The part that i found most interesting in Bowling for Columbine was that they sold guns at the bank. I think it is ridiculous that guns can be bought that easily. Even though they did background checks on the people, it still makes it too easy to get it. Gun violence is a big problem in the country and buying a bank makes criminals getting guns too easy. If you want to get a gun you should have to go through a long process to ensure you aren't mentally unstable and will not use it to kill people.
The part of bowling for columbine that I found most interesting was the fact that Micheal Moore was from Michigan. He was also an NRA "marksman". With him being brought up with the values that are important in Michigan, you would think that he would be a gun freak as well as the people that he is showing in the movie. In addition, it surprised me that he feels so strongly opposed to guns. Lastly, his choices for the people to be interviewed were biased and showed a one sided approach to the gun issue
Michael moore's Bowling for Columbine is a very eye opening but leftist film. His biting remarks and entertaining but slightly pejorative sarcasm leaves no one unscathed and left with bitter laughter. Specifically in the beginning, as he reexplores his homestate of Michigan. Moore, doing in a funny way (as if it softens the blow) presents the people their as idiots. When he questioned about the banks handing out guns to people and its safety. I think it depends on the area, in a place where hunting is so popular knowledge of guns probably start from childhood. Frankly, I don't see the big deal. Its like giving a steak knife that you can easily shank with to someone at a cooking class. You would assume that they are not psycopathic or diagnosed with antisocial personality. But I guess a psycho could choose a cooking class as the setting for his mass murder if he so pleased.
the part of the documentary that most intrigued me was actually at the beginning when Michael Moore went to open a bank account. Now the point about the bank account didn't intrigue me, it was the part when they said that you can get a free gun when you open a bank account. now what i don't get is that why would they give you a free gun for opening a bank account instead of like money. if they hive a gun to the wrong person for example someone who is crazy they could go and us that gun to kill people or even rob someplace like the bank. I feel that if they had to give a gun then they should give it to them with absolutely no ammo. That way hey for the moment can cause no harm. This is what i found to be interesting from the documentary bowling for columbine.
In Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for Columbine, he explores the world in which we live in a nation where people are obsessed with guns and violence. Why do some feel in need of the reassurance of guns? An interesting segment of the movie is when Chris Rock suggests that our problem could be solved by simply increasing the price of bullets. This is just the same way taxes are put on cigarettes. Instead of bullets costing a trivial amount of money, why not raise the price to $5,000? Chris Rock goes on to say that there'd be less innocent bystanders if bullets were that expensive. I think he brings up a good point, but at the same time, it's very impractical.
The part of Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for Columbine, that shocked me the most and I found to be extremely interesting was the fact that in Michigan any ordinary person that passes a background check can receive a free weapon at a bank. I don't think background checks are such a great source to rely on when purchasing and obtaining weapons. A person could possibly snap at any time and endanger anyone if they are in the presence of any available weapons. I believe there should be a longer and more challenging process if you want to obtain a gun.
From watching the documentary, Bowling for Columbine, it came to my attention how Michael Moore shows citizen of the town and how they are so strong for having guns. Im not saying I'm against having guns, but I do believe to have them for your protection. Yet there is a thin line for having it for protection or just for unnecessary reasons. It surprises me how the people Michael interviews are, I hate to say but stupid. They lack education when they speak. For example, a women of the Militia says she joined to protect her daughter yet her child roams around in the cold in just a diaper. I see the strong contradiction there and its not only funny but eye-opening. I enjoy watching the documentary but I believe that the people of the town need more education so they can understand how dangerous it is for them to carry large guns. The town lacks authority to control the use of guns hence why the two young boys were able to get and use them against their own student body. It is sad to see the terrible act by the two boys. It goes to show that we can't get rid of the guns but there needs to be more control of the people purchasing or using the guns. The problem is the people behind the gun.
In the documentary, Bowling For Columbine, Michael Moore helps me realize the true dangers of gun usage. The fact that anybody can walk into a local bank, apply for a bank account, and then receive a dangerous weapon is mind blowing. I know the bank does a “background check” and says the individual is totally fine and then hands them a gun. But, do you really know what that person is capable of? What they would actually do with that gun. I’m pro gun in some ways, for example if a member of law enforcement or if military men and women have guns I’m fine because they go through the proper training and use those guns to protect and serve our country. It’s ridiculous that anyone in a state down south can walk into their local Wal-Mart and buy a gun. This country is making it easier and easier for an individual to have a gun in hands.
Michael Moore's documentary "Bowling for Columbine" is an amazing documentary about how easy it is for people to access gun and how dangerous they can be. I believe that guns are not the problem but people are. A gun cannot walk out a door pull its own trigger there is alway someone behind the gun. In this documentary he is very one sided and he almost makes you feel guilty for being pro guns. If the government bands guns people who want to kill others will just use another weapon or make one themselves. I do in fact believe that guns should not be so easily accessed. For example, you should not be able to get a gun just by opening in a banks account. People should have to undergo a few test in order to gain access to a gun. The Chris Rock segment was very funny but he did have a point when he said we should raise the price on bullets because people would not want to use the bullets unless they were in true danger.
The part from Michael Moore's documentary Bowling for Columbine I thought that was most interesting was that any normal state residence of Michigan can get a gun so easily.All the person has to do is pass a very basic background check and they can receive a gun from the local bank. Its idiotic that the banks are storing the guns in the banks too that's just asking for an armed robbery. I feel that if a person wants to purchase a weapon they should have to go through more than a mediocre background check. They should have to go though numerous other tests to buy a weapon because there are some crazy people out there. Say if someone has a bad day and there temper goes off and they decide they want to kill people they could easily do that because they got a gun so easily.Guns aren't always the problem a lot of the times its the sick crazy individuals holding the gun.
I do think that the film is completely one sidded, but thats the way Moore is. It's his movie and he can show what he wants to. Not everyone is going to agree with it and that's just the way life is. Bad things are going to happen and is there really a way to prevent it? You can blame whatever you want but im a realistic person and were always going to hear bad news. Thats just life.
The part of Bowling for Columbine that I found most interesting so far was the footage from the school shooting. It was a terrible tragedy that happened that day but for some reason as a viewer of the film it interests me the most. I couldn't get my eyes off the film. "If it bleeds, it leads" relates to this a lot because as much of a tragedy that it was it intrigued so many viewers. The film is completely one sided and i am completely against anti-gun.
They say the point of a documentary is a film about real life events and real people using actual images and objects. However Michael Moore is very opinionated in his attempts to make a film going over the horrific events of Columbine. It is one thing to have an opinion, but his use of manipulation when making this film paints all gun users as psychotic, evil people who are all the same. I also dislike the way he tries to include humor in such a terrible topic. I truly believe that he is a horrible human being that is so one sides when trying to make a film not only is he hypocritical by shooting guns his entire childhood. He makes guns seem to be the problem and makes guns seem evil when he is interviewing people who are not mentally stable. He is trying to make a topic our country was founded on seem evil but he raises controversy to a constitutional amendment. Not only do I think guns are not the problem but I believe his viewpoints are immoral. I don't believe you should paint anyone as a bad person because of their beliefs however he uses tactics that are in bad taste in order to get his point across. His negativity towards guns should also be reflected on other weapons on well. What about the kids parents they obviously knew the boys were unstable. The father called in saying they were in a gang, why were they not blamed why is it the gun and not the insane and sadistic mind of the child who want to crash a plane into New York. Who is to say it was the gun? Yes it is a horrific event that happened but guns were not to blame. Guns are made with the intent to protect and to provide is it truly the guns fault if they are misused. Over the past week a mother of three drove a car into a lake with her children in the car while expecting another child too no one knows why she did it but she did. Does that mean that cars should be band because it was used as a tool to kill instead of it's intended use. So is it really the guns I truly don't believe that people can blame guns and I believe that Michael Moore I too one sided on his film and he himself is a problem with society.
Micheal Moore's documentary is very one sided. He is trying to make guns look like the problem when in my opinion i believe the people who commit these crimes are the ones to blame. I think its unfair to blame guns and say they are bad for society. When they are made to protect people and it is the persons fault who chooses what to do with the gun. I think trying to get rid of guns is foolish because bad things are still going to happen such as columbine and sometimes its impossible to prevent these crimes from happening. Instead of blaming the guns for being responsible for the Columbine shooting we should be looking at the people who committed these crimes. Such as the Father of one of the shooters who called the school and said he thinks his son might be involved. These shooters were mentally unstable and guns should not be looked at in a negative way just because they got in the wrong hands. I think we will never truly understand why people commit these horrible crimes, people just want answers and want to blame the guns. I think the Father should have done something to help his son if he knew he needed help.
The part of Bowling for Columbine I find most interesting is the footage from the day of the shooting. It scary to know things like that can actually happen in the world and we're not always safe no matter where we are. I think it's ridiculous the bank even allows them to have guns. Even a backround check isn't enough to prove the person isn't going to harm anyone. The footage from the shooting was very sad. When the girl in the video was being interviewed i could see the fear in her eyes of how much it affected her.
The part that i found most interesting in Bowling for Columbine was that they sold guns at the bank. I think it is ridiculous that guns can be bought that easily. Even though they did background checks on the people, it still makes it too easy to get it. Gun violence is a big problem in the country and buying a bank makes criminals getting guns too easy. If you want to get a gun you should have to go through a long process to ensure you aren't mentally unstable and will not use it to kill people.
ReplyDeleteThe part of bowling for columbine that I found most interesting was the fact that Micheal Moore was from Michigan. He was also an NRA "marksman". With him being brought up with the values that are important in Michigan, you would think that he would be a gun freak as well as the people that he is showing in the movie. In addition, it surprised me that he feels so strongly opposed to guns. Lastly, his choices for the people to be interviewed were biased and showed a one sided approach to the gun issue
ReplyDeleteMichael moore's Bowling for Columbine is a very eye opening but leftist film. His biting remarks and entertaining but slightly pejorative sarcasm leaves no one unscathed and left with bitter laughter. Specifically in the beginning, as he reexplores his homestate of Michigan. Moore, doing in a funny way (as if it softens the blow) presents the people their as idiots. When he questioned about the banks handing out guns to people and its safety. I think it depends on the area, in a place where hunting is so popular knowledge of guns probably start from childhood. Frankly, I don't see the big deal. Its like giving a steak knife that you can easily shank with to someone at a cooking class. You would assume that they are not psycopathic or diagnosed with antisocial personality. But I guess a psycho could choose a cooking class as the setting for his mass murder if he so pleased.
ReplyDeletethe part of the documentary that most intrigued me was actually at the beginning when Michael Moore went to open a bank account. Now the point about the bank account didn't intrigue me, it was the part when they said that you can get a free gun when you open a bank account. now what i don't get is that why would they give you a free gun for opening a bank account instead of like money. if they hive a gun to the wrong person for example someone who is crazy they could go and us that gun to kill people or even rob someplace like the bank. I feel that if they had to give a gun then they should give it to them with absolutely no ammo. That way hey for the moment can cause no harm. This is what i found to be interesting from the documentary bowling for columbine.
ReplyDeleteIn Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for Columbine, he explores the world in which we live in a nation where people are obsessed with guns and violence. Why do some feel in need of the reassurance of guns? An interesting segment of the movie is when Chris Rock suggests that our problem could be solved by simply increasing the price of bullets. This is just the same way taxes are put on cigarettes. Instead of bullets costing a trivial amount of money, why not raise the price to $5,000? Chris Rock goes on to say that there'd be less innocent bystanders if bullets were that expensive. I think he brings up a good point, but at the same time, it's very impractical.
ReplyDeleteThe part of Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for Columbine, that shocked me the most and I found to be extremely interesting was the fact that in Michigan any ordinary person that passes a background check can receive a free weapon at a bank. I don't think background checks are such a great source to rely on when purchasing and obtaining weapons. A person could possibly snap at any time and endanger anyone if they are in the presence of any available weapons. I believe there should be a longer and more challenging process if you want to obtain a gun.
ReplyDeleteFrom watching the documentary, Bowling for Columbine, it came to my attention how Michael Moore shows citizen of the town and how they are so strong for having guns. Im not saying I'm against having guns, but I do believe to have them for your protection. Yet there is a thin line for having it for protection or just for unnecessary reasons. It surprises me how the people Michael interviews are, I hate to say but stupid. They lack education when they speak. For example, a women of the Militia says she joined to protect her daughter yet her child roams around in the cold in just a diaper. I see the strong contradiction there and its not only funny but eye-opening. I enjoy watching the documentary but I believe that the people of the town need more education so they can understand how dangerous it is for them to carry large guns. The town lacks authority to control the use of guns hence why the two young boys were able to get and use them against their own student body. It is sad to see the terrible act by the two boys. It goes to show that we can't get rid of the guns but there needs to be more control of the people purchasing or using the guns. The problem is the people behind the gun.
ReplyDeleteIn the documentary, Bowling For Columbine, Michael Moore helps me realize the true dangers of gun usage. The fact that anybody can walk into a local bank, apply for a bank account, and then receive a dangerous weapon is mind blowing. I know the bank does a “background check” and says the individual is totally fine and then hands them a gun. But, do you really know what that person is capable of? What they would actually do with that gun. I’m pro gun in some ways, for example if a member of law enforcement or if military men and women have guns I’m fine because they go through the proper training and use those guns to protect and serve our country. It’s ridiculous that anyone in a state down south can walk into their local Wal-Mart and buy a gun. This country is making it easier and easier for an individual to have a gun in hands.
ReplyDeleteMichael Moore's documentary "Bowling for Columbine" is an amazing documentary about how easy it is for people to access gun and how dangerous they can be. I believe that guns are not the problem but people are. A gun cannot walk out a door pull its own trigger there is alway someone behind the gun. In this documentary he is very one sided and he almost makes you feel guilty for being pro guns. If the government bands guns people who want to kill others will just use another weapon or make one themselves. I do in fact believe that guns should not be so easily accessed. For example, you should not be able to get a gun just by opening in a banks account. People should have to undergo a few test in order to gain access to a gun. The Chris Rock segment was very funny but he did have a point when he said we should raise the price on bullets because people would not want to use the bullets unless they were in true danger.
ReplyDeleteThe part from Michael Moore's documentary Bowling for Columbine I thought that was most interesting was that any normal state residence of Michigan can get a gun so easily.All the person has to do is pass a very basic background check and they can receive a gun from the local bank. Its idiotic that the banks are storing the guns in the banks too that's just asking for an armed robbery. I feel that if a person wants to purchase a weapon they should have to go through more than a mediocre background check. They should have to go though numerous other tests to buy a weapon because there are some crazy people out there. Say if someone has a bad day and there temper goes off and they decide they want to kill people they could easily do that because they got a gun so easily.Guns aren't always the problem a lot of the times its the sick crazy individuals holding the gun.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the film is completely one sidded, but thats the way Moore is. It's his movie and he can show what he wants to. Not everyone is going to agree with it and that's just the way life is. Bad things are going to happen and is there really a way to prevent it? You can blame whatever you want but im a realistic person and were always going to hear bad news. Thats just life.
ReplyDeleteThe part of Bowling for Columbine that I found most interesting so far was the footage from the school shooting. It was a terrible tragedy that happened that day but for some reason as a viewer of the film it interests me the most. I couldn't get my eyes off the film. "If it bleeds, it leads" relates to this a lot because as much of a tragedy that it was it intrigued so many viewers. The film is completely one sided and i am completely against anti-gun.
ReplyDeleteThey say the point of a documentary is a film about real life events and real people using actual images and objects. However Michael Moore is very opinionated in his attempts to make a film going over the horrific events of Columbine. It is one thing to have an opinion, but his use of manipulation when making this film paints all gun users as psychotic, evil people who are all the same. I also dislike the way he tries to include humor in such a terrible topic. I truly believe that he is a horrible human being that is so one sides when trying to make a film not only is he hypocritical by shooting guns his entire childhood. He makes guns seem to be the problem and makes guns seem evil when he is interviewing people who are not mentally stable. He is trying to make a topic our country was founded on seem evil but he raises controversy to a constitutional amendment. Not only do I think guns are not the problem but I believe his viewpoints are immoral. I don't believe you should paint anyone as a bad person because of their beliefs however he uses tactics that are in bad taste in order to get his point across. His negativity towards guns should also be reflected on other weapons on well. What about the kids parents they obviously knew the boys were unstable. The father called in saying they were in a gang, why were they not blamed why is it the gun and not the insane and sadistic mind of the child who want to crash a plane into New York. Who is to say it was the gun? Yes it is a horrific event that happened but guns were not to blame. Guns are made with the intent to protect and to provide is it truly the guns fault if they are misused. Over the past week a mother of three drove a car into a lake with her children in the car while expecting another child too no one knows why she did it but she did. Does that mean that cars should be band because it was used as a tool to kill instead of it's intended use. So is it really the guns I truly don't believe that people can blame guns and I believe that Michael Moore I too one sided on his film and he himself is a problem with society.
ReplyDeleteMicheal Moore's documentary is very one sided. He is trying to make guns look like the problem when in my opinion i believe the people who commit these crimes are the ones to blame. I think its unfair to blame guns and say they are bad for society. When they are made to protect people and it is the persons fault who chooses what to do with the gun. I think trying to get rid of guns is foolish because bad things are still going to happen such as columbine and sometimes its impossible to prevent these crimes from happening. Instead of blaming the guns for being responsible for the Columbine shooting we should be looking at the people who committed these crimes. Such as the Father of one of the shooters who called the school and said he thinks his son might be involved. These shooters were mentally unstable and guns should not be looked at in a negative way just because they got in the wrong hands. I think we will never truly understand why people commit these horrible crimes, people just want answers and want to blame the guns. I think the Father should have done something to help his son if he knew he needed help.
ReplyDeleteThe part of Bowling for Columbine I find most interesting is the footage from the day of the shooting. It scary to know things like that can actually happen in the world and we're not always safe no matter where we are. I think it's ridiculous the bank even allows them to have guns. Even a backround check isn't enough to prove the person isn't going to harm anyone. The footage from the shooting was very sad. When the girl in the video was being interviewed i could see the fear in her eyes of how much it affected her.
ReplyDelete