]

What all of the sturm und drang about Michael Moore and 'Bowling for Columbine' forgets is that, 'Bowling' is a movie.  No matter whether you claim it is a documentary, whatever, it's simply a movie.  It is not reality, no matter how much people pretend it is.  It's about as accurate and useful as that stupid movie made by the guy who ate nothing but McDonalds food for a year.  It's about as real as Pamela Anderson, and, like her, results in distorted expectations.

[safristi]

 Bare arms....who waxes them...............

[Mitlov]

What all of the sturm und drang about Michael Moore and 'Bowling for Columbine' forgets is that, 'Bowling' is a movie.  No matter whether you claim it is a documentary, whatever, it's simply a movie.  It is not reality, no matter how much people pretend it is.  It's about as accurate and useful as that stupid movie made by the guy who ate nothing but McDonalds food for a year.  It's about as real as Pamela Anderson, and, like her, results in distorted expectations.

"Star Wars" does not pretend to be depicting the real world.  "Knocked Up" is the real world with fictional characters, and is clearly labeled a work of fiction.  Michael Moore does not say that he does fiction.  He puts himself out there as a documentary-maker portraying the truth, which subjects him to a much higher level of scrutiny.

[Mitlov]

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

Never understood that aphorism.

Both "an armed society is a polite society" and "guns cause murder" are inaccurate statements caused by the erroneous belief that the simple presence or absence of a mechanical device as a consumer commodity will change human nature and human compulsions.

[Cord]

What all of the sturm und drang about Michael Moore and 'Bowling for Columbine' forgets is that, 'Bowling' is a movie.  No matter whether you claim it is a documentary, whatever, it's simply a movie.  It is not reality, no matter how much people pretend it is.  It's about as accurate and useful as that stupid movie made by the guy who ate nothing but McDonalds food for a year.  It's about as real as Pamela Anderson, and, like her, results in distorted expectations.

Just a movie? Just some entertaining fluff to keep an audience amused for a couple hours? I don't think so. One only has to look at the defensive postings placed by some of this forum's well educated members at the mere mention of criticism of this movie. The site I linked to above and my comments in general were not of the, "Harrison Ford's tie is blue in this scene and then is red in the next scene" variety. They are issues of outright lies and deception. The "it's only a movie" line is only popular now that Moore's deceptions have come to light.

It's interesting that the same people that can find outrage over deception in a car ad, don't seem too bothered by lies that have much more far reaching implications. It's positively Machiavellian.

[safristi]

  Michaevelli MOORE ...has a nice RING to IT....... ...BUTT!! lose the ball cap and the cheap WindBREAKER..... yer a Multi Millionaire now with a Manhattan Zip CODE....I'm sure he's not a memeber here..prolly gettin' a Tummy Tuck in Havana........ask fer tha "Hemmingway"...a rugged yet manly LOOK...

[Baron von Raschke]

"It's interesting that the same people that can find outrage over deception in a car ad, don't seem too bothered by lies that have much more far reaching implications. It's positively Machiavellian."





Its human nature to look for things that prove what people already believe and to discard what does not fit into their belief systems.  One stereotype is that car salesmen look to make a sale at all costs, so people srutinize car ads to prove this instilled belief.

Same goes for the stereotypical perception that it's the wild west down south with everyone walking around with guns ablazin'.  When they see the movie, this reinforces what they alreday believed to begin with.

Not saying this is right, but I'm not surprised.

[tenpenny]

What all of the sturm und drang about Michael Moore and 'Bowling for Columbine' forgets is that, 'Bowling' is a movie.  No matter whether you claim it is a documentary, whatever, it's simply a movie.  It is not reality, no matter how much people pretend it is.  It's about as accurate and useful as that stupid movie made by the guy who ate nothing but McDonalds food for a year.  It's about as real as Pamela Anderson, and, like her, results in distorted expectations.

Just a movie? Just some entertaining fluff to keep an audience amused for a couple hours? I don't think so. One only has to look at the defensive postings placed by some of this forum's well educated members at the mere mention of criticism of this movie. The site I linked to above and my comments in general were not of the, "Harrison Ford's tie is blue in this scene and then is red in the next scene" variety. They are issues of outright lies and deception. The "it's only a movie" line is only popular now that Moore's deceptions have come to light.

It's interesting that the same people that can find outrage over deception in a car ad, don't seem too bothered by lies that have much more far reaching implications. It's positively Machiavellian.

Well, I made the mistake of reading one of his books, and after that, I realized that he is simply an actor, a commentator, an opinionated media personality.  After having read the book (what was it, stupid white men, or something), I have no need of ever watching any of his movies, unless I'm looking for entertainment.  They are somewhat less informative than, say, Hannah Montana.

Each person can find their entertainment where they want it, me, I'd rather watch other things.

[Cord]

Well, I made the mistake of reading one of his books, and after that, I realized that he is simply an actor, a commentator, an opinionated media personality.  After having read the book (what was it, stupid white men, or something), I have no need of ever watching any of his movies, unless I'm looking for entertainment.  They are somewhat less informative than, say, Hannah Montana.

Each person can find their entertainment where they want it, me, I'd rather watch other things.

I agree 100%. The unfortunate part is that there is a huge audience out there that is not quite as discriminating. And when that audience sees films like this receiving awards as documentary productions, they tend to believe what is said in them. I would submit that there are millions of people out there for whom Michael Moore films are their main source of political and social education. Very sad and very troubling.