-this review was one I wrote in Dec 2003. my opinion hasn't changed- I watched Innocents Betrayed. I have to be blunt. I was not impressed. To me, it was more an anti-government film than a Pro-Gun film. All I saw was how governments in the last 100 years have killed people. I fail to see how arming those people could have made any difference what so ever. If the people do not have the will to resist, they won't, no matter what tools they have. There is a quote at the beginning of the film that goes something like those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it. Well, like it or not, its human nature to forget. Just look at the past. Go back further than 100 years. Mankind keeps making the same mistakes over and over. The hype of this film was that it would radically change people's minds about gun control. Well, it misses horribly. It gives quick snippets of death tolls from regimes in the last century. The impression I got was that I should fear my government. It just showed bad governments doing bad things and that they continue to do so throughout time. I got more out of the two interviews at the very end than I did from the film. Governments are something to fear. I don't care if you are armed or not. Once a government gets enough power, the people are doomed no matter what. Our government has gained too much power already. There are too many people in this country that either don't want to resist or who just don't care. Just look at the US population and compare it to the NRA membership. I wanted my parents to watch the film. They are from the mid-west. Lived there all their lives. Dad is upper 60s, Mom is middle 50s. They are neither pro or anti gun. They do not own any guns, but have accompanied me to the range and shot some of my smaller caliber weapons. To them, its not about exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights. Its about getting out of the house and doing something different. They could just as easily take a drive out in the country. Only my Mom watched the entire film. She almost fell asleep watching it. She thought it was more about how governments abuse their power than gun control. She made a comment about 9/11. "What difference would guns have made? The plane was taken over with box cutters. I would risk a few cuts and some spilled blood to save my life." On a technical note, the content was cheap and thin. The editing was worse than amateur. With the apparent resources they had, they could have made a much better film. Someone needs to go back and start putting in some cold hard facts. It needs better presentation so people won't fall asleep. My mother, who is no director, agreed about the presentation. I would have spent more time on facts about the results of gun control in the US. There were two good examples towards the end: the lady at Luby's in Texas and the Carpenter Family in California. These are two very good examples of how gun control kills. Why weren't they explored further?? Where was Ruby Ridge?? Where was Waco??? Plenty of examples that were not shown. Take my advice, don't waste the time or money. I am embarrassed by this film and will not show it to anyone else. The producers of this film need to go back to the drawing board and make something with REAL impact.

Unless you are into politics and history, you won't really 'want' to see this movie like it is any other film.. treat it like what it is - a documentary. It is a very important documentary, because people must learn about what happened in the past, so they can prevent recurrences of past tragedies in the future. It is important that people see this movie so that they are more educated, and aware of the significance of the gun debate. Gun rights and the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting or sportsmen, although those are both perfectly legitimate activities. The real purpose behind the 2nd amendment gets discussed in this movie, and the film will reveal to any intelligent person who enjoys history and understands why it is important why gun control must be rejected.

This is very gruesome and not entertaining at all. All you really see are a bunch of gruesome pictures and short films, (except for the interview at the end) and the only sound you hear is the chattering of the narrator and some dramatic music. But the thing is that it is short, and to the point. (not sweet) Entertainment should play a very limited role in documentaries, and information should contain a maximum role. (That's something that Michael Moore fans need to learn.) Basically, it talks about all the genocide that happened in the twentieth century, and how they could've been prevented if the citizenry were armed. Just to give you a hint on how much genocide there was,170,000,000 people died because of genocide. The Nazi Holocaust only accounted for 13,000,000. EVERYONE should see this movie before they get taken in by anti-gun lies and mislogic. It is indeed true that none of the genocide could've taken place if the citizenry were armed. (EVERY genocide had disarmament as its precursor.) I won't say too much more, or I'll go over the 1,000 word maximum.7/10 One more thing, they could've done a LOT better with the September 11th part. (Watch the movie and you'll agree.)

This is a very disturbing movie. Not because of the images -- by now most educated persons probably know that 20th Century governments butchered 200 million or more people -- but because of the blunt and matter-of-fact way it illustrates some of the precursors to genocide. Intellectually I understood the historical connection between authoritarian states, civilian disarmament, and genocide but now I understand it viscerally as well. From the first time I saw that roving gun sight until the final credits this documentary alternately horrified and enraged me. However, not everyone will finish this film feeling thoughtful. It does challenge some fundamental assumptions people make about genocide but I think that is a good thing. Pretty darned good for a movie with only a $90,000 budget.