Slashdot Mirror

The ratio of gun ownership in New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the USA is roughly the same, but only the USA suffers from such a high rate of gun related crime. Why is that?

No guns? Haven't you seen Bowling for Columbine?

Criminal control shouldn't be given to "innocent people" (the innocent people are the children who are found dead when playing with daddy's gun), but there should be MORE cops and stricter control.

Many guns used by criminals are STOLEN. Stolen from whom? From "innocent people" who LEGALLY BOUGHT their guns. Congratulations Mr. Innocent people, you just let a thief get another gun!

If you want more insight on Gun control, you should watch "Bowling for Columbine" by Michael Moore.

Now, going BACK TO THE TOPIC:

Yes, they're putting a TAX on eBay'ing. Well, that should teach people to pay more attention when voting.

1. House of Bush, House of Saud: The secret relationship between the world's two most powerful dynasties by Craig Unger, 2004, Scribner. Available as a book and as excerpts on CD.
   
   The Bush family connection with the Saudis is also documented in a new movie by Michael Moore, due for release on July 4, 2004, called Fahrenheit 9/11. Michael Moore won an academy award for his movie " Bowling for Columbine", in spite of the sometimes poor quality of his reporting.
2. Crude Politics: How Bush's oil cronies hijacked the war on terrorism by Paul Sperry, 2003, WND Books, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
3. Worse than Watergate: The secret presidency of George W. Bush by John W. Dean, 2004, Little, Brown and Co., New York. Here are quotes from an NPR Interview of John Dean, which is available online (NPR is National Public Radio in the U.S.):
   
   "This is not a left-right issue. It's not a Republican, Democrat issue. I draw on as many Republicans who are critical of the secrecy of this presidency as I do Democrats." From the written introduction: "Reporters covering the White House of George W. Bush claim that the current administration is more pre-occupied with controlling information than any of his predecessors."
   
   More quotes from John Dean: "Bush is head of state and Cheney is head of government." George W. Bush is "frighteningly unsophisticated for a president of the United States". "I can't find anything that is comparable in history."
4. The Book on Bush: How George W. (mis)leads America by Eric Alterman and Mark Green, 2004. Available as a book and excerpts on CD.
5. Fraud: The strategy behind the Bush lies and why the media didn't tell you by Paul Waldman, 2004, Sourcebooks, Inc. Paul Waldman is the past associate director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and holds a Ph.D. in communications.
6. American Dynasty: Aristocracy, fortune, and the politics of deceit in the house of Bush by Kevin Phillips, 2004.
7. The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the education of Paul O'Neill by Ron Suskind, 2004, Simon & Schuster. Available as a book and excerpts on CD.
8. Against All Enemies: Inside America's war on terror by Richard A. Clarke, 2004, Free Press. Available as a book and excerpts on cassette and CD. Mr. Clarke was the head of the U.S. government's anti-terrorism effort until he quit because of disagreement with the George W. Bush administration. Mr. Clarke had served under President Reagan, the former President Bush, and President Clinton.
9. Perfectly Legal: The covert campaign to rig our tax system to benefit the super rich -- and cheat everybody else by David Cay Johnston, 2003, Portfolio. Reviews: Powell's Barnes and Noble Amazon
   
   Mr. Johnston has twice won the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting.
10. Supreme Injustice: How the high court hijacked election 2000 by Alan M. Dershowitz, 2001, Oxf

I've been asked to perform what could be considered DCMA prohibited activities for *my job* and in the name of *fair rights*. I work for an educational instution, and we have been contacted by an instructor who wants to use a part Bowling for Columbine in their humanities course, delievered over the net. Since the copy the professor owns is on DVD, DCMA would have to be violated for it to be used, even within the educational use guidelines for fair use. From talking with my co-workers, one of whom owns BfC on DVD also, it's a good movie, and he's going to loan it to me next week so I can watch it. We're waiting on permission / legal advice of the school to act on this content being brought into the course. Just what I need to have added to "duties as required". Personally, I think this could be a great addition to the course, and it should be well within normal fair use guidelines. (Streaming it, so it's not easily savable, quality will be crap so it can go over a modem, and a student may want to go buy/rent the movie after discussing part of it in class.) The movie even has a Teacher's Guide!

Sounds like a scenerio that should be protected, not made illegal, which, since it's on DVD and Macrovisioned on VHS, it is by the DCMA - even if permission is granted we'd have to circumvent encryption to do it! But IIRC, it's distributed by Miramax, which is a division of Disney, so who know if it will be allowed.

Wow? Michael Moore posts on slashdot? ;-)

Fine, have it your way. Text from the BofC website, links from elsewhere, unless too numerous to list, so I default to Michael Moore's page, full of links from government sources and the like.

1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator. Declassified CIA report, same uncensored report linked from a slashdot article.

1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians killed. CIA documents from 1954 pertaining to Guatemala as well as book excerpt and newspaper article.

1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem. President Johnson once called him "the Churchill of Asia" in 1961. Wikipedia and two books

1963-1975: American military kills 4 million civilians in Southeast Asia.

September 11, 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered. Common knowledge, its in a ton of books (excerpt)and movies

1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed. (Chomsky) and full reports (another), and a piece by William Blum

1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion. --Reagan invited Afghani leaders to the white house, and said they were like the US' "founding fathers."

1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras". 30,000 Nicaraguans die. --Orchestrated by Oliver North from the White House

1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians. Sworn affadavits by members of National Security council. Photo of Tariq Aziz at White House with Reagan. More evidence.

1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to help them kill Iraqis. --Part of Iran-contra

1989: CI

Fine, have it your way. Text from the BofC website, links from elsewhere, unless too numerous to list, so I default to Michael Moore's page, full of links from government sources and the like.

1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator. Declassified CIA report, same uncensored report linked from a slashdot article.

1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians killed. CIA documents from 1954 pertaining to Guatemala as well as book excerpt and newspaper article.

1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem. President Johnson once called him "the Churchill of Asia" in 1961. Wikipedia and two books

1963-1975: American military kills 4 million civilians in Southeast Asia.

September 11, 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered. Common knowledge, its in a ton of books (excerpt)and movies

1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed. (Chomsky) and full reports (another), and a piece by William Blum

1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion. --Reagan invited Afghani leaders to the white house, and said they were like the US' "founding fathers."

1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras". 30,000 Nicaraguans die. --Orchestrated by Oliver North from the White House

1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians. Sworn affadavits by members of National Security council. Photo of Tariq Aziz at White House with Reagan. More evidence.

1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to help them kill Iraqis. --Part of Iran-contra

1989: CI

Oh, you want recent? What about the White House supporting the people who tried to orchestrate a Coup d'etat against the democracy in Venezuela? When the coup failed, President Chavez said that the CIA had involvement, with video.

Or how about when New Zealand said they didn't support war against Iraq, so the US shut them out of Free Trade talks, leaving Australia in instead?

Or what about the US' long laundry list of vetoes in the UN? What's the count, 35 resolutions concerning Israel vetoed by the US? Even being the sole dissenting vote in many cases. Of course this is abuse of the US' power, to please the Jewish and Christian Zionist voters back home. These weren't all binding, and some of them were common sense "S/17769/Rev. 1: Occupied Territories: Calls upon Israel to respect Muslim holy places." Why should the US, the supposed "peace broker" of the Middle East, block that, and stand as the sole vote againt?

Want more?

I've been wanting to try my hand at firearms, just to see if a youth spent playing Duck Hunt and an adolescence playing FPS games has given me a preternatural shooting ability.

You wouldn't happen to be into bowling, too, would you?

Someone arrest this man...

--

Would you happen to be interested in bowling, too?

--

The American Bowling Congress, with their promotions that use violent images, is clearly responsible for those deaths. The blood of America's children is on their hands.

Having left TV alone for six months my kid (13) says she's happier from not watching it. I no longer miss ANY show, except maybe Actors Studio.
The point being that TV really is very intrusive in that you are mostly at the whim of the networks. His gradual release from their influence has left him a happer and calmer person. Interestingly an Oscar winning fellow by the name of Michael Moore made a number of documentaries including one called Bowling for Columbine.
Michael makes the same observation as I had which is that what seperate Canada and the US is how the US media leaves the reader/viewer with an increasing amount of fear. Being from Sweden myself and having lived on a few different continents, where the media is not that focused on bad news, it's creepy to see how afraid the american society is. Did you know in Canada many people don't evel lock their doors? They don't see any reason to lock themselves in.
The impact is so gradual that it's easy to miss. But once you have successfully stepped off TV you realize the difference.

I love the Subject. OSS zealots, like myself, tend to miss the point from time to time.

What people need to realize here is that technology does NOT always solve a problem. Even if it appears to solve the problem it may create numerous other problems. Why put the election results into the hands of a few campaign-funding corporations? Our government has a history of setting up phony elections to install leaders in other countries, why make it easy to do so here. Read here or here. You can argue that Michael Moore is a wacko, he isn't, but history often has a way of telling us the truth behind the rhetoric.

I love the Subject. OSS zealots, like myself, tend to miss the point from time to time.

What people need to realize here is that technology does NOT always solve a problem. Even if it appears to solve the problem it may create numerous other problems. Why put the election results into the hands of a few campaign-funding corporations? Our government has a history of setting up phony elections to install leaders in other countries, why make it easy to do so here. Read here or here. You can argue that Michael Moore is a wacko, he isn't, but history often has a way of telling us the truth behind the rhetoric.

I wasn't entirely serious.

Seen Bowling for Columbine ?

I simply made a play on words, with regards to the whole bowling thing. No tinfoil hat involved.

See The Culture of Fear. This problem is way overrated. So is "child abduction".

In terms of risk, your kid is far more likely to be hit by a drunk driver than abducted by a stranger, seduced over the Internet, or killed by a terrorist. Get a grip.

in the tried and true american tradition, the riaa is trying to incite fear in the file sharing populace.

given the shear number of file sharers out there, 261 people is pretty insignificant, much less than 1%. given that in the last five years, about 26% of drivers where involved in car accident (source) you should be more worried about crashing than the riaa suing you.

i'm sure the riaa realizes this but also knows that fear is a powerful motivating force. they're just hoping that hearing about these lawsuits will turn many of those who now share into leachers, or knock them off the network entirely.

for a lot if interesting info about the culture of fear in america you can look here

Didn't the "Wonderful World" sequence from Bowling for Columbine teach you that the US isn't perfect overseas?

There are too many 'normal' white people to do THAT to.

They wait for one that is a smaller group, like those of us that were wearing trench coats, that were all of the sudden going to kill everyone. I had worn a black trench, and listened to Marilyn for years before that, then it happens, and everyone starts looking at me funnier then before. Alot of us who fit the 'profile' regardless of where we were got pulled into the principles offices, and forced to change, ordered to see school shrinks.

We have always done this. Regardless of the group. If you havent seen Bowling for Columbine, do so.

When you're done with that, visit Michael Moore's homepage.

Moore's Bowling for Columbine won an Oscar for Best Documentary.

We compound our worries beyond all reason. Life expectancy in the United States has doubled during the twentieth century. We are better able to cure and control diseases than any other civilization in history. Yet we hear that phenomenal numbers of us are dreadfully ill. In 1996 Bob Garfield, a magazine writer, reviewed articles about serious diseases published over the course of a year in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and USA Today. He learned that, in addition to 59 million Americans with heart disease, 53 million with migraines, 25 million with osteoporosis, 16 million with obesity, and 3 million with cancer, many Americans suffer from more obscure ailments such as temporomandibular joint disorders (10 million) and brain injuries (2 million). Adding up the estimates, Garfield determined that 543 million Americans are seriously sick-a shocking number in a nation of 266 million inhabitants. "Either as a society we are doomed, or someone is seriously double-dipping," he suggested.

Actually, the way SETI works allows for any workload over an extended period of time. The samples that your computer is analysing have been around for quite some time; they are transmitted from regions that are light years away! In addition, it is only once every year or so that they have a real chance to look for anything interesting that they find. As far as a cure for SARS goes, I have an elderly grandmother who was rushed to the hospital for unrelated reasons shortly after the start of the SARS scare in Ontario. She was taken into an ambulance by men and women wearing full environmental suits. She has since been released, quite possibly too early (they still don't know what was wrong with her), so I'm anxious for the world to just deal with SARS. This is a prime example of the Fear Consumption Model brought to us by Marilyn Manson and Michael Moore. The more we fear, the more we consume. As a whole our society has seen millions of dollars spent on research on a disease that has only killed 295 people out of over six billion. When diseases were feared in the past it was worth fearing them: Justinian's Plague (541-544AD) killed 40% of the population of Constantinople; In the 14th Century we saw as many as 800 people a day dying of the Bubonic Plague -- 30% of Normandy's population was decimated. By comparison, SARS has managed to destroy less than 0.0000005% of the world's population, infecting a mere 0.000077% of the population.

I can't wait until we can attribute violence to the nightly news.

Or don't you guys watch documentaries?

:P

Are you seriously suggesting that keeping around 200 alleged terrorists locked up without due process is somehow comparable to killing 5000 civilians with chemical weapons?

It was a poor example of the reprehensible behaviour (including terrorism as defined here or here) that the US has been known to engage in.

Visit clips , click on "A brief history of America". THINK!

I believe a US-led war on Iraq is entirely justified
Is this because of all the technology/weapons of mass destruction the US helped him aquire? Maybe Bush should take this up with his daddy and leave the world alone. Why doesn't the US present this as the much seeked proof of WMD in Iraq?

After one madman bent on your destruction is *not* attacked, and then kills thousands of innocent Americans, it is perfectly justified to seek out other madmen bent on your destruction.
You did attack Al-Qaeda and Ossama Bin Ladden. It was your excuse for bombing Afghanistan. Thousands died in your showoff, and like the 9/11 attacks, the thousands that died did not have anything to do with there government's foreign policy. Did you find him Ossama Bin Ladden? No.

Does anybody, even the French, put forth that Saddam is not a madman,
He is a madman, but please dont play the hollier than though card, not after you fundded him, not after you purposedly supplied him with knowledge and equipment to perform his madness. And if judged by the ammount of pain and grief he has inflicted, Bush is even madder than Hussein.

is he not highly interested in doing harm to the U.S.?
yes, probably, along with many other countries and people who you have wadged war in the past. Are you going to bomb them all just because you are not popular among them?

I just worry that Iraq and its surrounding nations will propagandize this (as history shows they have before) and use it as a tool to create more, not less terrorism. Justified or not, it will still bring a lot of negative consequences when we win--maybe more than if we didn't do it at all.
I totally agree with you in this point. Going to war is a no win scenario for the US and Iraq in the long run. Like it or not, the root of US directed terrorism is the past US foreign policy. Want to stop terrorism? Change your foreign policy.

1) Screening does not make it safe. http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/stupid. php Some argue that the passengers are less safe against hijackers without their pen knives, knitting needles, toenail clippers, and letter openers.

2) Who would pay?

3) What is the first thing a potential hijacker would want? A super-duper security clearance id!

4) Suppose you pass the offline screening test 'a couple years ago' and then your sheep leaves you, and you decide to hijack a plane with your can of mace. You think you should be able to show your pass and walk on by?

5) Do you look like your ID? Does anybody else?

This is an extremely well done (and funny!) documentary on America's obsession with guns, done by Michael Moore. Catch the trailor here.

It includes a great scene of Michael Moore going to a bank advertising "Free Gun With New Account", and sure enough, walks out with a brand new firearm!

Okay, I wear a trench coat, I was just as alienated as the next teenager, but I find this picture a little troubling. Sam Barros lives in Michigan now, and if you saw Bowling for Columbine you know what that means - all the other children are armed too. Teenagers with guns bother me, because my Mom TOOK MY GUN AWAY - I mean, because it's dangerous.

It's not how long you lived, it's HOW you lived...

I felt the same way when I was his age :)

Seriously; there are physiological changes that occur, alterations in brain chemistry, which, let us face facts, impair the judgement and good sense of young people. That is not to say that there are no teenagers with far better sense than the average adult; but even so, it's a stage in neurological development that does not promote sensible behavior.

It also means that explosions are not nearly as cool as they seem when you're 18. Another fact - chicks do not dig explosions. I learned this the hard way so now I pass it on to the younger generation.

I don't think explosives chemistry is a good starting place for a junior chemist; Sam Barros has obviously done fine, but I'm not sure how this stands as a role model. For one thing, he clearly does have good sense (note the many safety warnings emblazoned all over his web page.)

Chemistry involving dyes, optics, visual effects, material science and metallurgy (electroplating, for example) is no more difficult and much safer. Making stuff like this can't indulge your inner pyromanic like a bomb can. I'm not trying to criticize teenage boys for wanting to cause some damage - I certainly did - but it worries me.

So, I wonder - why does the slashdot story focus on the explosives? His EM devices are cooler anyway.

Ah, the hell with it. I'm only 23 years old! What am I thinking? It's time I put together a web page on how to weaponise biological and chemical agents. Now THAT would earn you some attention at the science fair.

Finally - when blowing up your school, wear ear protection! Regrowing fingers and toes is just around the corner (well, hopefully, I have some friends working on this); regrowing your inner ear may never be possible.

List of stupid american military actions

If you think it's not a good idea to have a military, start coming up with damn good reasons not to have them. And make sure you include among those reasons "no other country would attack us, not now, not ever, no matter what our national policies are." Until you can say that, you need the military.

You need the military because the US uses the military to piss off other countries by interfering with stuff that's none of it's business anyway.
You need the military to defend against people like osama bin laden, a person who has been trained by your own CIA and funded with 3 billion of your taxpayers money
You need the military because saddam hussein has too many weapons, which he bought with the billions of US taxpayer money your government gave him.
You need the military because having a military creates a need for a military.

The US are supposed to be the good guys, start behaving like that and you'll see that there will be a lot less hard feelings against the US.
stop bullying the world and you'll see that in a few decades you won't need a military anymore.

And before you start preaching on how 'good' the US is, read
this list and weep.

Why email Saddam Hussein? If you have followed recent news you will find that it is the US that is about to invade Iraq, not the other way around.

I bet that the coming US invasion of Iraq will end up in this list pretty soon...

Ok, but why should I believe Mr. Sullivan any more than I believe Michael Moore? Mr. Sullivan does nothing more than assert his own "facts" and gives no useable references to back up his views that Michael Moore had lied.

For example, the issue that the Columbine kids were *not* bowling that morning as tossed out by Sullivan in his article in opposition to Moore's view that they were:

From the "Bowling for Columbine" FAQ page:

The title is taken from the little-known fact that the two killers, Dylan and Eric, were supposed to be in bowling class at Columbine High School on the morning of the murders. At least five witnesses, including their teacher, told the police that they saw one or both boys that morning at the bowling alley for their first hour class. Some school and law enforcement officials later maintained that the two boys skipped that class that morning yet no other witness has come forward to say they saw Eric and Dylan anywhere else that morning.

One reason the film is called "Bowling For Columbine" is that, after the massacre, all the pundits and experts started blaming all the usual suspects that are wheeled out for blame whenever a school shooting occurs--evil rock music (in this case Marilyn Manson), violent video games, and bad parenting.

My point is that those scapegoats make about as much sense as blaming bowling. After all, Eric and Dylan were bowlers, they took bowling class at Columbine--was bowling responsible for their evil deeds? If they bowled that morning, did the bowling trigger their desire to commit mass murder? Or, if they skipped their bowling class that morning, did that bring on the massacre? Had they bowled, that may have altered their mood and prevented them from picking up their guns. As you can see, this is all nonsense, just as it is nonsense to blame Marilyn Manson.

From Sullivan's "source" Dan Lyons of Forbes magazine:

TITLE: Moore titled the movie Bowling for Columbine because, he suggests, the two kids who shot up Columbine High in Littleton, Colo., went to a 6 a.m. bowling class on the day of the attack.
ACTUALLY: Cool story, but police say it's not true. They say the shooters skipped their bowling class that day.

I'm sorry, but while I don't have links to the actual witness statements and police reports, I'd say that Michael Moore's explanation is better than Mr. Sullivan's "proof" from Dan Lyons' two sentence statements.

In fact, the FAQ page goes on to debunk quite a few of the "facts" stated by Dan Lyons (what's Forbes magazine doing trying to debunk a documentary anyways? why don't they stick to money articles?):

Q. Is that bank that hands out guns for real?
A. Yes. North Country Bank (with branches throughout Northern Michigan) offers you a wide choice of guns when you open up a certificate of deposit account. In effect, they are giving you all of the interest the account will earn in advance in the form of a gun. The bank is also an authorized federal arms dealer so they can do the quick background check right there at the bank. I put $1,000 in a long-term account, they did the background check, and, within an hour, walked out with my new Weatherby--just as you see it in the film. (I did have a choice of getting a pair of golf clubs or a grandfather clock, but they didn't have either of those hanging on the wall like they did those three rifles). I learned about the bank's gun offer from an ad in the local paper that showed a gun across the top with the heading, " More Bang for Your Buck" from North Country Bank. I still have the account and the gun to this day (though I plan to legally "auction" off the gun for charity, and creatively have it destroyed--more on that later!)

and...

Q. How did you convince Lockheed to let you in their missile factory in Littleton?
A. Well, first of all, the Lockheed PR people would disagree with your use of the term, "missile." They now call their Titan and Atlas missiles on which nuclear warheads were once (and still are but in less numbers) attached, "rockets." That's because the Lockheed rockets now take satellites into outer space. Some of them are weather satellites, some are telecommunications satellites, and some are top secret Pentagon projects (like the ones that are launched as spy satellites and others which are used to direct the launching of the nuclear missiles should the USA ever decide to use them).

Lockheed Martin is the largest defense contractor in the United States. They gave us the MX missile and are now heavily involved in developing the nutty Star Wars missile defense shield. They have five facilities in and around the Littleton and Denver area and they are the #1 private employer in the school district that contains Columbine High School.

How did I get their permission to film there? I threatened them with bombing, of course.

and...

If you believe Mr. Sullivan's suppositions that all of the US money to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan went to "aid" not to the government, then you should check out this link on Moore's site. It is, unlike Sullivan's article, well-linked and referenced to the State Dept reports and other sources which explain how the money was sent to Afghanistan in order to support the Taliban (not the people).

When it comes to fact-checking a documentary on how our culture is skewed in some places, I'll trust Michael Moore, not Andrew Sullivan and Dan Lyons.

Ok, but why should I believe Mr. Sullivan any more than I believe Michael Moore? Mr. Sullivan does nothing more than assert his own "facts" and gives no useable references to back up his views that Michael Moore had lied.

For example, the issue that the Columbine kids were *not* bowling that morning as tossed out by Sullivan in his article in opposition to Moore's view that they were:

From the "Bowling for Columbine" FAQ page:

The title is taken from the little-known fact that the two killers, Dylan and Eric, were supposed to be in bowling class at Columbine High School on the morning of the murders. At least five witnesses, including their teacher, told the police that they saw one or both boys that morning at the bowling alley for their first hour class. Some school and law enforcement officials later maintained that the two boys skipped that class that morning yet no other witness has come forward to say they saw Eric and Dylan anywhere else that morning.

One reason the film is called "Bowling For Columbine" is that, after the massacre, all the pundits and experts started blaming all the usual suspects that are wheeled out for blame whenever a school shooting occurs--evil rock music (in this case Marilyn Manson), violent video games, and bad parenting.

My point is that those scapegoats make about as much sense as blaming bowling. After all, Eric and Dylan were bowlers, they took bowling class at Columbine--was bowling responsible for their evil deeds? If they bowled that morning, did the bowling trigger their desire to commit mass murder? Or, if they skipped their bowling class that morning, did that bring on the massacre? Had they bowled, that may have altered their mood and prevented them from picking up their guns. As you can see, this is all nonsense, just as it is nonsense to blame Marilyn Manson.

From Sullivan's "source" Dan Lyons of Forbes magazine:

TITLE: Moore titled the movie Bowling for Columbine because, he suggests, the two kids who shot up Columbine High in Littleton, Colo., went to a 6 a.m. bowling class on the day of the attack.
ACTUALLY: Cool story, but police say it's not true. They say the shooters skipped their bowling class that day.

I'm sorry, but while I don't have links to the actual witness statements and police reports, I'd say that Michael Moore's explanation is better than Mr. Sullivan's "proof" from Dan Lyons' two sentence statements.

In fact, the FAQ page goes on to debunk quite a few of the "facts" stated by Dan Lyons (what's Forbes magazine doing trying to debunk a documentary anyways? why don't they stick to money articles?):

Q. Is that bank that hands out guns for real?
A. Yes. North Country Bank (with branches throughout Northern Michigan) offers you a wide choice of guns when you open up a certificate of deposit account. In effect, they are giving you all of the interest the account will earn in advance in the form of a gun. The bank is also an authorized federal arms dealer so they can do the quick background check right there at the bank. I put $1,000 in a long-term account, they did the background check, and, within an hour, walked out with my new Weatherby--just as you see it in the film. (I did have a choice of getting a pair of golf clubs or a grandfather clock, but they didn't have either of those hanging on the wall like they did those three rifles). I learned about the bank's gun offer from an ad in the local paper that showed a gun across the top with the heading, " More Bang for Your Buck" from North Country Bank. I still have the account and the gun to this day (though I plan to legally "auction" off the gun for charity, and creatively have it destroyed--more on that later!)

and...

Q. How did you convince Lockheed to let you in their missile factory in Littleton?
A. Well, first of all, the Lockheed PR people would disagree with your use of the term, "missile." They now call their Titan and Atlas missiles on which nuclear warheads were once (and still are but in less numbers) attached, "rockets." That's because the Lockheed rockets now take satellites into outer space. Some of them are weather satellites, some are telecommunications satellites, and some are top secret Pentagon projects (like the ones that are launched as spy satellites and others which are used to direct the launching of the nuclear missiles should the USA ever decide to use them).

Lockheed Martin is the largest defense contractor in the United States. They gave us the MX missile and are now heavily involved in developing the nutty Star Wars missile defense shield. They have five facilities in and around the Littleton and Denver area and they are the #1 private employer in the school district that contains Columbine High School.

How did I get their permission to film there? I threatened them with bombing, of course.

and...

If you believe Mr. Sullivan's suppositions that all of the US money to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan went to "aid" not to the government, then you should check out this link on Moore's site. It is, unlike Sullivan's article, well-linked and referenced to the State Dept reports and other sources which explain how the money was sent to Afghanistan in order to support the Taliban (not the people).

When it comes to fact-checking a documentary on how our culture is skewed in some places, I'll trust Michael Moore, not Andrew Sullivan and Dan Lyons.

Check out this movie called Bowling for Columbine. Its in alot of the bigger theaters and looks at the issues of violence in teens as well as adults. http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com Games arn't the reason either.

A Michael Moore fan, are you? ;)

"I think the bigger picture needs to be looked at here... the whole argument of "They have guns, so I damn well will have guns" is a self fulfilling, cyclical attitude that only breeds more and more insecurity... It's not the way to make everyone safe... this 'mutually assured destruction' thing is hardly a way to live life... how can you ever be at peace? How can you ever just relax? When you're locked in your house with the bars on the windows, the turret out the front, and your gun on your lap, ready to go, just in case?

Is it always in the back of your head that you could be shot at any moment? If so I do pity you... I don't mean that in a 'I pity da fool' kind of way, I really do pity anyone who lives their life like that... and I'm glad I'm in a country where I don't really have to.

The few times that I've been in the US I've managed to visit some pretty unpleasant areas of it (And some damn amazingly wonderful ones too), and those times, when I was with friends, and ended up in the wrong part of town, and were sheparded out by the police for they feared for our lives... well darn it, that scared us... there is no-where in Australia like that... NO-WHERE! Sure there are some not so nice places, places where you'd rather not spend your evening, but they sure as hell aren't the sort of places where police say "Don't go down there or you'll be shot"... that's some scary shit.

The whole gun control vs no control thing is becoming a little hazy in my mind, but the thing that remains clear as day is the type of society that breeds the NEED to carry one around to feel any sort of safety... that's a society with some serious damn issues, and suggesting that the entire world is like where you live, because you happen to be afraid is very, very niave... there are a lot of places in this wonderful world where you are able to go through your life without forever fearing for it.

I've read in other posts for this thread that there should be more effort put into welfare, medical treatment, education and the like instead of the hard focus just on guns, and I have to agree... that is the only way the USA is going to bring itself out of its absolute gun crazed state.

And I think that a link to the Bowling for Columbine intro page is needed (Although I'm sure it has been linked to many times before)... just because those figures say SO much... so damn much."

It's not the way to make everyone safe... this 'mutually assured destruction' thing is hardly a way to live life... how can you ever be at peace? How can you ever just relax? When you're locked in your house with the bars on the windows, the turret out the front, and your gun on your lap, ready to go, just in case?

Is it always in the back of your head that you could be shot at any moment? If so I do pity you... I don't mean that in a 'I pity da fool' kind of way, I really do pity anyone who lives their life like that... and I'm glad I'm in a country where I don't really have to.

The few times that I've been in the US I've managed to visit some pretty unpleasant areas of it (And some damn amazingly wonderful ones too), and those times, when I was with friends, and ended up in the wrong part of town, and were sheparded out by the police for they feared for our lives... well darn it, that scared us... there is no-where in Australia like that... NO-WHERE! Sure there are some not so nice places, places where you'd rather not spend your evening, but they sure as hell aren't the sort of places where police say "Don't go down there or you'll be shot"... that's some scary shit.

The whole gun control vs no control thing is becoming a little hazy in my mind, but the thing that remains clear as day is the type of society that breeds the NEED to carry one around to feel any sort of safety... that's a society with some serious damn issues, and suggesting that the entire world is like where you live, because you happen to be afraid is very, very niave... there are a lot of places in this wonderful world where you are able to go through your life without forever fearing for it.

I've read in other posts for this thread that there should be more effort put into welfare, medical treatment, education and the like instead of the hard focus just on guns, and I have to agree... that is the only way the USA is going to bring itself out of its absolute gun crazed state.

And I think that a link to the Bowling for Columbine intro page is needed (Although I'm sure it has been linked to many times before)... just because those figures say SO much... so damn much.

the incident that forms the title of the film is itself a myth

The title is taken from the little-known fact that the two killers, Dylan and Eric, were supposed to be in bowling class at Columbine High School on the morning of the murders. At least five witnesses, including their teacher, told the police that they saw one or both boys that morning at the bowling alley for their first hour class. Some school and law enforcement officials later maintained that the two boys skipped that class that morning yet no other witness has come forward to say they saw Eric and Dylan anywhere else that morning.

One reason the film is called "Bowling For Columbine" is that, after the massacre, all the pundits and experts started blaming all the usual suspects that are wheeled out for blame whenever a school shooting occurs--evil rock music (in this case Marilyn Manson), violent video games, and bad parenting.

My point is that those scapegoats make about as much sense as blaming bowling. After all, Eric and Dylan were bowlers, they took bowling class at Columbine--was bowling responsible for their evil deeds? If they bowled that morning, did the bowling trigger their desire to commit mass murder? Or, if they skipped their bowling class that morning, did that bring on the massacre? Had they bowled, that may have altered their mood and prevented them from picking up their guns. As you can see, this is all nonsense, just as it is nonsense to blame Marilyn Manson.

The title suggests other metaphors for the state of the nation which are best left to the viewers and their imagination.

http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/media/clips/ind ex.php Click the 'brief history of america' link for your favorite media player. Come to think of it, click the other links too. Then since it will probably have been /.ed by the time you get to the last one, just go out and see the movie.

The problem is in the actual regulation. How much training were you required to go through before you got your gun? Do all of the members of your family go through training (even the younger ones, so that they know to respect the gun, and so that they know it's not just daddy's toy)? Is it state or federally mandated that you had to prove that you knew what the hell you were doing before they let you take one of those things home with you?

This isn't a black or white matter of guns or no guns. People on either side of think so are delusional. This is a question of how carefully we screen and prepare gun recipients. Do we make sure they're prepared for the responsibility, or do we hand them over with new bank accounts and throw caution to the wind? How much accountability do you, the gun dealers (gun shows included) and the government have in insuring that people with weapons are people who know how do take care of weapons?

Qualification: I'm not a gun owner. I knew I wouldn't be one the day I went onto a range and my sheet came back without any holes. However, I know several, and most of them treat their weapons with the necessary respect and restrain due them. The ones that don't, well let's just say that's not an extra armrest in the front seat of the car, and pray that they're forced into choosing between responsbility or giving up their arms.

From Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" website:

On August 27, 1999 Bryan Midgette was arrested for abusing his wife, Marsha. Despite a restraining order, Bryan tracked Marsha down three days later at the Wal-Mart in Pottstown, Pennsylvania where she worked. He purchased bullets for his .22 caliber handgun in the store, then chased Marsha through the aisles and shot her before killing himself. Marsha survived, but suffers from severe brain damage.

For ten years, James Easton Kelly had studied towards a graduate degree in English at the University of Arkansas. Then, his professor, John R. Locke, informed him that due to his lack of progress towards his doctorate, the school was dismissing him. At 11:27 AM on Monday, August 28th, 2000 Kelly went to a Wal-Mart 10 miles from the Fayetteville campus and purchased 50 rounds of .38 caliber bullets. He then returned to the school, went to Locke's office and, shortly after noon, shot Locke three times, killing him instantly. Kelly then turned the gun on himself.

On May 22, 2001 Laura Gassaway entered a Wal-Mart in Rockford, Illinois, went to the sporting goods section and tried to purchase bullets for her handgun. After the clerk refused to sell to her because she did not have a state firearm owners identification card, Gassaway began shoplifting other items before store security stopped her. The security officers called the police and then took Gassaway to the back of the store. There, she pulled a handgun from her purse and shot three security guards before police burst in and killed her.

During an argument with his estranged wife on July 31, 2001, John VanGraafeiland threatened to go to Wal-Mart, buy bullets and kill himself. Police contacted the two local Wal-Mart's in Wilmington, North Carolina, warning them not to sell bullets to the man, but no one told the clerk selling the ammunition. After purchasing the bullets, VanGraafeiland went to his car and killed himself. Wal-Mart eventually settled a lawsuit brought by his family, paying them $130,000 for their negligence.