The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am
Remember Bowling for Columbine? Little film about guns? Critics loved it:
The brunt of the picture scrutinizes American firearm owners. Seventy million Americans own at least one gun; firearms kill 35,000 people annually in the U.S …
Moore’s foray into Canadian gun culture is the finest segment of the film. In Windsor—a stone’s throw across the Detroit River from the Motor City—locals admit, to the astonished Moore, that they don’t regularly lock their doors.
“Why?” responded one woman, at a neighborhood pub. “What do I have to be afraid of?”
Oh, I don’t know … Michael Moore’s gun-toting bodyguard, perhaps?
Filmmaker Michael Moore’s bodyguard was arrested for carrying an unlicensed weapon in New York’s JFK airport Wednesday night.
Police took Patrick Burke, who says Moore employs him, into custody after he declared he was carrying a firearm at a ticket counter. Burke is licensed to carry a firearm in Florida and California, but not in New York. Burke was taken to Queens central booking and could potentially be charged with a felony for the incident.
Moore’s 2003 Oscar-winning film “Bowling for Columbine” criticizes what Moore calls America’s “culture of fear” and its obsession with guns.
Culture of fear? What does Moore have to be afraid of?
UPDATE & CORRECTION. The Moore story is wrong. A note sent to Moorewatch from Patrick Burk’s employers follows:
Fox News has now removed the link for this story from their home page; their original story contained several errors. We want to be certain you are aware of the appropriate corrections.
I know that Fox News editors must rely upon others when preparing their stories, and I offer with no judgment that their story titled “Michael Moore’s Bodyguard Arrested on Airport Gun Charge” contains several errors, including its entire headline.
Please correct the errors in your story below as soon as possible, because, as you are aware, the errors reach an ever-widening audience with each passing minute – and will predictably be picked up by other news agencies.
Our full-time employee, Patrick Burk, is not “Michael Moore’s bodyguard.” Accordingly, the headline in the Fox News Web site story is false and misleading.
If you believe Patrick Burk was ever assigned to protect Michael Moore, or any number of other public figures, you might accurately report that “A bodyguard who was once assigned to protect Michael Moore … “
You could as accurately say “A bodyguard that was once assigned to protect President Clinton,” because Patrick Burk has also been assigned to protect President Clinton in the past – but you wouldn’t be accurate if you said “President Clinton’s Bodyguard.”
Quite right. Please hit the above link for the full text of this message.
- “What does Moore have to be afraid of?”
Gun-toting, loons who completely skipped past that whole First Amendment thing, perhaps?
Dingbats who missed the entire point of the movie and who have threatened Moore’s life for merely asking some hard questions about the gun culture?
So-called “patriots” who think that patriotism means “agree with our leader or else”?
If you were the target of such a vicious hate campaign, and had personally met some of the nuts out there who worship guns, you might be thinking about getting an armed bodyguard too, Tim. At least until such time as society wakes up to itself and takes those nuts’ guns away.
- If you were the target of such a vicious hate campaign, and you had personally met some of the nuts out there who worship guns, you might be thinking about getting an armed bodyguard too, Tim.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Michael Moore receiving threats; he did threaten to sue anyone who ‘libelled’ him upon the release of ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’, so he can dish out as much as he takes.
- When we lived in Vermont where almost everyone has a gun or a rifle (gun racks on pickups are common), we not only never locked the door, we literally had no key to the front door. When we retired to Florida, the people who bought the house were from Yonkers NY at the time in the midst of an ugly racial war, and I think what clinched the sale was the fact that their kids would be safe.
Like most lefties (both were college professors) they were hypocrits who mouthed support for the blacks holding their former home town hostage while looking forward to the safety of living in an area of gun totting and gun shooting natives.
To the Canadian lady who doesn’t have anything to be afriad of, maybe even the hoodlums have gotten the message that there’s nothing in Canada worth stealing. Heh?
- “At least until such time as society wakes up to itself and takes those nuts’ guns away.”
So, who defines a “nut with a gun”, RhysW? Michael Moore, perhaps? You? I don’t deny that they exist (they do), but Michael’s approach is that ALL gun owners are criminals, or are potential criminals.
And I should note that in accepting the use of firearms for personal protection (i.e., his bodyguard) condones their use.
Which makes Michael Moore a hypocrite. This doesn’t surprise me or others, but you seem not to have grasped this fact.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 01/21 at 12:17 AM • #
- Michael’s approach is that ALL gun owners are criminals, or are potential criminals.
Is it? I thought part of Bowling for Columbine was that Canadians had similar levels of gun ownership but lower rates of gun crime?
Posted by Robert Corr on 01/21 at 12:21 AM • #
- 70 million gun owners
35,000 firearm-related deaths. Probably including things like suicide and gang/drug related killings.Sounds like the “gun nuts” are about the most peaceable fellows you are likely to run into, going by the numbers. I’d rather have 70 million American gun owners as my neighbors than 7 million English or Latin American soccer fans.
- Robert Corr:
Moore for some time used to say that he belonged to the National Rifle Association so that one day he could become the president and declare the NRA a gun control group.
To be honest, I don’t think even Moore knew what he was saying in Bowling for Columbine. Even the title was screwy, since the two killers – wait, I guess the correct press term is “insurgents” or “militants” – skipped their morning bowling class that day.
- “I thought part of Bowling for Columbine was that Canadians had similar levels of gun ownership but lower rates of gun crime?”
Not entirely. Canadian registration was a model for solution to the “gun problem” that Moore thinks existed in the USA. And the success of the Canadian program is arguable:
http://www.ncpa.org/iss/cri/2002/pd040102f.html
But if you want both sides, try this:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=canadian+gun+control
But you still miss my point. Michael The Moor decries the availability of firearms, but hires armed bodyguards. He is a hypocrite on gun control. Period.
Not that I’m surprised.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 01/21 at 01:06 AM • #
- Ah—first this RhysW character tries to sign up with a snarky “ha ha I’m not leaving a real email” address. Then when he was presented with the wait-for-the-register-link-email message, he was forced to use his real email address. As a precaution, seeing two similar new registrant announcements hit my box, I sent an email off to his asking if the first joker had been he. He replied with a stiffly worded complaint about having to use “personal information” to sign up here. I can see why.
Troll while you can, Mooron. So far you’re cruising for an account suspension.
Posted by Andrea Harris on 01/21 at 01:10 AM • #
- Guardian
AC: A question that came up yesterday during the Q&A was, “Do you have a gun?”MM: I have the gun which I won at the bank for opening the account, and I want to get rid of it; I don’t want a gun in the house. Yes, I have that gun but not for long and there’s no ammunition in it.
“MM:… we have to put the guns away. So I do believe in gun control – guns have to be put aside until we can act more Canadian-like.
“Nice interview with Moore by the Guardian about guns.
- Actually , the title of this thread should have been “Fat Man’s Gunsel Arrested” … not only does it capture more of the Dashiell Hammett flavor but it also more accurately sums up the relationship between Moore and his punk…Posted by richard mcenroe on 01/21 at 02:28 AM • #
- I live in Detroit, just across the river from Windsor, and I know a number of people who live there. I also generally listen to the Canadian Broadcasting Company because it’s the only classical music station in the area.
This will doubtless come as a shock to readers of Tim’s blog–brace yourselves. Moore is lying about this, too. They lock their doors and their cars.
One reason is that, as the CBC reports, they do have crime over there. It’s not as bad as Detroit but the idea that Windsor or Canada generally is a crime-free paradise, and it’s because of their gun laws, is…what’s the word?…oh, yes, balderdash.
Posted by Alex Bensky on 01/21 at 02:32 AM • #
- “What does Moore have to be afraid of?”
The new food pyramid, perhaps? He doesn’t strike me as a person who goes heavy on the “fruits and veggies”.
And gravity is certainly not his friend, either…
Posted by Tex Lovera on 01/21 at 04:14 AM • #
- “the title of this thread should have been “Fat Man’s Gunsel Arrested” …not only does it capture more of the Dashiell Hammett flavor but it also more accurately sums up the relationship between Moore and his punk…”
The cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.Hey, don’t crack foxy on Moore, see? If you had sacks of dough the size of Betty Grable’s brassiere, you’d be worried about some two-bit hood pumping a dum-dum into your groceries, too. So lay off, flatfoot.
- “If you were the target of such a vicious hate campaign”
What, like Mikey’s hate campaign against America? Why do all you leftys smear everyone in sight that you don’t agree with, and then boo-hoo every time someone has the temerity to get pissed about it? No, death threats are not appropriate, but name one ill effect Mikey has suffered after all of his high-profile, high-profit slanders. Just one.
Oh, that’s right, people booed him at the Oscars. Christ, he’d better shack up with Salman Rushdie before he gets hurt.
- Somehow I doubt this story will make it to Katie and Matt’s desk, Dan and Peter will overlook it as well.
Great story and you guys are right. It only serves to show that not only is Michael Moore a big fat douche, but a hypcritical big fat douche.
I am much more ashamed to share a first name with him than the Dixie Chicks are to be from Texas.Posted by TXLonghornmike on 01/21 at 05:59 AM • #
- Nooooooooo no fair using statistics when talking about gun controll !!!!
It’s all about feeeeelings.
Hahahah… celebrity gun-hater finds out that guns are quite useful things, after all.
Oh, and New York (the place with some of the most repressive gun control laws in the U.S.) has suddenly become a little less safe for Moore, now that his bodyguards have been disarmed.
Welcome to the world you want us all to live in, Mikey.
Posted by Kim du Toit on 01/21 at 06:58 AM • #
- Amazing…what goes around, comes around!Posted by Mike SC USA on 01/21 at 08:47 AM • #
- RhysW is offended. His email to me ran thus:
Tim asked what Michael Moore has to fear, and I supplied a list. Disagreement
on an issue is not trolling. It’s called debating. A useful response would
have been for you to list ways in which each of the people on my list are not
really a threat to Moore. Here are some sample responses:[quote]”Most of the threats to Moore are harmless net kooks hiding in their
mother’s basement and he would know that. He has nothing to
fear from them”.“Any kook that wanted to take Michael out would first have to find him,
probably at one of his damn movie showings or book launches. There
is likely to be regular security at such places, so he has little need
for an armed bodyguard. At other times, the kooks won’t know where
he is, so he has little to fear”.What troll do you know who can argue the *other* side of a debate, as I just
did above?Perhaps you should try a debating tactic other than Ad Hominem next time? You might find the challenge refreshing.
Cheers,
Rhys.
P.S. And wanting privacy is not a crime. It’s called “prudence”.[/quote]Then he sent another email to me bitching because I didn’t give explicit, follow-the-lines-on-the-floor directions to registering. Well kids, what do you say to RhysW? He wants debate, let’s debate! (Translation: over to you guys—I almost fell asleep from boredom just copying this. Sorry.)
Posted by Andrea Harris on 01/21 at 02:23 PM • #
- Hmmmm, should be fun…..
Gun-toting, loons who completely skipped past that whole First Amendment thing, perhaps?
There are many gun owners who have justifiable reasons for owning a firearm, and the assertion that they are ignorant “loons” is insulting.Dingbats who missed the entire point of the movie and who have threatened Moore’s life for merely asking some hard questions about the gun culture?
Dingbats?, once again your insulting people, and as for the movie, it has been thouroughly torn apart by people who understand concepts like “context” and “integrity” both things that MM seems to be lacking.So-called “patriots” who think that patriotism means “agree with our leader or else”?
Actually, i’d say that 99.99% of people who support President Bush disagree with him on various things, again your insulting people by suggesting that only ignorant manipulted mindless fools could support him.What troll do you know who can argue the *other* side of a debate, as I just
did above?
No, you didnt, you built a strawman, just like a good little leftist troll.Perhaps you should try a debating tactic other than Ad Hominem next time? You might find the challenge refreshing.
And then you follow up with a patronising sneer.Gee wizz Rhys, 3 insults in 3 sentences, followed up by a snarky email. And you bleat about being called a troll. Its not debating you fucktard, it IS trolling, debating is when you are reasonable and dont patronise and otherwise insult those whom you are debating with.
FUCK OFF, PISSANT.
- Just a thought:
Gavan de Becker is the bodyguard’s boss, and the author of a great book called ‘The Gift of Fear’.
I suggest that if we centre-right moderates love Moore so much, there must be a good contingent of people less moderate sending death threats and dead dogs. Gavan de Becker is the MAN when you are getting that, and part of his strategy would be not encouraging the wrong behaviour by responding to it.
Hence the nutjobs will get no oxygen in the papers from Moore. Doesn’t mean they aren’t there.
- 40,000 people died as a result of gun violence in Brazil in 2003…where are all the so-called ‘bleeding hearts’ for Brazil? Where’s the outrage? The situation in Brazil can’t be exploited the way anti-Americanism can at the box office by people like Moore. They can’t use the issue of gun violence in places like Brazil or the Middle East as a platform to raise their own profile, or for their own agenda. An agenda which is, more often than not, self-serving!
Well this is Canada, so she might come home one day to find that a bunch of stoners carrying baggies of totally legal hemp squatting in her home. Or even worse, since Moore is in town, she runs the risk of being eaten out of house and home. Of course, she could always buy a gun.