Under the Gun (2016)

Sadly Over-hyped

Fresh and Exciting

A lot of fun.

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

This film is an anti-gun diatribe against lawful gun owners, while giving real criminals (like gang bangers in Chicago killing themselves and others) a pass.Dr. John Lott has been an outspoken advocate of "More Guns, Less Crime". He is a celebrated criminal justice academic. His books about the failure of gun control have never been refuted.Dr. Lott had spent approximately six hours being interviewed for Under the Gun. Prior to the film's release, however, when Ms. Soechtig was asked whether her film featured any gun-rights experts (anyone besides persons "very strongly tilted towards gun control"), she confirmed that Dr. Lott had been interviewed but his input and information were not being used. "We did a great piece on him. He's the originator of the idea that more guns equal less crime. When we went to include his research in the film, it felt like unnecessary real estate to put in the film…We kept going back to the idea that we wanted to reserve the real estate in the film for the responsible gun owners." As biased and unscrupulous as the "official" response on the exclusion of John Lott may be, it now appears that some Lott footage made it into the film, but was taken out after Michael Bloomberg allegedly insisted on its removal. According to a recent interview with John Cardillo, "They were going to run it, and Bloomberg and Couric had a private screening and after that screening" the Lott footage was deleted.For those that don't know, Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire that wants to ban guns from all law abiding citizens. It now appears that he and Katie Couric conspired to hide the truth about gun controls failures over the years by "massaging the facts". They refused to show both sides of the story, which is what journalists are supposed to do.This documentary is a joke. Do not see it, or you risk encouraging Couric and her crappy producers to create similar trash in the future.

"Oh my God! They added a pause! This film is bogus!" writes anyone who hasn't actually seen the entire film. The truth is, this is an incredibly well-made, informative, and at times highly infuriating look at America's gun laws. The film makes clear in no uncertain terms that it is NOT advocating for banning guns are taking away guns in America. In fact, it makes clear up front that the Supreme Court has expressly forbid such actions. What it does focus on is how America got to its current state of leading the developed world in mass shooting and other forms of gun violence. What is also focuses on very well are the victim's stories and the history of the NRA. The controversy surrounding the "misleading edit" is so overblown. It's such an insignificant part of the doc, and really it's being used as a distraction to defer from the real damning statistics, laws, and policies the NRA has pushed to implement over the years. I really encourage all of the one-star reviewers to hold their tongues until they've seen the entire doc. See if you feel as outraged over an added pause after you see how the ATF still needs to use a paper-based filing system for gun reports because of laws enacted by the NRA (if that doesn't sound like a big deal, wait until you hear them talk about how they need to take safety precautions to make sure their floor doesn't collapse from the weight of all of the file boxes). P.S. Anyone familiar with how documentaries are made should know that docs are not journalism. They are opinion pieces. I personally think the pause is unfortunate because it is all anyone is talking about. But the rest of the doc is filled with statistics that make a compelling case for reforming America's gun laws.

What was promised to be an unbiased look at guns. Turned out to be lies and editing, to get the gun control adgenda out there. Luckily they were caught and the conversation has turned from gun control. Now it is about the lies the director and producer told. Bet they never thought that is the way it would turn out. If you want to watch the most anti gun, Bloomberg backed, and completely biased film about guns. This would be the one for you. It's sad, they took something that could have shown both sides. (Even family members I have thought it was going to be a fair look.) They took it and completely lied to get everyone to watch. Then showed the anti gun side over and over. Everything negative about guns without rebuttal was there. Like the terrorist watch list. The NRA has never had an issue with the list. They take issue with who makes the list (it's secret, nobody knows.) If put on the list incorrectly can you get off? (No, there is no judge panel or anyone you can go to in order to fix the issue.) The United States is supposed to be innocent until proved guilty. The terrorist watch list is the opposite approach. If this government wanted to do it correctly. There wouldn't be an issue with it at all! Watching made me wonder, how long it took them to find NRA members that were complete morons. Did they interview 100 people or 1000 people before they found the guys that don't know. The pro gun community is pretty knowledgeable about the laws. Once you find out they were selectively editing their film. The answer is obvious... They stood there until they found people that agreed with their side. Again, I take issue with many things in this film. First and foremost it's a completely biased look at a major issue in America. With the gun control side using lies and propaganda to back their side. Second, it was advertised as a fair look from both sides. It wasn't, they did everything possible to make the pro gun side look stupid and unknowledgeable. Third, the makers of the film were so unknowledgeable themselves, they broke federal gun laws in order to make their film. Finally, this film did nothing at all to help either side. It's a huge screw up that will be forgotten. Rather than a fair look at both sides. The movie is a sad attempt to pass more gun control laws. If you want that sort of thing. You will love the movie. If you don't want more gun laws. The movie is so full of lies it will make you furious.

At 21:48 Couric is made to appear as if she has stumped the Virginia Citizens Defense League by asking the question, "If there are no background checks for gun purchasers, how do you prevent felons or terrorists from purchasing a gun?" Subsequent to this question, the camera pans from VCDF member to member and all appear to be mesmerized by this question. Problem is, the editor of the film removed their verbose answers to this question, and inserted film of them patiently waiting to be asked a question.If this is an example of what Couric considers journalistic integrity, then she will always be remembered as a hack propagandist rather than a serious investigative reporter.