The problem here is that you continue to cast Mr. Moore as 100%-anti-gun-in-all-cases, or suggesting that he wants to prevent each and every American from owning a firearm. This is patently false.
Mr. Moore---and frankly, a sizable majority of Americans---believe in reasonable, common sense gun control, instead of the current system of unlimited firepower without a papertrail or even the barest veneer of accountability.
You're so invested in attacking Mr. Moore that you'll bend and twist his positions like a pretzel to do so, which is, to say the least, dishonest.
Andrew
· 4 years ago
I'd have to agree with Don Myers on this one. I've seen "Bowling for Colombine" numerous times and I've never seen any instances where Moore critizes people owning guns. He simply argues for strict gun control. He doesn't think Americans should be able to own Tech-9's or assault rifles. Or even be able to simply buy munitions from the local Walmart.
I think someone can be pro-gun but pro-gun control at the same time. You can call him a hypocrite for a lot of other things he does, but I don't think you can in this instance.
TC-LeatherPenguin
· 4 years ago
I've read and re-read that letter from de Becker that Moorewatch received, and all it is semantical wordplay aimed at putting distance between the Ham Hoover and the incident.
The facts of the story FOX published were, and still are, correct: The man was arrested for possession of an unlicensed firearm (wherever else it may be registered in the US doesn't mean diddly in New York City); he stated as his occupation to the arresting officers that he was Michael Moore's bodyguard.
He didn't say, "I'm a professional bodyguard" or "I'm hired muscle" or anything else. Neither did the article.
Chris
· 4 years ago
I think Mark's comment on your previous post is still a justification. If Michael Moore has made enemies of gun owners (he is a member of the NRA) he's chosen a dangerous enemy. My guess is if he had made a film calling for tulip control, he wouldn't necessarily need the armed bodyguards. A florist or two, but not armed florists.
All Comments
Mr. Moore---and frankly, a sizable majority of Americans---believe in reasonable, common sense gun control, instead of the current system of unlimited firepower without a papertrail or even the barest veneer of accountability.
You're so invested in attacking Mr. Moore that you'll bend and twist his positions like a pretzel to do so, which is, to say the least, dishonest.
I think someone can be pro-gun but pro-gun control at the same time. You can call him a hypocrite for a lot of other things he does, but I don't think you can in this instance.
The facts of the story FOX published were, and still are, correct: The man was arrested for possession of an unlicensed firearm (wherever else it may be registered in the US doesn't mean diddly in New York City); he stated as his occupation to the arresting officers that he was Michael Moore's bodyguard.
He didn't say, "I'm a professional bodyguard" or "I'm hired muscle" or anything else. Neither did the article.