We may as well just go right around the country and let every politician sound off on violent video games.

The latest to make a claim without any evidence to support that claim (big surprise from a politician, isn't it?) is senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), who says that video games are actually a bigger problem than guns because games "affect people." …well, thank goodness he isn't vague.

Speaking during MSNBC's The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd (and as summarized at GameSpot ), Alexander apparently missed the part where guns "affect" people by, you know, killing them, but whatever. His direct quote is as follows:

"I think video games is a bigger problem than guns. Because video games affect people. But the First Amendment limits what we can do about video games and the Second Amendment to the constitution limits what we can do about guns."

Have there been studies conducted that I'm not familiar with? Have researchers suddenly proven in the last month or so that video games "affect" people? I've no doubt that violent media of all kinds, including violent games, can have a long-term negative effect on children, which is why I'm a proponent of the ESRB. But to make the outlandish generalized claim that all games just "affect" all people? I'd be embarrassed to say something that ignorant. I really would.

Subscribe
Notify of
88 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cesar_ser_4
Cesar_ser_4
8 years ago

I say we get up in arms and straight up blame the ESRB if they somehow manage to do something to videogames. The ESRB won't have any other option but to blame the real culprits which are the parents of those mentally unstable little brats. We shall turn their own against them. If that makes sense of course.

The only place i see this going is the vast majority of gamers shooting themselves on the foot and the rest of us get punished for it.


Last edited by Cesar_ser_4 on 1/30/2013 11:04:36 PM

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

"Shooting themselves in the foot…"

HA! lol

BikerSaint
BikerSaint
8 years ago

The arrogance of all these half-a$$ed baby-wipe politicians who are jumping on a bandwagon just to say "Here I am me, look at me" are overwhelming disgusting & make me want to puke.

Gone are the days when politicians actually cared enough about what they did & said while in office, instead of going on self-righteous nanny-status tangents & just more & more of their own utterly useless & meaningless %*^&% personal agenda's.

Kratoskillall09
Kratoskillall09
8 years ago

That right there is worthy of 2 or 3 facepalms. That is absolutely ridiculous to say anything like that. Especially without any evidence to backup his claims. One thing you didn't mention is I do believe this guy is a member of the NRA. So right off the bat he's being extremely biased. I would actually like to find a politician whose got something to say on the subject without having any bias or other political agendas. That's just wishful thinking though. Any politician will say anything they can just to get few more votes next election. Will the video game bashing end anytime soon? It's getting kinda tiresome and redundant? Or since the Sandy Hook tragedy, is this the fad? Just wait till GTA V is about to release every parent and politician will be up in arms. All I can say to the parents is if you don't want your kid playing the game then I don't know, don't get it for them, and don't let them. If they happen to get a hold of the game punish them like my parents would've done. Don't go on national TV or the internet complaining about it. Ya know, be parents for once. Sorry. End of rant.

Vitron
Vitron
8 years ago

When you mean 2 or 3 face palms, you meant in thousands right? 🙂

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

I watched a little of the testimony today and there was more junk, Chuck Grassley I think, was saying how he just doesn't believe the information game developers brought to the conference. Just dismissed it because of who it came from, nevermind the fact that it was all scientific studies that found no statistically significant link between games and real violence.

This is what happens when you try to fight belief and ideology with science. The psychos always control the conversation.

Excelsior1
Excelsior1
8 years ago

I mentioned this in another related thread but I will post it again. Last year handguns killed 48 people in Japan, 34 in Switzerland. 21 in Sweden, 52 in Canada, and 8 in Great Britian. 10,728 people were killed by handguns here in the United States last year.

I am embarrassed because of where we rank on that list here in the United States. Clearly we have a systemic problem here in the United States.

Great Britian and Canada have the same violent videogame influences we have here in the United States. If it's videogames causing violence then why aren't more people dying from guns in other countries? It's because those countries have a lot less guns on the street.

There is a loophole in federal law that allows handguns to be sold at gunshows with no background checks or paperwork of any kind. Handgun sales from gunshows account for 2 out every 5 legal handgun purchases here in the United States. 11 states have closed this loophole.

We should at least close that loophole and require background checks for all handgun purchases.

I'm not advocating taking guns away from responsible gun owners but closing that loophole seems like a good place to start. I see no reason why responsible and legal gun owners should oppose this.

The NRA is scared that the mood here in the United States has shifted so they throwing everything they can out there to distort the issue. People are getting fed up with all these gun related deaths and mass murders.


Last edited by Excelsior1 on 1/30/2013 11:37:01 PM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago
Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

It's not like our countries don't have guns. In Canada, any law-abiding citizen can still get a gun. Just not in 5 minutes at your local walmart.

What's limited is the types of weaponry you can own (still very lethal weapons can be bought. You just can't be a one man army) and there are many more hoops to jump through.

So, you're psychologically unstable as declared by your mandatory psychiatrist review? Well, hold on there, psycho. No gun for you!

Lots of weaponry in my extended family. None for me, though.

The difference is in the control, and to some extent, the access to health care.

Also, excelsior, in guns in general, Canada has had more deaths by guns (your numbers are correct about handguns, though). But it's still miniscule. Only 500-some homicides total, guns or not. We're the second worst 1st world country for homicides per capita at 2-point something per 100k. You are right… something strange is going on in the US with their over 10-point something per 100k.

All I know… is that it's definitely not video games.


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/30/2013 11:44:51 PM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Underdog, if advertising helps sell products why wouldn't violent games have some affect on the mentally deranged?

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

We have mentally deranged in other countries too, Jawk. Same commercials, too. And games… and movies… and violent themed music… and we see your news and other international news too… What's your point? I'm not sure what you're fighting for, here.

Crazy psychopath A with no history of illness or criminal activity might see or play a game in Canada, and think, aw hell, shits gonna get shot up for real! WHOOP WHOOP WHOOOOOOOP!!! Then find a slingshot or something…

Crazy psychopath B with no record of illness or criminal activity might do the same in an uncontrolled and easily accessible weapon market and have a very different outcome. Even with a measly little "semi automatic" (as if that fact makes things better…)

Or…

ignore psychos… momentarily lost mind cheated on wife wants to kill her cheating husband in a moment of fury. She grabs an easily accessible rifle… or … oops… no guns because I can't buy one. Then emotion passes and all is right as rain. Except the impending divorce, of course.

Just…. control the crazy accessibility of it all. That's all. So what if you gotta do some paperwork? Still have your "rights"…


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/30/2013 11:56:26 PM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

How about you answer the question and quit dodging.

tes37
tes37
8 years ago

Excelsior1, have you ever thought that maybe those stats indicate Americans have better aim? 🙂

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I did answer it, Jawk. We have mentally deranged. And everyone, deranged or not, are affected by media. And the mentally ill, just like children, should arguably not have access.

However, that doesn't address the problem. My argument pointed out you aren't seeing the problem.

Answer this… Why is the US such an outlier? There are more peaceful 3rd world countries. US is the 10th most violent… even against countries with political unrest.

The answer might not be the fact you have guns. But it definitely isnt going to be in the field of whether or not mentally deranged people are affected by violent commercials…. lol There's no correlation because those commercials are not exclusive to the states who does have the exclusive problem of high violence in the free world.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Those stats he quotes are irrevlent anyway given more than 60% of those 10k gun deaths per year happen to be suicides. The rest is mostly gang and drug violence while less than 600 are accidental.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Not irrelevant. The US is still an outlier with 3.6 per 100k compared to second place's 0.5 per 100k.

Just…. stop…. seriously. How are you not embarrassed yet?

And suicides are not less relevant. Suicides are about equal country to country. (Canada only slightly better than the US. But only marginally)


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:10:52 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Embarrassed? Nope, I've been a long time gun owner and know all the anti-gun tricks and arguments people like you use to trash my country, culture and values. Besides its you who is confidently ignoring that we have a massive problem with inner city gangs and drug violence unlike most of those other nations you hold is such high esteem.


Last edited by Jawknee on 1/31/2013 12:20:07 AM

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I'm a huge fan of your country, culture, and values.

I just don't see the harm in a little red tape to manage an overly accessible weapon industry. It's just red tape, man. Not a prison. As World passively pointed out… no one is taking or suggesting taking rights away. Just keep an eye on who gets guns.

This may come as a shock to you, but I could go out to buy a gun, join a gun club, and put it up in a locked cabinet at my house. I don't because I know I'm safe. But if I was worried, I could. And I have that right, too.

Literally none of us think you should not be allowed to responsibly own a weapon.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Forgive me if I got a different impression given some of your positions since this shooting and in other controversial subjects that have taken place here in regards to the states.


Last edited by Jawknee on 1/31/2013 12:33:49 AM

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

My position on your gun laws can hardly represent a distaste for such broad topics as your culture, country, and values. My position was the same prior to the shooting. But I did get extra angry over the fact they were kids. But that's separate anger from gun laws in general. Broke my damn heart, that event did.


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:44:04 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

As it did mine. As it should any sensible human being. Forgive me for being defensive. Since that horrible crime the media and the American left have been bullying law abiding gun owner. They didn't even wait 24 hours before the attacks on gun owners ensued. They even went as far as deceptively editing video of a hearing in CT accusing gun right advocates of heckling a grieving father during his testimony in an attempt to smear people like me as child hating ghouls. Once the full unedited tape was released many such as Slate and Anderson Cooper were forced to retract their slanderous accusations while others like MSNBC and The Huffington Post stubbornly refused to let go of that narrative even in light of the evidence that proved them to be lying hacks.

Excelsior1
Excelsior1
8 years ago

Hey Jawk!! It's been awhile since I have seen you. I said I wasn't advocating taking guns away from responsible gun owners so please don't be so defensive. I don't have a problem with you owning guns and enjoying your hobby. I want be crystal clear. I am not advocating any type of ban on guns, I'm not trying to take your gun away, okay?

I know this is a sensitive topic guys but let's try to be respectful towards each other. If people get chippy then we will all just talk past each other and we won't be able to have an intelligent discussion.. PSXE members are a very mature bunch for the most part. I love hearing the opinions of PSXE memners

Okay back to guns. Here are the facts. In 33 states private gun owners are not restricted from selling guns at gun shows. Buyers who purchase guns from individuals are not required to submit to the federal background checks in place for liscensed dealers in these states.

Here are the states that require background checks for all gun purchases. They are California, Colorado, Conneticut, Illinois, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island.

The following states require background checks for just handguns. They are Hawai, Pennsylvannia, Maryland, and New York, and New Jersey.

Florida requires background checks for hadguns in some jurisdictions.

Anyways, I just don't understand how anyone can say the stats do not matter. No wonder we have such a problem. The stats don't look good so we will just toss them out and call them meaningless? Americans killing each other with guns at a much higher rate than in other countries does not matter?

I respectfully disagree. Those stats tell us we have a problem that other countries just don't have. How can we have an intelligent discussion if we just toss the stats out and say they don't matter? I'm sure the victims families here in United States would say those numbers matter. Those are actual lives being lost. They aren't just a number.

@Underdog

Thanks for the information, It's interesting to here from a Canadian, eh. 🙂 I am very embarrassed that we kill each other at such a high rate with guns here in United States.


Last edited by Excelsior1 on 1/31/2013 1:45:49 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Excelsior, I wasn't very diplomatic in my pending post so apologies in advance. I'm just tired of the attacks by many (not you) on people like me for lawfully exercising my rights. Also tired of the misinformation regarding gun shows and their so called loophole. What it really is is a private sale loophole where some states do not enforce or require a background check on private sales. But even those stats being thrown around by thr media and others are inaccurate. at most its about 1.9% of gunshot sales that end up in crime scenes or crimes committed per our own DOJ. Licensed dealers that sell at gun shows must by federal law do a background check on every sale and they're required to keep records of these sales.

And please if you want to have a reasonable discussion, don't try and pull on people's heart strings by invoke victims families. My best friend from high school was shot by gang bangers in the back. The bullet wasn't intended for him. Wrong place t the wrong time. So I am not without understanding how victims families feel.


Last edited by Jawknee on 1/31/2013 1:45:26 AM

Excelsior1
Excelsior1
8 years ago

@Jawk

Apologies for pulling on your heartstrings. I wasn't aiming to do that. Sorry to hear about your experience with gun related violence. I just don't like hearing those stats don't matter when those numbers represent actual people dying. Lives lost matter me.

Don't worry about your reply that wasn't very diplomatic. I know this is a sensitive topic. I hope I didn't get blasted too hard. 🙂


Last edited by Excelsior1 on 1/31/2013 2:17:39 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

I only meant that one can't say 10k a year is merely gun violence when a great many of those deaths were self inflicted. When you throw that number out without recognizing that fact it gives the impression all 10k are murder. Not that those deaths don't matter. Of course they do. I want to apologize again in advance for being a jerk in my pending post. Just so very frustrated with many in this debate. Not you, others. Unfair of me to lash out at you.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

This is a clear case of, "oh shit, all the other politicians are saying so, I'd better follow suit!"

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

The number of you willing to take the rights of law abiding citizens away to protect a hobby are quite sad.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

Who wants to take what rights away?

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Not as sad as those who make up facts to protect their imagined loss of rights. It's not so black and white as that, Jawk. Proper control doesn't take away rights.

All law-abiding Canadians can own guns too, you know…


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/30/2013 11:47:08 PM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Says the guy who quotes Wikipedia for his own facts.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Ok…. so now it's clear I'm just arguing with a crazy person.

There's nothing wrong with wikipedia so long as wikipedia uses appropriate annotations.

Go back to that site I showed you, and scroll down to the citations. That's how you know it's legit.

whoo-boy…


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:03:04 AM

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago
Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Who's dodging World's question, by the way.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

I'm sorry, I thought it was retorical given all the attacks on the 2nd Amendment and Americans by some in this community since Newtown.

@World, you've frequented these posts enough to have witness the plethora of comments blaming guns and calling for their ban.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I just don't believe media is the appropriate target. It's a very odd sort of patriot that would destroy the first amendment to protect the second.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

I don't believe that game makers should be forced to change anything. We live I'm a free society and that comes with risks. It's better parenting that is required. Not more gun laws or restrictions on the 1st Amendment. The entire Bill of Rights is important. Not just parts of it.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

On the topic of games, I completely agree.

I guess I would have an easier time with all the gun stuff if gun violence there wasn't so astronomically different from the rest of the free world. I just don't see how it could be anything but just… bad or out of date gun laws.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

As I have said many times, America is unique. We have over 186 metropolitan areas with a population greater than 250k. That's where most of these gun murders happen largely due to drug wars and gangs. Comparing us to places like the UK that only has 45 or Canada that has about 20 with a population greater than 200k is apples and oranges. You guys don't have the same drug and gang problem as we have nor the number metropolitan areas where most of these killings happen.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Um… Toronto is a major international drug capital, it's one of the main centers for human trafficking, and it has one of the highest rates of users per capita in the world.

It's diversity is comparable to New York City.

Vancouver is even worse for drugs (not as bad on the human trafficking.)


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:53:02 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Okay but that's two places compared to over 180+ in the US. They're not the same.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

meh, no harm in discussion. We don't have to be absolutists.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Isn't calling for a ban an absolutist position? My irriration with this whole debate is the proposals have been done before, they didn't work and they dispaportionalty target law abiding citizens. Not a single solution being proposed on Capltial Hill would have stopped the Newton killer. What Feinstien's bill would do is turn me and millions of other law abiding gun owners into criminals over night when we inevitably refuse to register our arms.

And to those who think gun bans work to stop mass shootings…Nope, the UK banned semi-automatic rifles and handguns in 1996. This guy at the link managed to kill 12 with a double barrel shotgun and a bolt action rifle in 2010.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/10219655

Humans can be despicable and do horrible things to one another. Our founders understood this after having fought a decades long British occupation. They understood that when it comes down to it, much like an animal trying to survive in the wild we and we alone are responsible for our own defense. Cops do a great job but they cant be everywhere at once. It's better to own a firearm and never need it than to get stuck in a situation where you need one and don't have one.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I think I'm done on this topic. Why argue with someone who mocks your sources while using none of their own?

Facts we all know, games are clearly not the cause. As game popularity rises, violence declines. And we all have access to the same games, movies, news, music…. so why is it different? Whatever you believe it to be, I'm getting tired of the blame landing in the laps of the lambs. I'm also getting tired of people thinking a thin little bit of red tape equivocating a prison.

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

No one said they were different. I never solely blamed games. Unlike you who blame pieces of metal and plastic. "The gun made him do it" is just as stupid as saying "the games made him do it" or that large spoons make people fat.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I never once said that, Jawk. I said there needs to be a system that is responsible for the overly accessible market. Please, point out where I said, "The gun made him do it."

As I've said a number of times now… I can own a gun too, you know. The difference is I have more paper work to do first, and I need a background check and assessment. Then I register it. It can be done in just a couple days. If I'm diligent, I could do it all in one day.


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:25:15 AM

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

Hers your facts right from the Canadiadn Mounties. Granted is older data but this is as updated as they kept it I guess.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/res-rec/deaths_deces-eng.htm

Jawknee
Jawknee
8 years ago

I have done a back ground check for every fire arm I have purchased and hay includes those done at gun shows. To that gun show loophole lie needs to be put to rest. When I sold one to a friend my state requires the transfer be done through a licensed FFL dealer as a witness and a background check is done again on both of us to ensure the transfer is legal. I have zero issue with such procedure. It's registration I have a problem with as I don't trust my government. Not long ago my government rounded up over 100k of our fellow citizens and put them in interment camps simply because of their race. Can't blame me for not trusting Washington DC to respect my 2nd Amendment Rights or any of my rights for that matter.


Last edited by Jawknee on 1/31/2013 12:28:23 AM

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

Sounds like you have issues with a whole lot of other problems unrelated to guns.

My buddy is a police officer, and he's grateful before approaching a home to know if they have a gun on the property. Admittedly, our country's registry is a colossal waste of money. (it targets hunters with extra stuff that applies no other type of gun owner. Very strange)


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:38:38 AM

BikerSaint
BikerSaint
8 years ago

Speaking of guns….

Let's say for just a moment that there's a break-in with 2 or 3 perps, or even worse, a full-on home invasion(which America is also highly known for too) with a team of suspects.

Now, just 1 guess which of the following do I want to defend against them all….

1. baseball bat
2. kitchen knife
3. 5 to 7 shot handgun
4. semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round clip.

As far as I'm concerned, they come after me, I'm gonna do my very best that nobody leaves alive.

Gun bans will only stop law abiding citizens from defending themselves against any & all comers.

And the Gun control freaks don't just want our rifles, because believe me, that after that's done, they'll smell the blood of conquest & they'll continue to stop at nothing to disarm us of every single gun made, regardless.

And does any one in their right mind, actually think that the psychotics & the criminals will ever turn in their illegal guns…yeah right, just hold your breath & wait for that.

"I'd rather take my chances being judged by a jury of 12, than laying in a casket, carried by 6"

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I suppose you'd need a gun, because people breaking in in the US probably have guns too.

Also, at this point, a gun BAN is a bad bad idea.


Last edited by Underdog15 on 1/31/2013 12:36:36 AM