The clearly unscripted dialogue between Moore and the spokesperson (Moore must return several times to get any satisfaction and the Kmart spokesperson stutters and clearly is just unconvincingly rehearsing the company line) gives the viewer a sense that history is happening in the 'here and now' of the film, just as the viewer watched the security footage of the massacre at the high school. Eventually, Kmart agrees to no longer sell firearms, under Moore's direct, on-camera pressure. For one brief moment, the irony ebbs away as Moore takes some satisfaction that his quest for truth has done something, however small. Moore deploys the same investigative, 'slice of life' technique when he goes to the NRA-supporting actor Charlton Heston's home, to ask the actor why he agrees to support the organization, even after the shootings. Heston can offer no explanation, other than safety, despite the fact he lives in a house with a security gate, in an affluent area of Hollywood. Heston's comment that America's escalated levels of violence are due to America's greater "diversity" smacks of racism, but also highlight why many people buy guns and live in such a state of fear. The fact that Americans are actually not threatened with murders at every corner and need guns to protect themselves is a myth promulgated by the types of films made by men like Heston, Moore implies, and the sensationalist coverage the 'if it leads, it bleeds' evening news gives to violence. This belies the fact, Moore tells the viewer, that although the murder rate is down...

The perception that violence is 'normal' fuels the Columbine mentality, he suggests, showing excerpts of local crime news coverage.
Thus, throughout the film Moore constantly creates an ironic contrast with real-life images of violence with snippets of popular culture that show America's lack of concern with the spread of increasingly sophisticated weaponry. Perhaps the most frightening example is that of a bank that is also a gun dealership. The bank gives away guns to people who open up new accounts, instead of toasters, again normalizing the presence of guns in households where people have no idea of how dangerous guns can be, or even how to use them. Moore notes that Canada has relatively lax gun legislation, yet a far lower murder rate. His film implies that greater corporate and individual responsibility in America is necessary to prevent the Columbine tragedy from occurring again. More than anything, Moore's individual voyage of discovery and journey into the horrific ironies of America's firearm obsession suggests that a change must occur within the hearts of Americans. Rather than simply mourn what occurred at Columbine, or use the tragedy to fuel us into barricading ourselves in our homes with more guns, we must try to turn away with the fascination we have for outlaw violence, and find solace in a new and more humane and compassionate vision of America.

Works Cited

Bowling for Columbine." Directed by Michael Moore. 2002.