I haven't seen it, but I remember when it hit the papers that it was a doc on bridge suicides there was quite an uproar.

Personally, I think is totally shameless on the part of the film maker.:nope:

I'm not sure.
Suicide on the Golden gate is a public act, and the film makers had a watch on the bridge every day, they called the police as soon as someone looked likely to jump. Apparently lives were saved

Put it this way.

If I owned a handgun, there is a good chance I wouldnt be here today.

nuff said.

I think this might be related to that study the US Army did after WWII, that 80% of combat infantryman who were actually in combat, never actually aimed their weapons at the enemy. Apparently, they were more afraid of killing someone than getting killed.

Despite 3000 years of bloody human history as a race, it seems individuals are highly influenced by conscience and guilt.

I know of that study. Apparently they took the amount of ammunition used divided by the number of enemy KIA/WIA to come up with that figure. Unfortunately it ignores the tactic of supressive fire.

Are you sure you are not thinking of the study after Vietnam, that calculated 10,000 rounds per enemy KIA, and caused the Army to refocus on Basic Rifle Marksmanship? I believe this was conducted by like a dozen colonels, and they came back with like 6 bullet points of what the Army had to do, but to this day those bulletpoints are classified.

I am thinking of the study after WWII, where I believe they specifically asked these guys whether they fired they aimed at the enemy or not.

We looked at both of them in my OBC, but it was a long time ago, and the details are foggy.

Yeah maybe that's the one i'm thinking of.