TexasCHLforum.com

retrieverman wrote:The lady whose husband was killed made a statement, and I may have misinterpreted it. She said that, as a victim, that she and her "cause" was looking out for the greater good of the country as a whole, and the gun owners were fearful and only looking out for themselves.(paraphrased)

Came across a little self righteous and condescending to me, but like I said, I may have misinterpreted it.

No, I'd say you pretty much nailed it.

jimlongley wrote:My guess is that they didn't make the cut because they didn't serve the producers' political agenda.

Actually, given Spurlock's obvious slant in most things (I think he sucks as a documentarian, but he occasionally covers interesting things on 30 Days, like this one) I found this episode to be remarkably unbiased in its presentation. He could easily have picked some dumb inbred bubba as the head of the "gun family", but the guy he went with...albeit not the most compelling and eloquent representative for our side, was a personable, rational, reasonably intelligent guy who made a good showing. In fact, all personal bias aside, I thought he made a far better rep for our side then she did for the anti-gunners. At least, until she began to soften up her stance and be more open-minded at the end.

And, as much as I feel bad for their losses, the two older female activists at the park bench came across as the typical arrogant, condescending and emotion-driven antis they were.

Of course, the arguments presented by both sides were not well-constructed and were very, very simplistic. But, all-in-all, not a bad episode as far as the over all impression given.