Phonearl
Good start, but then it gets ruined
Claysaba
Excellent, Without a doubt!!
KnotStronger
This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.
tocfba
Does little to none to show how many crimes are stopped by armed citizens. I don't have the numbers in front of me but it is at least 3 times more crimes stopped than crimes committed.
jharmon12
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.
michelle-920-722440
After this month's horrific murder in Orlando, and after marching Sunday with Moms Demand Action at the SF Pride Parade, and after calling politicians during the government sit-in last week, I knew I had to learn more about the stranglehold the NRA has placed on our government… I just got off the couch from watching Katie Couric's newly released documentary (free on EPIX which Comcast doesn't offer… I streamed for $0.99 on Amazon). I took a huge number of notes on all the atrocities I learned, which I know I'll need as ammunition for future gun battles ahead. (PUBLIC DISCLAIMER; I don't believe in taking anyone's guns away. I think that it should be harder to shoot a gun than to drive a car… and believe in closing the terrorist watch list loophole.) I learned a ton with this less-than-2 hour documentary, and strongly recommend it to the members of Moms Demand Action/Everytown Against Gun Violence/the Brady Campaign and others interested in reducing gun violence – or learning why America is having such a hard time doing so. Yes I know there was one edit made unfairly for "the other side"... bottom line, this shares a lot of truths about why America can't change gun laws. If moms can lobby the automobile industry for safer cars and car seats - and win - then moms can do so with the NRA for gun safety and less gun violence. #Enough #DisarmHate
karlie-82589
This IS NOT a documentary; it is a fictional film with a skewed narrative against the 2nd Amendment. The portion where Katie Couric poses the following question: "If there are no background checks for gun purchasers, how do you prevent felons or terrorists from purchasing a gun?" to the Virginia Citizens Defense League has been spliced and diced - replacing their 4+ minute reply with almost 10 seconds of awkward silence. Shameful reporting on Couric's part and completely negates any truth in this film. The only reason to mislead your audience is because your points aren't strong enough to stand on their own. Don't waste your time on this; no critical thinking required, just more "dumbing down" as usual.
