The definition of irony
 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144921,00.html

I'm sorry, but that's just TOO FUNNY. Kind of reminds me of when it came out that Rosie The Gun-Hater's bodyguard was packing heat. :lol:

Not irony; elitism.

You forget; Victim Disarmament is for "us" not for "Them." For instance:

Diane Feinstein has one of the very, very few CCW permits issued in California.
Rosie O'Donnel's bodygaurd carries a gun.
Ted Kennedy's bodygaurd got busted with an illegal, UNREGISTERED MACHINE GUN a f ew years back.

Their lives are worth defending; ours are not.

You may forget but Moore is also a longs standing member of the NRA and owns guns himself...

I'm speechless.

Yup. The bugger got 200 hours of Community Service after the found an unregistered pistol and an unregistered MP-5S in the trunk of the car.

Just for perspective, and unpapered NFA item would gaurantee 20 years to any Paeon like one of us.

And I could join NOW, but I still wouldn't have tits.

What difference does this make? The point is that this overweight, self-hating jackass is a hypocrite and contradicts himself countless times, by making a lie-filled shitfest of a film (better known as Bowling for Columbine), stating that all guns should be banned, and then having an armed bodyguard. Sounds like a classic case of "do what I say but not as I do"

Possible headlines:

"Unlicensed gun-toting thug found employed by award-winning director of anti-gun movie, Bowling for Columbine."

"Award-winning director of anti-gun movie, Bowling for Columbine, advocates use of gun in protecting own ass."

"Award-winning director of anti-war movie, Fahrenheit 9/11, blasts use of deadly U.S. military force, endorses use of deadly personal bodyguard force."

edit - I just now noticed the comma in your sentence, nevermind

I don't see how it's really ironic. Michael Moore's the guy with the stated opinions on gun violence, not his bodyguard. If he asked the guy to carry the weapon or knew about it and condoned it, that'd be one thing, but if the guy was just carrying then me. Tempest in a teapot, really.

And despite the fact that Michael Moore is an ideologue and a hypocrite (not for this - for other reasons I won't go into here), I don't think that necessarily detracts from the validity of some of the points he makes in his movies.

It does detract from the validity of his points. I never could understand him because I couldnt understand why he believes what he does. Now I do get it, he believes that his live should be protected, and by taking guns from other people (and having them himself) allows for more security on his part.

typical conservative tactics: if you cant destroy the message, slag the messenger.
i dont see the irony in this.
i dont see anything in it beyond stupidity.

and if you want to get into the question of privilege--since it usually follows that those who are militant about their guns also fear "big goverment" and so oppose national health--how about trying on the idea that market driven health care means that the llives of the children of the affluent are worth more than the lives of the children of the poor? if you want to discuss privelege and hypocrisy, start with something meaningful, not this.

thread coup d'etat ended.
act as before.

didn't even mention national healthcare for a foreign nation (iraq), but no national healthcare for the nation providing it (u.s.).

i will act as before! :D

What's typical here is the typical accusation typically used to explain universal typicality.
You're missing the point of the whole situation: Humor. It's funny. Don't you think?
Hah-hah?
;)

I wonder how many people continue to mistakenly think that Moore is anti-gun. And are these the same people that saw Bowling For Columbine and failed to comprehend that BforC was not an anti-gun film? And if so, I wonder why they failed to comprehend that very obvious aspect of the film. I wonder if maybe they went into the film with preconceived notions of what it was about, and were therefore unable to process the information that was presented.

Not seeing the film surely adds to the misconceptions of it.

I'm not seeing how he's hypocritical here. The headline doesn't say that Moore himself was carrying a gun, his bodyguard was. Granted, it is pretty funny but I don't see how Moore ends up with the eggface here.

I agree with Manx here: I was under the impression that Moore wasn't anti-gun, but rather, wanted to draw attention to the "culture of fear" that pervades our society and in the media whit large.

I lked the part where he compared Canada's gun culture with our own. It gave me a lot to think about. As it is, I am constantly having to defend my (our) right to own and carry arms in this country whereas it "seemed" in Canada, a lot of people had them but it wasn't a big deal AND their crime rate was lower.

Which is odd because Moore is slamming the media for supposedly fear mongering when he'a fear-mongerer himself. Was BFC anything more than a gigantic scarepiece about gun crime and american society?

There are plenty of factors that account for that. First off, Canada's population is far smaller than ours, so obviously, their gun homicide numbers are going to be lower. Second off, Canada's population mostly consists of white citizens, while the US's population is made up of just about every race and ethnic group out there, so there's bound to be many race and ethnic related crimes to inflate our gun homicide rates. Third off, Canada isn't the crime free paradise that Moore makes it out to be, sorry.

That is an intresting point: How does one define or differentiate "fear-mongering" from "expose" from "information distribution"?

I think the inherent subjectivity would complicate things:

EX: Weather report - Tomorrow, rain - Oh no fear mongering, there's gonna be rain! OR, ok, it's going to rain tomorrow.

In the Moore example, I suppose one could cite his method of distributing information as being insightful and enciteful. For me personally, I didn't interpret it as fear mongering. However, on the nighty news, "Killer Bees attack LA" is certainly fear mongering to me or at the very least, sensationalist. Fear mongering would be if Moore was shouting "Oh my God, guns kill people! We must ban all guns before our children all die" or something like that.

I dunno, BFC didn't make me scared about gun crime. In fact, I felt it was backing us gun proponents. The question is one of culture not legality. at least that is how I saw it. It pointed out that legal guns weren't the problem, which is exactly what anti-gun people are always trying to do: restrict legal gun rights.

Was moore even with his body guard? If he wasn't then i fail to see how this really has anything to do with moore at all. Even if the bodyguard was with moore, how is it ironic that a bodyguard would pack heat? I think some of the people here are under the impression that if someone happens to support any form of gun control, than it logically follows that they don't want anyone to have guns. This actually doesn't make sense in any sort of reality based context. Even if i were to go out on a limb and pretend that moore was in favor of the most stringent of gun control; i have yet to hear anyone i know who favors gun control -aside from the occasional anarchist-express a desire to remove guns from people who have a legitimate employment based need to use them i.e the police or the army or body guards or security guards.

Would it be ironic for moore to call 911 because the cops that may respond to his call will be carrying guns? Nope. Just like it isn't really that ironic that moore can make movies critical of america's gun culture while living in a country whose interests are protected by soldiers who use guns.

This might be ironic if moore was carrying the gun himself, but other than that, i just see mm detractors stretching to talk shit.

I've often wondered the same thing. I suppose it's a knee-jerk reaction to some of the movie. I saw it as more an exposé on the culture of fear in the States. Did Moore actually say that guns should be banned?


You would compare rates per-capita, not overall numbers.

Huh? Have you been to Canada?

Maybe not crime free, but there isn't the culture of fear in Canada like in the US.

:confused: I've run across practically every ethnic group you can imagine while travelling through Canada.

2nd: I wasn't aware that there are crimes specifically relegated to certain races and ethnicities. Crime has always seemed to be an equal opportunity category from my viewpoint, or are you saying that certain crimes are only committed by certain races/ethnic groups?

ananas,

crime is an equal opportunity category, but there are segments of the population who choose to take the opportunity more than others... at times those delineations are statistically linked to racial identities. so, in a way... there are crimes that are more likely to be committed by certain ethnic groups. also, it's no secret that societies that have homogeneous ethnic compositions are often very low in crime (japan, switzerland, norway). it isn't always the case, but not having societal lines able to be draw along ethnic boundaries seems to be a factor in the reduction of crime.

i don't think it's exactly the definition of irony... because i don't think moore (as much as i detest the guy's work) ever promoted the abolition of ALL firearms. it is probably something he wished would've been kept under wraps, the good lord knows he has enough stuff to smudge over without worrying about giving the public one more reason to side with his detractors. i think there are enough examples of the "animal farm" mentality among elitists without having to point to this one.

Not for nothing, but he does support the banning of all handguns (which is what his bodyguard was caught with). See the following excerpt from his appearance on the Donohue Show....

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread...nahue-20021028

No, there are better films on cesspools than "Bowling for Columbine," but THIS is the classic case:

Carl Rowan, one of the country's foremost gun control advocates, stated in his syndicated column that "If you have a gun you should go to jail- period."

One night, Rowan heard people trespassing on his property. He produced an unregistered .22 pistol, fired a warning shot in their direction, and hit one of them in the wrist. Rowan was not convicted or jailed for possessing a gun despite Washington DC's strict gun laws.

The trespassers, if memory serves, turned out to be young people who'd decided to sneak into his pool for a swim.

Rowan tried to avoid responsibility by claiming the gun belonged to his son, an FBI agent.

ahh... i had not understood that he was against banning all handguns. well, i suppose that does qualify as a clear example of hypocrisy. given that information, i'll get a quiet chuckle at anyone who tries to defend him.

"If it were up to me, I would tell Mr. and Mrs. America to turn them in -- turn them all in."

Dianne Feinstein, to Lesley Stahl during an interview with CBS's "60 Minutes" on Feb. 24, 1995.

" The need for a ban on handguns cannot be overstated."

Hon. Major R. Owens (Rep. NY, Introduction of the Public Health and Safety Act of 1993, Extension of Remarks - September 23, 1993. Congressional Record, 103rd Congress, 1993-1994)

"Mr. President, what is going on in this country? Does going to school mean exposure to handguns and to death? As you know, my position is we should ban all handguns, get rid of them, no manufacture, no sale, no importation, no transportation, no possession of a handgun . There are 66 million handguns in the United States of America today, with 2 million being added every year."

Senator John H. Chafee, Rhode Island (June 11, 1992, Congressional Record, 102nd Congress, 1991-1992)

While this "thinking" may not be universal, it's certainly widespread. There are thousand of documented statements like this from constitution-haters at various levels. Someone should explain how this isn't "fear-mongering." Oh, that's right--that's only done by Republicans.


I take it you consider insignificant those people who have a legitimate defense-based need to use them?

You accidentally slipped an accuracy in here. When you call the cops, they MAY show up. They're not required to.

A couple of girls who became rape victims in their apartment established the above in a court case. Seems they were held captive for 12 hours. The police never responded to their emergency call.

at least it's not like that song about irony, and it talks about rain and weddings and stuff. It was ironic that the song had nothing to do with irony

irateplatypus,

What crimes would more likely be committed by certain ethnic groups? Do Blacks commit more murders? Whites commit more rapes?

Your example of Japan, Switzerland, Norway does not preclude any of those homogeneous ethnic groups from committing any crime; e.g., murders are committed in those countries, albeit at a much lower rate than one would find in the US. My confusion about the original poster's comments was not about the numbers of crimes committed, but his rather generalized statement about crimes and ethnic groups.

Ananas, I didn't mean to come off as racist with my comment but crime tends to be higher among minorities. Granted, this isn't always the case but it tends to be the case. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

Oh boy, here we go...

where are we going???? I don't get it. This whole irony thing is really ironic in the sense that...... darn i lost my train of thought. I was heading somewhere but that stupid baby genuis superbabies commercial came on and it made me mad.

Interestingly, the homogenous countries mentioned have a lower rate of poverty, by far. Maybe that has to do with their lower rate of crime. At least violent crime. Now corporate crime.....

Anyways, "fear-mongering" most certainly NOT the sole bastion of Republicans. It is used widely by people of all persuasions. C'mon Sob, you know that.

EX: Global warming is going to get us!!

And besides, a lot of fear-mongering is apolitical - it's just there for entertainment value. Like: Shark attack!! Beaches closed for the summer!!

It reminds me of that Simpsons episode where a bear wanders into Springfield and everyone panics and freaks out. The town then proceed to enact a series of ridiculous laws and set up a "Bear Patrol" that consists of a B-2 stealth bomber. Hilarity ensues...

-=-=-=-=-

Game Over

Not surprised its a Fox link at all.

A security guard having a weapon is like a librarian having a book. Im surprised he hasnt been shot already, judging by the amount of white hot fury that is felt about him in the states. And yes, he is fat and he does have tits. I think this has been established.

Hell, how many companies and individuals would like to see this guy go away? permanently? SmithGlaxoKline is already preparing "Michael Moore emergency" drills.... Moore's blasted everything he doesnt believe in. The guy has probably received so many death threats he probably takes them seriously.

Please.

I am fully aware of this argument, but to say that Moore is not anti-gun is to ignore the total effect of all his work on the subject, including BFC.

What is the total effect of BFC? Is he responsible for misinterpretation by others?