PDA

View Full Version : Michael Moore's Admission


PuddinHead
August 30th, 2008, 10:40
Channel surfing the other night and landed on IFC and Michael Moore (Bowling for Columbine) was talking to Charlton Heston and Moore said something which sounded to me like an admission gun control advocate would never say. It went something like this:
"Mr. Heston, why do you think that there is more violent gun crime in the United States than in Canada when citizens in both countries possess the same amount of guns? Both have similar history of gun ownership, hunting etc."

Heston's reply was he didn't really know, but maybe (and he was only a guessing), it had something to do with the U.S. having such ethnic diversity, that some violence comes from friction between groups.

MY POINT IS THIS--MICHAEL MOORE ADMITTING THAT GUN VIOLENCE IS NOT CONNECTED TO THE OWNERSHIP OF GUNS! To me his argument loses most if not all credibility by that admission.

MY QUESTION THEN IS THIS--Why are Americans more violent that Canadians? Is it the water or what?

scottmcneal
August 30th, 2008, 10:52
I'll say TAXES....:doh:

WB9YZU
August 30th, 2008, 11:13
I'm not sure Mr. Moore is an anti-gun advocate as much as he is a pro-Michael Moore advocate.

I'd have to do a lot more research, which I am uninclined to do, to find out what the demographics of gun crime in the US. My gut feeling is that "gun violence" is not so much race related per se, as related to the perpetration of an other crime.

In other words, whether or not a gun was present, X number of robberies happened. While commiting said crime, Y number of robberies were commited with a gun, and Z number of robberies that were commited with a gun resulted in the discharge of said weapon. The important statistic to relating to Mr. Heston's "guess" is: How many of Y robberies were commited specifically because of the difference between the race difference between the criminal and their victim. My "guess" is that the selection of the victim based soley on race is not high enough to be relevant to Mr. Moore's question.

GSequoia
August 30th, 2008, 11:18
I blame lack of loose women.

ECKSJAY
August 30th, 2008, 11:24
I blame lack of loose women.

I agree, buddy.

Darky
August 30th, 2008, 11:45
If I remember correctly, the movie was actually about the media and it's violence. Hollywood movies, GTA, etc. He kinda took a roundabout route to it.

Ray H
August 30th, 2008, 13:16
I think a bigger question would be "why does anyone care what Michael Moore says or does. He's a nobody who has made a name for himself by pretending to know something. He is a prime example of "it doesnt matter what you say or what you know, all you have to do is talk louder than everyone else and people will listen".

As for Canadian violence. Are we figuring in the difference in population? When you stick a bunch of people in tight together, there will be more violence. I bet if you take most of the bigger cities in the U.S. out of the equation, the violence will statistically be very similar to other places in the world with similar population dencities. That and there are just some places in the world where people are more laid back because of economic and social differences.

SCW
August 30th, 2008, 13:26
Because we have so many screwed up gun laws, nearly everyone in possesion of a firearm can be found to violate some obscure statute. Some jackass dealing drugs is busted, only to find he also owned a gun. The gun was at home/in his car, but now it's a federal gun crime. We had a guy here in Utah go up the river for 25 years because he sold some pot and owned a handgun.

PuddinHead
August 30th, 2008, 14:41
If I remember correctly, the movie was actually about the media and it's violence. Hollywood movies, GTA, etc. He kinda took a roundabout route to it.

He (Moore) also included the fact that Canadians watch just as much TV, play same violent video games, listen to the same music yadda yadda yadda ad infinitum. Yet the murder rate (murder by gun) per capita is lower in Canada than U.S. Personnally, I would think the ethnic mix in Canada is similar to that in the United States.

WB9YZU
August 30th, 2008, 15:00
You'll see a lot more of those "combination laws" as time goes on. The logic is that if you can not be trusted not to commit a crime, you can't be trusted owning a gun. And if you were a trusted person, and commited a crime, they will come take it from you.

There are just so many people trying to do so many things that you just can't keep track of what is being made illegal at this very second.

I don't understand a legal system which takes minor offenses and makes them big crimes, yet will not execute our worse criminals.

red91
August 30th, 2008, 15:07
MY QUESTION THEN IS THIS--Why are Americans more violent that Canadians? Is it the water or what?


Fluoride.

iwannadie
August 30th, 2008, 15:09
I think they need to look at the type of guns in canada and the US, that will explain alot. I imagine the majority of guns in canada are rifles, not that easy to conceal/rob someone with a hunting rifle. In the US, Id bet handguns are in the majority or at least by far above the numbers in canada. I remember seeing something about how the average canadian household has 4 guns or something. Its always a rifle shown too, never see a pistol in those types of examples.

Im all for gun ownership(I open carry a pistol) and the freedoms behind it. I just think the canada comparison isnt a fair one. Id also like to know the numbers behind illegal gun trades. Here its easy to get illegal guns which Im sure account for a huge number of crimes. In canada if all the guns are legal that would cut down on gun related crimes, Id think.

WB9YZU
August 30th, 2008, 19:28
Perhaps they should examine the number of deaths attributed to candle sticks? Seems like every 30 or 40's film, some dame was picking up a candle stick and wacking somebody with it. Perhaps the relative mobilty, or lack of it of the average electric lamp has cut down on such deaths.

This conversation make less and less sense. Unless you can show real number of gun types, and the actual crime percentages in Canadian cities compared to American cities, I think everything else is like listening to Fox News, one conjecture followed by another.

Deadman 94 xj
August 30th, 2008, 20:59
America - More guns = less crime + more shootings

Canada - Less guns = more crime + more stabings

WB9YZU
August 30th, 2008, 21:00
America - More guns = less crime + more shootings

Canada - Less guns = more crime + more stabings

Statistics?

Deadman 94 xj
August 30th, 2008, 21:15
Statistics?

No stats but if I looked I'd find them.
Countries without guns have some crazy bastards in them. Person on person crime is super high compared to the US.
They don't do that stuff here because they know they'll get there heads blown off.

EMSJEEP
August 30th, 2008, 21:37
a prime example is England...they had a really bad school shooting some years ago and instituted an outright ban on firearms and experienced an increase in violent (firearm related) crime. The issue is that, save for the more publicized mass shootings in which a legal gun was obtained when it shouldn't have been or was stolen from a family member, I would venture to say that most firearms related crimes occur with the use of illegal weapons. Look at New York City...impossible to get a pistol license, yet they have numerous shootings a day (you don't see them on the news cause no body cares about dealers shooting addicts and gang warfare). Do you think any banger out there is rolling with a legal firearm? The rest of the gun related incidents are people that are just too stupid to own guns...people who should have jokingly put the gun to their head and pulled the trigger not their wife's or fellow officer's...eliminating illegal guns will do little for gun violence. Instituting better background checks, strict interviews and training, as well as teaching and enforcing safeguarding requirements will impact firearms deaths...we have been trying for decades to get illegal guns off the streets? where does that end? not by making legal guns illegal...if people really want to kill each other they will kill each other...imagine gangs on the streets of LA getting into sword fights...shit you could kill someone with a ball point pen if you were motivated enough...or as the late George Carlin noted...airline utensils.

XJEEPER
August 31st, 2008, 06:44
This post is wasting more time addressing the opinions of Michael Moore than I care to spend.......what makes him a credible expert on guns, violent crime, climate change or underwear?

PuddinHead
August 31st, 2008, 11:45
This post is wasting more time addressing the opinions of Michael Moore than I care to spend.......what makes him a credible expert on guns, violent crime, climate change or underwear?

Assuming Americans are more violent than other folks such as our Canadian neighbors, the question is WHY?

MAYBE THE STATS WE NEED TO LOOK AT IS NUMBER THE OF MURDERS PER CAPITA IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT METHOD THE KILLER USED, WHETHER IT WAS A GUN, A KNIFE, POISON OR SOMETHING ELSE. This post is not about Michael Moore per se, but the anit-gun lobby and their arguments. And it's about the reality or perception of violence in the U.S.

WB9YZU
August 31st, 2008, 12:23
I know you are the original poster and all, but you set the tone of this thread when you exhumed Micheal Moore.

I you wanted to talk about something else, perhaps you should have come to that point in the 1st post.

PuddinHead
September 1st, 2008, 17:02
Originally posted by Zuki-Ron
I know you are the original poster and all, but you set the tone of this thread when you exhumed Micheal Moore.

I you wanted to talk about something else, perhaps you should have come to that point in the 1st post


:huh:

MY QUESTION THEN IS THIS--Why are Americans more violent that Canadians? Is it the water or what?


Originally posted by PuddinHead
Assuming Americans are more violent than other folks such as our Canadian neighbors, the question is WHY?
This post is not about Michael Moore....it's about the reality or perception of violence in the U.S.


The question seems clear to me. I do go on some times.

WB9YZU
September 1st, 2008, 19:06
The question seems clear to me. I do go on some times.

Sorry, when I read your post, it seemed to me the key feature in it was a video on IFC and Michael Moore.

There are 2 Wikipedia's you could look at.
One is for Canada, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Canada
One for the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

The conclusion I came to by quickly viewing the data is that Canadian's are more likley to commit a crime of violence than here in the US. The difference is that when we do commit a crime of violence, we are more likely to kill while doing it.

So, by whose standard are Canadian's less violent than we are in the US?
I'll let you be the judge.

WrenchMonkey
September 1st, 2008, 21:31
Personnally, I would think the ethnic mix in Canada is similar to that in the United States.

Nope.

Don't know if you really want to go there, cause the conversation gets pretty uncomfortable pretty quickly. But if you really do want to start a frank discussion:

"According to 2005 U.S. Census figures, some 39.9 million African Americans live in the United States, comprising 13.8 percent of the total population." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American)

"According to the 2006 Census by Statistics Canada, 783,795 Canadians identified themselves as black, constituting 2.5% of the entire Canadian population" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Canadian)

Now of course there are other components to an "ethnic mix," but any frank discussion of gun violence has to recognize the problems in the african american community.

But like I said, I doubt anybody really wants to go there...

Robert

EMSJEEP
September 2nd, 2008, 08:01
I for one vote that we go there....
anyway...its not necessarily etnicity so much as it is the urban environment that contribute to gun violence, its not something innately black or hispanic or redneck...its a product of the economic and social standards of our urban centers.

ocean_jet
September 2nd, 2008, 12:24
MY POINT IS THIS--MICHAEL MOORE ADMITTING THAT GUN VIOLENCE IS NOT CONNECTED TO THE OWNERSHIP OF GUNS! To me his argument loses most if not all credibility by that admission.


That was the point of the movie... that gun violence is NOT connected to gun ownership, but connected to a "Climate of Fear" that is prepetuated by the media, and has been present in this country from its founding.

EMSJEEP
September 2nd, 2008, 12:38
you say "Climate of Fear" like its a bad thing...

tkjeeper
September 2nd, 2008, 17:57
Take it from me, it's the good beer. I dont buy that Americans are more violent than we are. Maybe we smoke more dope. Maybe it's too cold up here to bother killing anyone. But I can tell you we dont take our guns as seriously as you all do, not that thats bad or anything. I dont know, get me a beer.