The 2002 Academy Award winner for Documentary Feature is Bowling for Columbine, directed by activist filmmaker Michael Moore. This documentary examines in depth the different aspects of potential reasons for extreme gun violence in the United States. Released in 2002, the film is not directly centered around the Columbine shooting, however, the event serves as a catalyst to question the founding principals of America, where gun ownership is believed to be essential to one’s freedom. Throughout the film, Moore gives the audience statistics about gun crimes worldwide, multiple clips of previous shootings, interviews with celebrities of different perspectives — such as former president Charlton Heston of NRA (National Rifle Association) — and …show more content…
For instance, Moore uses his status as a popular filmmaker to establish his credibility by interviewing people of all backgrounds: pro-gun owners, american students, and even some Canadians, giving the audience the perspective of ordinary citizens and the opposition side to state their reasons. The vast difference between the thoughts of Americans and Canadians certainly emphasize cultural fear. However, in the interview with the former NRA president Charlton Heston, Moore questions him in a pressing manner, almost cornering him. As a result of Moore’s methods, Heston gets extremely uncomfortable and leaves the interview, backfiring . Although that diminishes the credibility of Moore, the scene where Heston walks off certainly represents the NRA president unable to take on the heavy questions about school shootings and gun violence. Alternatively, the scene where Moore opens a bank account to receive a free gun instantly shows the easy accessibility of firearms, but, it is inaccurate. Upon further research, it can be found that the guns have to be shipped to the bank or a gun shop from a different location; it’s not as fast and easy as depicted in the film. For these reasons, the use of ethos was fairly ineffective due to misusing his credibility and the method of interviewing, although receiving diverse opinions from citizens enhances Moore’s …show more content…
To illustrate, he uses many gut-wrenching clips of several shootings, displaying the horrors of gun deaths, bringing out the sympathetic side of people. Besides that, the story of a 6 year old boy firing at his 6 year old girl classmate certainly makes people react negatively to guns, as they do not want their loved ones to turn into a victim of gun violence. Another clip shows the father of a Columbine victim, stating “There is something wrong in this country when a child can point a gun in the face of another child like they did to my son”. With such a devastating situation, it undeniably plays a role in persuading others to feel as the father did. On a brighter note, Moore manages to include some amusing scenes in the film as well; he breaks down other people’s walls and gives them a good laugh. Humor can be found in the part when a first grader gets suspended from school for pointing a chicken strip at their teacher, or the scene where Moore opens several unlocked doors in Canada. On the other hand, this brings up the question of how many doors he tried to open before finding the ones as shown, once again leaving the audience with doubt about his persuasive ways. All is all, pathos is used skillfully at the right moments to carefully evoke feelings from the
Moore uses ethos in his work by giving us descriptive details and facts on other shootings and gun sells in America. Moore’s audience is more likely to give him creditability because of the way he dresses. In the movie he goes about looking like any
The documentary format obviously does not allow every person in the population to speak or give his or her opinion, but Moore has a few select people to speak about gun control, and lets the viewer assume that is what most others of that population believe. This use of hasty generalization is a bit difficult to notice whilst watching the film, but once the documentary is over, the viewer may start to realize that the opinions presented in the film may simply not be the general consensus. For example, Moore interviews a small group of teenagers near a fast-food restaurant and asks them if they believe Canada is a less violent country than the United States. Simply because of this segm...
...so bad, though, shouldn't the media be covering it and don't citizens have something to be afraid of? And if the media is indeed over-covering the issue and America is safer than we think, why did Moore make this film? CONCLUSION All in all penetrating, contradictory gossipy Michael Moore’s "Columbine" a strong and effective yet moralizing castigation of gun violence is an eye opener for all Americans. "I wanted to say something much larger about how society is manipulated by politicians and corporations into being in a constant state of panic and fear," Moore asserted, "and how once you get the population whipped up like that, conservative regimes can get just about anything they want out of the people without firing a shot." Since I'm not pretending to be an objective journalist in this article, I'll just conclude by saying, Amen to that, Brother. Bibliography
...ssibly help more than harm. Experience has taught me that when a child walks in fear of expressing their feelings they bottle up all of their emotions; simply because they’re afraid of the consequences. Teaching children to appropriately use and appreciate violent media will help them build confidence, “power, and selfhood.” (Jones 287) He successfully executes the use of rhetorical methods and offers solutions to the opposing viewpoint. Jones’ consistent use logical and emotional appeal entices the reader and effectively persuades; this clearly substantiates his deserving of the top persuasiveness prize.
In 2013, research conducted by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) defined public mass shootings as events that happened in a public place where four or more people were injured or died as a result of gunfire. CRS also argued that the gunman typically selected their victims at random. J. Harris and R. Harris (2012) referred to public mass shootings as rampage violence. Ironically, following each tragic public mass shooting identified above, there were spirited debates about gun control among political pundits, government officials and the American people, deliberations on the influence of media and entertainment glorifying violence, gaps in mental health services and a commitment to address the problem but to no avail. With no progress made on addressing public mass shootings, it was concluded that current research on mass violence has been ineffective and required some modification (J. Harris & R. Harris, 2012).
One ubiquitous concern of parents is that of their child’s safety. Parents go through life making decisions that they hope will benefit the child. One of the decisions parents must make for their child is where he or she will attend school. School is meant to be a safe haven, a place in which a child is encouraged to grow and prosper. Tragedy strikes, however, when that safe place is twisted and morphed into a place of fear and anguish. This was the shocking reality for parents of high school students in Columbine, Colorado. Two shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, Columbine High School seniors, entered the school and opened fire, killing thirteen, injuring twenty-four, and firing a total of 188 shots. Although Harris and Klebold committed suicide at the scene, their actions are a living reminder of the possible dangers schools are succumbed to and the necessary precautions that must be taken to prevent future events such as this from occurring. Evidence supporting the motive behind the shooting, a depiction of the event itself, and the aftermath are portrayed in the gripping manuscript, Columbine, written by Dave Cullen. With in-depth descriptions and an unbiased tone, Cullen reveals the mystery and calamity that stupefied many for years—the Columbine Massacre.
The United States will not soon forget the rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut that came just two weeks before Christmas last year. This tragic event resulted in the death of twenty students and eight adults. Although the event shocked the nation, rampage shootings are nothing new. Over the years, many families have lost loved ones to these horrific events. As a result, these mass shootings such as the one that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary caught public attention leading to a push to find the cause of these events. Out of this research a variety of possible causes came to light consisting of arguments stating that high school bullying, availability of guns, mental illness, violent movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings. However, these researchers and debaters tend to ignore the role of massive media coverage in the increase of copycat shootings in the United States.
When looking at all of the important issues of today’s society, one of the most neglected issues revolves around guns. Guns serve two different purposes: to defend and to kill. Even though I’ve been on this Earth for only 21 years, I’ve become keen and have taken an interest in the study of guns and how they pose more problems in society than any other issue. My interest all started around the time of the Columbine shooting in Colorado and how society has taken steps since that point in history. Going back to the two different purposes, both have been used to help explain the differences in the distinctions of different gun related events that continue to occur, such as mass shootings. Problem analysis, as stated, will help to explain how guns can be seen differently from each individual and what can be gained or lost from a deep analysis.
In American society, violence runs rampage throughout the country that causes its citizens to be afraid and discouraged about their homeland. One of the major parts of American violence is from guns. In the documentary, "Bowling for Columbine", a famous filmmaker, Michael Moore addresses the ubiquitous situation in America. He argues that the use of guns in America co-insides or correlates to the recent massacres and that America, as a whole, should have stricter gun control laws. Throughout the film, Moore uses specific references to it and employs rhetorical and persuasive devices to construct his argument in favor of changing gun laws.
Sandy Hook, Colorado Movie Theater, Columbine, and Virginia Tech all have one thing in common they known as mass shootings. Mass shootings are defined as the study of having four or more victims and do not include gang killings or slayings that involve the death of multiple family members. In Jen Christensen’s article, “Why the U.S has the most mass shootings” published by CNN, she discusses a recent shooting and ties it into mass shootings. Jen Christensen is a producer/editor with CNN’s Health, Medical and Wellness Unit. She has also earned the highest awards in broadcasting; Peabody and DuPont are some, as a producer. Prior to CNN, she was an award winning investigate producer with WSOC-TV in Charlotte, N.C. She has launched and managed an award-winning
From Columbine to Blacksburg and Aurora, gun control has become quite the controversial issue in the United States. As such, sides have been made on the proper means not only to regulate weapons, but also in how it has reshaped America as a whole. Within two articles and an procedure image set around the campus of Virginia Tech, they persuade and reinforce potential readers with the issues surrounding gun control. From the on-campus’ procedures in what to do if caught in such a dire situation and the split message it can give off, the NRA’s outlandish and aggressive stance against President Obama, and President Obama’s vivid, somber statement about the need for change at Umpqua Community College, these are multiple portrayals bearing the same
The film uses a variety of interviews from people who support the ownership of guns and people who are victims of gun violence. Moore also discusses the possible reasons for the number of gun related deaths and murders each year, but allows the audience to develop their own ideas about further guns restrictions. Although Moore never blatantly states his opinions on gun control, he focuses his interviews on people who have been directly affected by gun violence, people from low income areas who are uneducated and support the use of guns, and he questions the intentions of large, successful corporations. Each of these interviews and candid questions imply that Moore supports further gun control as he focuses on the negative aspects of owning a weapon with the ability to kill someone. Bowling for Columbine brilliantly related fear within American people caused by the media to the high number of gun owners by using creative scenes and imagines. Moore is correct to call attention to the number of gun related deaths in America as they amounted to 33,599 in 2014, according to the CDC, Centers for Disease Control. Of the 33,599 mortalities, two-thirds were intentional suicides and the CDC reveals that 12,000 of those deaths were
It Deprived parents from seeing their loved ones. "Moore introduces us to two of the students wounded at Columbine, both still with bullets in their bodies. He explains that all of the Columbine bullets were freely sold to the teenage killers by Kmart, at 17 cents apiece. And then he takes the two victims to Kmart headquarters to return the bullets for a refund"(Bowling for Columbine Movie). Actually, Moore showed us these two students in order to bring our attention to a public to have enough knowledge about how people with suicidal thoughts react. I think Moore wanted also to display facts about the huge tragedy that the Bowling for Columbine High school went through, and he also provided his movie with a clip from the shooting video and how the horrible was the situation of the students and they looked
With the media shining so much light upon this topic, it is evident that mass murders in the United States of America are more frequent and deadly. In fact, studies have found that the USA has more mass public shootings than any other country (Christensen). These numbers have only been increasing in the past decades. This is shocking because the USA holds only 5 percent of the world’s population, but as a nation, contributes to 31 percent of mass murders (Christensen). Although these murders continue to be a rare phenomenon, weak gun laws, the need for fame, and issues with societal views are the main causes of the increase in cases.
Children start to act rebellious at home such as screaming, breaking objects, and even causing physical harm. However, when the minor encounters an argument with an individual they can physically harm or kill the individual. Such as, the massacre in high schools, the students that are bullied, plan to get back at the people by using violent actions. In other words the massacre shooting in West Paducah, Kentucky, and Littleton, Colorado, the high school students gained the knowledge of how to use a weapon to kill students. Since they have been harm by classmates, these students were furious which lead them to act violently towards their classmates by killing them. Like the article of “Did Video Games Train the School Shooters To Kill?: Determining Whether Wisconsin Courts Should Impose Negligence or Strict Liability in a Lawsuit Against the Video Game Manufactures” by Tara C. Campbell mentioned that a Marksman expert said the high school 's students have never fired a gun in their lives. He included, "pulled the trigger, instantly moved