Under the Gun

Leaving the politics out of it, the makers of this are claiming to present a balanced view. It is typical of American rhetoric and the creation of propaganda disguised as fact. Emotional response (and I do empathize with many of the traumatized people that helped create this "documentary") is the most frequently used tool in this film to present opinion, and any facts are only skewed to represent one side of the discussion.

One-sided political rhetoric, which persistently portrays opposition as ignorant, is one of the reasons there is a powerful ultra-right movement. Strong enough perhaps to take control of all our government.

The film does not give equal time, nor give credence, to any opposing viewpoint. It portrays all gun owners as a shill for a political lobby and demonizes, yes, you guessed it, commerce.

If you are an anti-gun activist, you will walk away from this statement feeling warm and fuzzy. If you believe in gun ownership, you may sprain an ankle getting to the phone to call the NRA membership line.

There was no balance, very little fact, no intelligent debate. This will only polarize two already polarized groups. It would have been interesting to see balanced. This wasn't interesting.