Bowling for Columbine

I have a lot to say about this documentary… but I don’t know if I’ll write it all down.

I think it has a lot more to do with the United States as a country than actual gun control. Most of the places discussed are gun-loving countries, but it’s the U.S. that has the highest rate of gun related deaths. I think this documentary is attacking the view American’s have of the 2nd amendment rather than the actual right we have to bear arms.

I bought this movie last night, after we watched it for the second day in class… It won an Oscar.

It was made by Michael Moore, and this isn’t the only documentary he’s made. My roommate is taking sociology this semester and her prof. emails YouTube videos to his students. Last night she clicked on one of them and had me watch it with her. Michael Moore was documenting a protest against a protest in the first video we watched. The people of Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas were standing just feet away from a soldier’s funeral with signs that read, “God Hates America” and “Death to Fag Enablers.” The entire foundation of this church is that the United States is hated by God because we allow and ‘encourage’ homosexuality. The soldiers fighting for our country, even those who are not gay, are not shielded from this group of protesters. Their reasoning? The soldiers are protecting a fag-loving country and therefore, are not loved by God. In this documentary, Moore travels with on a light pink painted bus with gay rights supporters and follows the Westboro Baptist Church protesters around the country.

I didn’t really think much of that documentary, even though it should have really hit home for me. I mostly just thought that those people were downright insane and decided that I would never venture anywhere near Topeka, Kansas in my lifetime.

So with that said, I would like to say that this gun control documentary is much better. A lot of time went into making this video and I hope all of you take some time to research this yourselves, or to at least think back on some of it’s points and ideas after this class.

A lot of things I’ve seen in this documentary shocked me. That in Michigan, a bank would deal firearms. The purpose of a bank is to handle money and loans. I always thought they were supposed to make money on interest-not guns. I was shocked that the shooters from Columbine and the bomber in Oklahoma City had all spent a duration of their lives living here in Michigan as well. I never really thought about this state in terms of what kind of people it produced.

However, some things didn’t shock me. The spokesperson for the Littleton Armory saying that countries don’t just get irritated with each other and bomb them, that wasn’t a shock. What was he supposed to say? The truth and lose his job? Of course not. I also wasn’t shocked that the media blamed Marilyn Manson for influencing the Columbine shootings. He scares people, that’s his job, how he makes money. He doesn’t kill people though.

So those are the things that shocked, and didn’t shock, me.

What I will forever take with me though, is the segment in which the Armory Spokesman said that countries did not just get mad at each other and blow one another up for no reason, that would just be insane and not at all what governmental policy is about. Everyone in this country knows that that statement was an outright lie. Moore didn’t have to show clip after clip of the U.S. bombing countries throughout the 20th century in order for us to know that the man didn’t have a leg to stand on. He didn’t have to play “What a Wonderful World” in the background of the segment… but he did.

I’m glad.

I did cry during this segment, and I don’t mind saying that. Things hit me hard when they are the absolute truth, and I feel that is what Moore showed us in that particular piece of the documentary. We don’t live in a wonderful world all of the time, not everyone tells the truth.

I’ve done a little bit of research and I know that Moore is against Bush’s politics, for homosexuality, against guns, ect. His methods aren’t appreciated by everyone, but he does a damn good job of getting people to listen to what he has to say. I really admire this man, not as much for his views, as for how he displays and argues for them.

I know why we are watching this movie…to understand persuasiveness, but I can’t help but find it ironic. Last week, when Julie asked us what we thought we could do in order to change our government, to make them see our side of issues, I told her something that none of you got to hear. I said that voting did nothing for us. We can elect who other people tell us to elect. In history, countries were taken by force. Usually, by the force of the people who lived there, and not outside occupations. I think my reasoning was perfectly logical. If we really wanted a change, someone would organize a rebellion against the government and it would be overthrown. No more constitution, no more bill of rights. We’d have new laws and new democracy.

I was not saying that I want to take over this country. I was simply explaining that that was the only way I saw change occurring. Not even good change, just change in general. I’m not an anarchist and I don’t worship the devil and all that other crap. I just don’t think this country is working, for me at least.

If anyone comments that I should just leave, if this is truly how I feel. I would love for them to buy me a plane ticket out. Nothing is that simple and there are always two sides of every fence. You can’t always run from something you don’t like. You can’t always fight it either.

So this is where I stand on guns and America.

On a precarious fence, unsure and afraid of where I might fall.

 

 

~ by addysinstardust on November 18, 2008.