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…
Oh looky, old man who never plays videogames pulls out the "Protect the Children" card and the "Taking Advantage of a Panic Situation" card.
Yea, silly old farts…
Where the fuck are the Violent Movie Studies in wake of the incident too? Maybe the shooter loved action movies with Arnold in it, rofl.
The ignorant blame game, boils my blood more than most other things just because I cannot stand ignorant 'adults' of Last and Last-last generation. That's why when us in this generation see a senior or adult that likes video games? They generally are MUCH MUCH more open-minded, much more open to common sense and they're 500% more interesting as a human being in general.
These 'People'?….You can just instantly see how closed-minded they are… it's sickening.
isnt it the parents job to look after their kids, not some random company? and what Canada doesnt have the same exact video games we do here? i wanna slap that man…
?? Canada?? what do they have to do with this?
But yeah, video games are becoming the scapegoat again…because kids weren't bullied and picked on and violent before them..forget about how many times I almost had my legs broken as a kid because someone wanted to try a new move they saw on wrestling, or something they saw in a movie…The fact the the shooter had mental/pshycological issues and easy access to guns is being swept under the rug, it had to be the video games fault! But hey, the media loves a good witch hunt…
Last edited by CH1N00K on 12/20/2012 2:12:18 PM
The 'gun-issue' is not being swept under the rug. Our hack media has been exploiting this horrible event for the last 5 days to further their anti-gun narrative. They refuse to acknowledge the gimping of our mental health system. The mom as a law abiding citizen had a right to own firearms. Her mistake was being naive about what her nutter son was capable of. No parent wants to believe their child is capable of such evil. She should have gotten rid of the guns. No one is arguing otherwise but to blame guns or games is nothing but knee jerk reactionary fluff meant to make the outraged feel better by acting like their doing something.
I don't want to make a political issue out of this, but the reports don't make sense. On one side, the former baby sitter said the mother was very particular about him not going to the bathroom on the clock or doing anything that would mean leaving the son alone, yet we're told that the mom herself would leave the son(albeit at an older age)alone at home with an arsenal of guns. And in all this madness, someone decides to blame video games?
Last edited by Shams on 12/20/2012 4:47:09 PM
Politicians are looking at any way they can to avoid addressing the gun control issue and this is the result. Fox News instantly stressed the "culture of violence" in Hollywood and Video Games to take pressure off the gun issue.
A study is fine. It should turn out favorable to gamers anyway and even if it doesn't nothing will result from it…
Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/20/2012 11:50:01 AM
Exactly! They are just trying to divert attention from the real issue.
This tragedy has been a wake up call to many, and now murder advocates… I mean gun rights supporters 😉 fear the President might get off his a$$ and finally do something about gun control. Assault weapons should never be sold to civilians period. The only real use for an assault weapon is to kill lots of people as fast as possible. Nobody goes hunting dear with a Uzi! Any person who buys one has in mind to use it in another human being, surely they might call the self-defense BS card, but all it takes is one bad day and a nervous breakdown for that to change…
Get off your gun-control soapboxes please. The politician that this article is about is a Rockefeller. The Rockefellers have historically been strict supporters of gun-control, so Jay Rockefeller is not trying to avoid the gun control issue.
I think you will be hard pressed to find a Dem who will be for stricter gun control laws and give a pass to violent video games. Even if the prez "finally do something about gun control", he will probably set his sights on violent video games as well.
Breaking news: NRA tries shifting blame to video games and hollywood in "press conference" without questions…
Typical.
Just for the record to all the haters here: I'm not anti-gun, I'm just for reasonable regulations like closing the gun show loophole so every gun purchased will be accompanied with a background check…
You have never been to a gun show. If you did you would know this 'gun show loophole' is a complete farce. Who's spewing talking points now?
How is it a farce? Oh because the right-wing media says it is, I see.
If it is indeed a farce, then why would you care if they close it?
Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 1:40:06 PM
Listen to yourself, rightwing this, rightwing that. Dude, keep going, your inane rambling is only further exposing your bias and unwillingness to except facts for what they are.
"If it is indeed a farce, then why would you care if they close it?"
My God, you're an idiot. I'll answer this and then I'm done. No point in arguing with people like you who don't want to deal in facts, just your emotional opinion.
Their goal is to shut gun shows down for good. There is no loophole to close. Any and everyone who buys a gun at a gun show MUST fill out the longhorn and go through the background check. If one wants to transfer a firearm from one owner to another there is a county Sheriff at the show who over sees the transfer to make sure the two parties are lawful.
But you see, you lie. You lie because it doesn't help or anti-gun case to let the truth come out. And your attacks on me for offering up factual data only exposes you and your lies. So don't stop! Ramble on and misinform people because you feel you have the right to lie as long as your agenda is heard. Listening to you and morons like you in the media talk about guns has been quite entertaining as NONE of you have no idea what you're talking about but still act as if you hold the moral authority.
Thank God the Founders gave us the Bill of Rights to protect us from people like you.
Haw a nice day chump.
Last edited by Jawknee on 12/21/2012 1:58:50 PM
Here's your facts and statistics:
"1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).
Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.
We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.
Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).
After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.
4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64."
From the Harvard School of Health. NOT some crappy biased think-tank.
Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 2:32:29 PM
Interesting facts for perspective: the second worst country in the first world for gun related deaths per capita is Canada. Of the last 25 first world mass shootings, 15 were in the states. Second place was Finland with 2. The two most peaceful countries in the world who not only have the fewest gun related deaths, but also the fewest homicides per capita, are the same two countries with the strictest gun laws in the world: Japan and Iceland. And Japan has the largest city in the world. Japan only has a little more than a third of the population if the us, but it's got 4 times that of Canada… They had 443 homicides last year. (only a few dozen involved guns) to Canada's 500+ and the USA's 12k…
Draw your own conclusions. I'm staying out if this otherwise. It makes me so mad. You just can't kill that many 6 year odds all at once in other first world countries. It just doesn't happen. And no… I don't own a gun. But I still feel perfectly capable of bring able to protect my family. wake the flip up….
I'm not responding to any rebuttal because I already know it will be incorrect, stubborn, backwards, and… Like ugh…. This is why other countries paint America with those unfair generalizations Ben hates so much. Grow a pair and realize guns couldn't protect those children.
In regards to my point earlier about the NRA here's the headline from IGN:
The NRA points to “vicious, violent video games†as the cause of shootings, calling violent entertainment “the filthiest form of pornography.â€
I saw the press conference, it was pathetic…
A Slate article revealing that NRA backed politicians effectively blocked the CDC from gun studies seems to lend credence to people's thoughts on the right wing on the gun control issue.
Last edited by pillz81 on 12/21/2012 3:10:34 PM
And about the gun-show loophole Jawknee, we're talking about FEDERAL law not the state laws that your personal local gun show is adhering to…
Some state laws are strict (very few) some are extremely loose.
Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 7:28:23 PM
Amazing how the right-wing is clearly trying to steer the debate away from the root cause of this violence. Appreciate the data posted by Poop. The facts are against the NRA and this grasping at straws shows that they are dying. The NRA is an antiquated organization that will die with the Republican party. As soon as these old farts with their ancient beliefs and prejudices die off the sooner the younger generation can move on. Move forward with the times please.
Have they considered the violent crime rate in Japan? They love them some video games and violent media. Where is there gun crime? Ludicrous.
Last time I checked, most violent games are rated fairly high so kids can't get them. Blame the parents not the games.
Wow… and i thought we were past the point where video games would be blamed for a tragedy.
To shoot you need guns, now I`m not an American nor I live in a country that permit carrying guns but shouldnt the problem lies on the availability and accessibility of firearms?
No, as the old saying goes "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." One problem lies between people and proper management of their firearms. People these days aren't taught to respect a firearm.
But in this particular issue. The real problem is media/news coverage. Every time something like this happens in the United States the news always informs us of Who the killer was, What he used, How he did it, personal background, and how many people died. The next depressed individual sees this and gets determined to top it once they reach the boiling point.
U.S. media in a sense glorifies these killers instead of focusing on the victims.
Nuclear bombs don't kill people, people kill people. Thus, should I be allowed to buy a nuke at my local Walmart?
Sorry, I just always thought that argument was sooooooo dumb.
You're right about the media's obsession with murderers though, killers know they'll be famous as hell after they're done. That is part of the problem as well…
Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/20/2012 1:10:47 PM
@PoopsMcGee
LOL Loved it!!
This is the best response I've seen to this dumb a$$ argument 🙂
What's dumb is blaming a inanimate object for the evil that lurks in men's hearts. Fact is there are over 150 million legal gun owners in the country and 99% of them do not commit crimes. I'll tell you as a gun owner myself it actually helps to reinforce my attempt to obey the law because I am responsible for the weapon I own.
Enough of this idiocy that a guns made an evil man commit murder. Guns can be used for evil and good. Days before this shooting a man walked into a Oregon mall and started shooting. He got 2 people before his gun jammed. A LAW ABIDING citizen with his carry conceal permit confronted him, guess what? The murderer then turned his gun on himself. But our hack media won't report that because it doesn't fit their anti-gun narrative. Two days after another would be mass murderer tried to shoot up a movie theater, guess what? An off duty cop tool him down before he could kill anyone with…..her gun.
If guns are so bad then the police and military shouldn't have them either.
My God, moral clarity is lost on so many people these days.
@PoopsMcGee
Nuclear weapons are WMDs not even in the same ball park of firearms. The weapons are simply created it takes a user to use them in a violent manner.
@Jawknee
You couldn't have said it any better
It's illegal to own nuclear materials that make up a nuclear bomb. It's not illegal to own fire arms. Not a good analogy.
@Jawknee
I don't have much against owning a regular gun for self-defense, but assault weapons should not be allowed in the hands of regular people period.
What kind of attack are you expecting on you or your home that you need a machine gun to protect yourself? Does anyone expect a zombie apocalypse? LOL
You guys are right, guns don't kill people, people kill people. People with a knife kill people faster, with a gun even faster, with an assault weapon they can kill even more people even faster.
Actually, while I respect your opinions, the facts don't lie. We are not allowed to carry guns or knives here in the UK. What has happened? Deaths by shootings and stabbings have drastically dropped since these laws were passed. You get evil people with evil intent everywhere. By preventing them getting the means to commit violent crime, you decrease violent crime rates : fact.
(Specially trained UK police and military personnel are allowed firearms)
Last edited by Dukemz_UK on 12/20/2012 2:30:50 PM
Define assault weapon. The AR15 is no more dangerous than a hand gun. It's not a machine gun or a 'high powered' rifle. It fires a weaker round than your typical .45 ACP. It uses a .223 hunting round that's used to hit small game such as quail or squirrel.
The media is not being honest about these guns. Truth is most of them have no idea what they're talking about. I can tell you this as an avid law abiding gun owner. They want to ban the AR15 because it 'looks' like an M4 but functions nothing like one. It's no different then any other semi-automatic hunting rifle. If these politician and news media people had any balls they would say what they want to say and call for a ban on all semi-automatic firearms, pistols and rifles alike. But they won't because they think the public is stupid and wish to slowly demagogue people into giving up their 2nd Amendment rights.
Thank you for being respectful Dukemz but respectfully, you're wrong.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm
Banning guns from law abiding citizens doesn't stop criminals from getting guns. At that point people are left defenseless. I spent some time in the UK after the Bermingham riots, the overwhelming majority of the people I talked too wished they had their gun rights during that time. A lot of property would have been saved.
Example, during the LA riots, Koreans in Korea Town grabbed their weapons and stood their ground and their shops were the only ones spared from massive destruction and looting.
I expected the "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." reply but why do you guys insist in protecting the very tool that caused many deaths, both in the past and the present?
Guns don't have their own fingers to pull the trigger. A madman in TX on Saturday drove his pickup truck into a crowed of people killing 14, do you blame the truck or the driver?
Assault Rifles are not even the problem in the U.S. The majority of killings whether individual or mass are usually done with hand guns. Not many people understand that. Assault Rifles and machine guns are two entirely different fire arms.
The fact of the matter is that people like this will always find an alternative. You take away a gun they get a knife. Take away the knife the use high powered bow & arrow. Take away bow & arrow they use home made explosives. Take away explosive material they will use poison. The possibilities go on forever and is only proven through the history of man.
I protect my right to bare arms because of how I was raised and the world we live in today. I was taught at a young age about gun safety, proper use, proper cleaning, proper storage, etc. I know you stated you're not from the U.S. but where I live, there's greater potential for home invasions, robberies off the street, and carjackings. I have a family and two boys I'd rather be able to protect them then not be able to.
Sure most would say "Call the police." That sounds like the right thing to do but response time has dragged over the years and by the time they get there you could've lost your life already
@Slugga, cops are great and most do a fine job but when seconds matter cops are minutes away. Most of the police officers I have spoken to or heard speak on the issues actually encourage law abiding citizens to take a firearm training and safety course and get a CCW if you're willing. They understand the 2nd Amendment wasn't about hunting or target shooting and want law abiding people to be able to protect themselves if need be,.
@Jawknee
I won't argue with you about guns, I have been a long time reader here, and know I would be out of my depth trying to argue gun specifics with you.
The fact is that when people have easy access to extreme fire power they can do extreme damage, the SIG and Glock that guy used can fire 5 bullets per second! Is that correct?
I get what you are saying about opportunistic people trying to further their anti-gun agenda with miss information, but the fact remains that guns are just too dangerous to be available so easily as it is in our country…
That's incorrect. Glocks and SigSaurs are semi-automatics. You can only fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. With recoil and blow backto affectingly hit your target you typical can accurately pop off 2 maybe 3 at most per second. In this case he didn't just randomly fire as fast as he could. He had a full 20 minutes before the cops showed up. He methodically executed these poor children one by one. People believe, (and of course there is no way of proving this)that he only stopped once he heard to sirens. Once cops with guns showed up. See my point? I know its easy to blame the gun but guns are only tools. Used for good or bad. As I said below, cops are wonderful and do a fantastic job most of the time but with a country as big as the US it's unrealistic to assume cops will be able to stop everyone from doing evil like this. Our Founders understood this. That's why they granted "the right of the people to bear arms" in our Bill of Rights among other reasons.
Also making guns less available to people like me who follow the law and would use them to protect my family or people around me in an event like this isn't going to stop criminals from getting them and using them. I mean here in the US we can't even control the people or the drugs that flood across our southern boarder, were not going to stop illegal guns either. All that does is make law abiding citizens less safe as the have no means of defense. Look at the gun deaths by gang bangers in Chicago. 450 this year alone, many of them kids and they have some of the strictest gun laws in the nations. Criminals ignore laws. That's what makes them criminals.
Last edited by Jawknee on 12/20/2012 3:58:18 PM
@Jawknee
I see what you mean, after a quick search online and watching a Youtube video, I can tell there is no way those guns can shoot 5 rounds per second, so much miss information about guns 🙁
Maybe that's the answer, people should be better trained, or training in operation and safety should be mandatory to anyone who purchases a weapon…
I'm out! I have a Math final to take 🙁
I hope this is the last we hear about tragedies this year.
Be safe and Happy holidays to all!!
@Jawknee I agree with that totally. A cop is the one who suggested to me to take CCW classes.
@Karosso You're right, people need to be trained/educated about gun use and safety.
Number of gun related murders in UK (2009):41
Number of gun related murders in US (2009):15,241
UK population as compared to US population: 1/5
The numbers speak for themselves. Guns don't kill people, the lobbyists and unregulated flow of guns kill people (and children).
@Jawknee, I think Dukemz was more referring to deaths and violent crimes, that's not to say that all crimes that involve a firearm are not "violent", but not all crimes will result in an injured or murdered victim (violent crime).
It should also be noted that in many jurisdictions a "gun crime" could be considered even when the criminal uses a non-functioning firearm (a replica) or threatens the use of a gun. As long as the victim or police believe that the firearm was/is real, it can be reported as a "gun crime"
The study the linked article was written about would have had more credibility if it was conducted by some type of non-partisan Government Accountability Office or an all-party committee by Members of Parliament, instead it was published by an organisation calling itself the "Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting". Also, it would have been a bit more helpful if that report was based on more recent statistics and not over ten years old.
One thing that that should be taken away from all these posts is that the concern that so many people from outside the US have when we see news of events like these. Plus, as you pointed out, Newtown was not the only mass shooting that occurred last week. It's hard not to link a very clear element that seems to associated with all these incidences.
Regardless, I hope they find out how and why, the mother was not able to properly secure these guns and ammunition away from someone that was not the owner and permit holder.
I'm sorry Jawk, but you sound like a paid lobbyist for the NRA. You got their talking points down by heart! You could've been on stage for their "press conference". Good show!
And Poops you sound like an emotional twit who just projects your inanity onto others. I'm not even an NRA member nor do I care what they do or day. I believe in a free people, you believe in telling people what to do REGARDLESS of the countless evidence that proves you wrong and policies you advocate put people in further danger. A firearm is a great equalizer for woman who wish to defend themselves against would be rapists or an abusive ex. You wish to take that away from them.
Why do you hate woman?
You sound like an overly defensive moron with a bunch of loaded "statistics and facts" that anyone could counter with other "statistics and facts" that show the complete opposite.
As I stated above, I'm not against reasonable gun ownership for self-defense or hunting. At all. Just not this gun-nut dogma that all the 'initiated' spew left and right.
Yes, I hate women. You got me. How about we bring up the numbers of women who are shot and killed in abusive relationships, whereas these would've have probably ended in less than a loss a life otherwise…
So why do you hate women?
…and as for being an "emotional twit" as you oh so elegantly put it, I held these views long before this mass shooting.
Thanks for proving my point with your oh so eloquent ramble. The difference between me and you, I believe people should be free to make their own choices in life and that includes how hey defend themselves from people who make the world a dangerous place. You feel you get to dictate how people choose to defend themselves against people who make the world a dangerous place. Your distrust of your fellow citizen proves you hold them in contempt. Why do you hate people?
And yes, I deal in statistics and facts. The HORROR!
Last edited by Jawknee on 12/21/2012 1:27:39 PM
No, you drown people in irrelevant statistics when there are more statistics proving the opposite point. Then act like your OPINION is fact and dismiss all other points of view. You are an arrogant blowhard that does nothing else but make people hate gun nuts. That's all.