Runaway Jury...

[Grimster74]

My brother purchased this one for me yesterday but have not had the time to sit down and watch it. Who's seen it and is it any good. The few people I've talked with said its an excellent movie, but as usual, rather hear it from my forum buddies.

[stevew14]

I really enjoyed it. Hackman and Hoffman in the same movie was a treat. Good story and character developement. It really held my attention and kept me guessing. Definitely worthwhile. I hope you enjoy it.

[Early B.]

Great movie. Excellent story. Very entertaining.

[Dr. Spec]

Book was based on big tobacco. The left wingers needed some fresh meat, so the plot was changed to demonize the evil gun industry instead.

Too politicized and agenda driven for me - personally I'm sensitive to the issue so I couldn't enjoy the movie.

[dorokusai]

It definetly had an agenda...but oh well, it was a decent movie. I have seen far worse lately, specifically House of the Dead....OMG what a bad movie.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Bowling for Columbine had less of an agenda than this. :rolleyes:

I was a dumbass and bought this movie before I had a chance to read Dr. Spec's post on the matter. Knowing he's a gun owner as I am his opinion is valuble to me. I happen to agree with him 100%.

The movie was clever in it's execution, but the blatant BS is something I couldn't get over. The whole premise of the case was a joke to begin with and to think those were the good guys because that's who the film was trying to get you to pull for. All for the children, eh? That's utterly despicable.

[Loud & Clear]

Fine film, really enjoyed it. Guns are great for inflicting violence on people and animals; now there's something to strive for.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Guns are great for inflicting violence on people and animals; now there's something to strive for.

So I guess ignorance is what you strive for? :confused: :eek:

[Loud & Clear]

Originally posted by Rush Limbaugh
So I guess ignorance is what you strive for? :confused: :eek:

Nifty comeback. You might be as intelligent as your namesake. :p

[Rush Limbaugh]

Originally posted by Loud & Clear
Nifty comeback. You might be as intelligent as your namesake. :p

I was responding to the ignorance of your comments. Guns are only to inflict violence on people and kill animals? What a broad and ignorant statement. Without guns you wouldn't even have the right to make the statements you just made.

Anyone who thinks a gun company is to blame for some guy walking in and spraying all of his co-workers has some major screws loose. Just like the lady who sued McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee on her own leg. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Loud & Clear]

Originally posted by Rush Limbaugh
Without guns you wouldn't even have the right to make the statements you just made.

Without clubs your ancestors wouldn't even have been able to propagate. Evolution, try it sometime. ;)

[Dr. Spec]

Evolution, try it sometime.

We're not quite there yet, L&C.

Animals are still killed every day to feed the human race (last time I checked vegans were in the distinct minority).

And certain human beings still can't resist (for myriad reasons) preying on and killing other human beings.

You are essentially correct in your assessment; I do use firearms to kill animals for food, and I'm perfectly content with my position in the food chain - at the top, thank you. And I also use firearms to defend myself from sociopathic 2 legged predators. Firearms are just tools for me - I legally use them with mature discretion when I need to, and then I put them away when I'm done.

And it goes without saying the human race as a whole is certainly not evolved enough to stop waging war and killing each other on a mass scale (to wit 9/11). I shouldn't need to remind you this country is at war, and we wouldn't be here unless the USA was capable of defending itself from other aggressive countries. The US soldier still carries a knife, a sidearm, and a rifle as the primary weapons to wage war.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Frankly i'm sick of the broad comments that having to kill something or someone in self defense is a bad thing, and that everyone but the criminal is to blame when the tool is used in an improper way.

I never said he was wrong in their intended uses, but I see a big difference between inflicting violence on people and animals and actually using the tool to defend yourself and those around you.

Guns are a rudimentary concept and the eradication thereof will never be seen through. Such a product can be milled by any machinist with the blue print of a firearm. The fact of the matter is that anti-gun people just like to look at one side. They see the murder and the crime, but they never see father or mother who saved themselves and their kids from a crazy intruder.

That is the ignorance I was refering to. Unless you have actually handled a firearm, fired one, and gone through the training you don't have a clue of the amount of respect and responsibility that goes into such a powerful tool. People with guns who have adequete training are safer than those without them.

So whats your logical conclusion? Take all of the guns away from law abiding citizens so the criminals, descriptive in their name, can commit another crime by illegally possessing firearms and allowing them to willfully know without a doubt that all of their victims are unarmed.

Genius! :rolleyes:

That is what it comes down to.

Think of a world without guns if you will. I can still kill you with a knife or any other tool I would desire. I can lop your head off just as quickly as I can pull the trigger on my gun. Are we going to ban knives next?

Oh, and evolution? Last I checked I never killed anyone, but it's the basic animal instinct to survive and I will kill someone if I have to in order to protect myself or my family. Maybe you need to redirect your focus to the scum and evil of the world. Get to the root of the issue rather than blaming it on an object that can't think or fire itself, or even, evolve if you will....

[smglbrth]

"Ted Kennedys car has killed more people than my gun".

Loud & Clear -

Everyone has their own viewpoint, in this country it is their right.
Remember Sargent York? He was, in fact, an objector to killing in W.W. I. Interesting thing was that when the time came he did kill over, I'm pretty sure, 20 Germans, single-handed. His reasoning? He figured those German machine guns were killing hundreds of men and if he were to kill the many Germans he did, it would mean less killing altogether. His means of defense of HUMAN LIFE? A bolt action rifle. My family is much larger than one person and if I have to use a firearm in self defense of my family's life, so be it.

Hunting for meat, to me anyway, it's a no-brainer. I like game animals and I love the hunt.