What was promised to be an unbiased look at guns. Turned out to be lies and editing, to get the gun control adgenda out there. Luckily they were caught and the conversation has turned from gun control. Now it is about the lies the director and producer told. Bet they never thought that is the way it would turn out. If you want to watch the most anti gun, Bloomberg backed, and completely biased film about guns. This would be the one for you. It's sad, they took something that could have shown both sides. (Even family members I have thought it was going to be a fair look.) They took it and completely lied to get everyone to watch. Then showed the anti gun side over and over. Everything negative about guns without rebuttal was there. Like the terrorist watch list. The NRA has never had an issue with the list. They take issue with who makes the list (it's secret, nobody knows.) If put on the list incorrectly can you get off? (No, there is no judge panel or anyone you can go to in order to fix the issue.) The United States is supposed to be innocent until proved guilty. The terrorist watch list is the opposite approach. If this government wanted to do it correctly. There wouldn't be an issue with it at all! Watching made me wonder, how long it took them to find NRA members that were complete morons. Did they interview 100 people or 1000 people before they found the guys that don't know. The pro gun community is pretty knowledgeable about the laws. Once you find out they were selectively editing their film. The answer is obvious... They stood there until they found people that agreed with their side. Again, I take issue with many things in this film. First and foremost it's a completely biased look at a major issue in America. With the gun control side using lies and propaganda to back their side. Second, it was advertised as a fair look from both sides. It wasn't, they did everything possible to make the pro gun side look stupid and unknowledgeable. Third, the makers of the film were so unknowledgeable themselves, they broke federal gun laws in order to make their film. Finally, this film did nothing at all to help either side. It's a huge screw up that will be forgotten. Rather than a fair look at both sides. The movie is a sad attempt to pass more gun control laws. If you want that sort of thing. You will love the movie. If you don't want more gun laws. The movie is so full of lies it will make you furious.

Exposed as a lie by the actual audio recording of Virginia Citizen's Defense League's group interview. Under the Gun showed VCDL members sitting in silence when asked about background checks, but the members actually responded immediately and for four solid minutes. Today (May 31, 2016) EPIX pulled this mockumentary from their programming. Katie Couric and other movie staff have issued half-hearted apologies for misrepresenting the VCDL. This movie needs to be re-edited for accuracy, or burned. In no way is it, as advertised, balanced. At their website http://underthegunmovie.com/ they list a multitude of anti-gun partners, but no pro-gun organizations are represented.

Stephanie Soechtig got caught. LOL.I guess the documentary was so bad that she needed to 'spice it up' by adding some fiction to the film.Just search "audio shows Katie Couric gun documentary deceptively edited interview pro gun activists" and you'll see how this 'film' represents the worst of the documentary genre.Stephanie you have a responsibility to at least pretend to represent the story in a minimally truthful manner. Just how many other edits did you make to spice things up?When did it become OK to release a 'documentary' that was as much fantasy as fact? It reminds me of the '80's when NBC used model rocket engines to set fire to a car so they could prove the point of their story, that the car was a fire hazard.Good luck on your future films. Now any documentary you make will be suspect.

At 21:48 Couric is made to appear as if she has stumped the Virginia Citizens Defense League by asking the question, "If there are no background checks for gun purchasers, how do you prevent felons or terrorists from purchasing a gun?" Subsequent to this question, the camera pans from VCDF member to member and all appear to be mesmerized by this question. Problem is, the editor of the film removed their verbose answers to this question, and inserted film of them patiently waiting to be asked a question.If this is an example of what Couric considers journalistic integrity, then she will always be remembered as a hack propagandist rather than a serious investigative reporter.