Ben-DutkaYou didn't actually expect video games would come through this one unfazed and free of suspicion, did you?
After the terrible shooting tragedy in Newtown, CT that left 26 people dead (20 of which were children), West Virginia senator Jay Rockefeller (D) has introduced a bill to congress that would ask the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to study the effects violent video games can have on kids.
Rockefeller singled out the gaming industry in an official statement on his website:
"Major corporations, including the video game industry, make billions on marketing and selling violent content to children. They have a responsibility to protect our children. If they do not, you can count on the Congress to take a more aggressive role."
If passed, NAS would conduct a "comprehensive study and investigation" of the possible links between violent video games and violent behavior in children. It would try to determine if such media causes kids to act more aggressively or negatively affect their general well-being. That's not a bad idea from a scientific standpoint, although they've done this countless times before, and there have been interesting results .
It's the above statement that makes my teeth grind. More in a minute…
If they had only loved Doom, that wouldn't have been the problem would it? I love Doom, it was a great game, the fact that for a little while I could shoot little pixelated bad guys was fun. I also played cops and robbers with super soakers and nerf guns…I even took one to school and had a blast one Halloween until the teacher took it away.. But no one got hurt, no parents had to bury their children..The fact that 2 high school students were able to gain access to huge arsenal of weapons that they could put together the idea that it was plausible for them to be able to shoot up the school, means that something with the system is broken somewhere.
And I'm not saying that you should outlaw the gun, we all know that that wouldn't work, it would only put more guns into the hands of the wrong people, but what's wrong with legislating it a bit better? You have the right to defend yourself and your family, but how many guns do you need to do that?
You do realize jawknee that you made yourself look like an idiot with that statement.
Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 12/22/2012 12:08:45 PM
Typical Senator bullcrap. He just wants to look like he's doing something in the hopes of getting reelected. I bet he won't care so much in a few weeks once everyone forgets about this tragedy. If he really cared about preventing this type of stuff from happening again, he would look into the real motivations of the killer and work to see if those are issues that need addressing in the general public.
Why would the NAS come up with this legendary link when everybody else has failed to? Why doesn't Congress take an aggressive stance on gun control? And no, the 2nd amendment doe snot give the avergae Joe the right to bear arms, not even to protect his home (The Supreme Court decided that the 2nd Amendment must mean this.)