In the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut school shooting, Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine is as relevant as ever. His argument that America's "culture of fear" and the prevalence of weapons within everyday society are the root causes of the high rates of gun violence and school shootings seen in the last several years is correct, however, the documentary did not do justice to the argument that the right to bear arms is a right guaranteed to Americans for a reason.
One thing Moore did very persuasively in his documentary was demonstrate the absurdity of having assualt weapons and ammunition for sale to nearly anyone with an interest in buying one. In one fo the opening scenes, Moore walks into a bank advertising a free gun with the setup of an account there. As he leaves, he jokingly asks, "Doesn't it seem a bit dangerous to sell guns at a bank?" This idea is continued when he goes to a local Wal-Mart and asks to buy the bullets used by the shooters at Columbine, and is handed them seemingly without any sort of identification required. However, Moore shows that change is possible when he goes to Wal-Mart headquarters with victims of the shooting and talks to them about the supposed problem, to which the leaders of Wal-Mart decide to stop selling ammunition. However, the point about the ease of gun ownership in America still rings true today; websites like Armslist.com and GunsAmerica.com make buying guns with minimal background checks increasingly easy.
This ease of access isn't what Moore finds to be the only real problem though. He explains the various hypotheses of why school shootings happen, citing violent video games, Marilyn Manson's rock and roll music, bullying, and general teen angst, but his personal take is much more convincing: Americans have become so afraid of their next-door neighbors that we have become desensitized to using guns in "defense."An example of this so-called "Cuture of Fear" can be seen in polls asking Americans about their concern over drug abuse; over half of the one poll's population stated their concern for drug use has risen in the last 5 years, despite the prevalence of drug abuse staying fairly constant. With the media quick to tackles stories of (often drug-related) murders and violent crimes, this hyper-awareness seems almost natural, and Moore demonstrates quite effectively the damage it can do on the American psyche.
As stated earlier, Moore did not do justice to the arguments of right-wing pro-gun groups like the NRA, but instead subtly mocked them as lunatic and dangerous. Many interviewees stated that they felt obligated to protect "what's theirs" or that they distrusted the federal government, but their heavy accents and the back stories provided damaged their reputability for the sake of the documentary. The Second Amendment, while created in a time when guns were far less dangerous than modern day, is meant to provide the citizens with a means of overthrowing any government that became too powerful or oppressive. States the Second Amendment Foundation, "self defense is a human right." While Moore may not agree with these views, (I also believe gun ownership should be regulated more strictly across America,) these views should have been presented more fairly in the documentary, at least to show his understanding and compassion with all viewpoints on the matter.
