Congresswoman Defends Violent Videogames
- Thread starter Marshall Honorof
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Your concern for peoples mental state is noted, your argument was actually pretty decent although I didn't agree with it but when you devolved into this part you lost any and all credibility.Grunt_Man11 said:
Banning guns will not make people start to ban knives, hammers, cars, ropes and hands it's a ludacris follow up that people somehow tie up.
"Oh you can kill people with that too you know? Yeah if you ban guns then your Glockenspiel will be next"
You could effectively continue your list ad nauseam if you really wanted too, I've even seen somebody go so far to say "Water" in one of those lists and it is always a hoot to read, no we would not ban hands.
Look, whilst I don't agree that the nuke was designed to sit and look scary (cold war mentality there), it was designed to be the "be all and end all" once we dropped it on Hiroshima.
The "scare factor" and "looming threat" was just a natural follow up of human instinct, nobody wants a nuke dropped on their country and rightly so. World leaders now collect them because not having one leaves you vulnerable to retaliation, again the cold war mentality.
Guns are designed for killing, the safety factor of having one just comes about naturally. If I was to break into your home, would I be risking getting shot? Yes, because I do not know if you have a gun or not so that puts me at a disadvantage if you have one and I do not.
So ultimately I just back out because my balls ain't that huge and your stuff is safe huzzah.
However, like in the wars where guns and any other form of defense/attack was some form of technological advancement the other side had to get one too.
Now owning a weapon is becoming almost mandatory to remain safe in some parts of the world, because if you don't have one someone else will.
Kind of scary, but that is the world we live in.
Captcha: Abide with me.
*points at the R&P forum*Dense_Electric said:
Really, if you haven't heard that, you haven't been around the escapist too much. Secondly, why the hell do people assume "ban" the moment they hear "gun control"?
Is it really always "all or nothing" with Americans? I'm sorry if that sounds crass, but I'm starting to get exasperated.
ON TOPIC: Well, she sure had some guts to go with this on FOX. And to paraphrase one of my favorite M's, "Sure, I don't have balls but that means at least I don't have to think with them."
My favorite part is that they think video games are made in hollywood. Fox news, video games don't cause violence and they certainly aren't made in hollywood.
Honestly I want to mention it but I think women are in the unfortunate position that looking their age is a death knell.DVS BSTrD said:
People treat women differently when they look old, kinda sad.
Glad to hear her say it. But its not merely gun laws, but gun mentality, which stems from the laws.
We are a nation need to understand firearms and their purpose.
We also need to not ignore "well regulated" in the 2nd amendment, literally everyone against gun regulation omits that part when they cite the 2nd amendment >.>...
<.<...
For convenience I guess.
Oh, shes good. She saw the rage agiasnt videogames. she saw how gamers reacted and now she just won a lot of votes by responding at the peak of "we hate goverment that is agaisnt games" rumble. perfectly played madam, you deserve to be in politics.
while its obviuosly not one-sided causality, the fact that guns area a real life danger remains to be true and lack of any decent regulation of it in america remains a problem.
Thanks. I try (though don't always succeed) to avoid being a member of any pitchfork-wielding mobs.GAunderrated said:
[small]*snort, snicker*[/small]Orks da best said:
[small]Pfft. Heh, heh.[/small] Oh hell: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!zdog jr said:
Seriously? SERIOUSLY?!! Was nobody paying attention to all the completely irrational, common sense-defying bullshit that pretentious, self-righteous twit burdened the American public with during her tenure as Speaker of the House? Anybody? You know, that stuff that earned her a kick-ass 21% approval rating. Well, I guess it's A-OK to shoulder the U.S. citizenry with crippling debt as long as you say something favorable about video games. Awesome.
YES! YOU WIN! As a Californian myself, and as someone who views politics in an incredibly skeptical light, I can safely say that you win this thread. This thread could go on for 20 pages and you still win the whole damn thing. What you wrote is exactly what I thought when I read the article but you got there first so you win.Formica Archonis said:
This is a very agenda based response, a calculated redirection. See, when the pro-gun advocates tried to scapegoat video games they made a mistake in the fact that it put the video game industry, an industry that has absolutely no stance or stake in the debate, on the defensive for no good reason. So the response would naturally to come right back and say that games are no problem and that everyone needs to take care of those nasty guns. It's a weird circular blame game and is completely unconstructive. I could point out extremely logical ways I could use to win the debate hands down, but that's for another thread.
Well, like I said you win the thread. I'd give you a cookie, but that's way to cliché by now, and since this is obviously going to turn into another raging debate about firearms, here, you win a gun.
All I can say is that I hope no one in this thread going 'vote Nancy Pelosi,' actually lives in the 12th district. You vote to stomp on my rights with the patriot act and wide sweeping domestic spy programs, you're dead to me.
I really thought after reading the comments there would be a bunch of gamers celebrating over the fact that there is a person in congress that agrees with us for once. But you can't mention the word 'gun' without a huge mess. Why are gun laws such a huge issue all of sudden. I know there was a school shooting, and this might make me sound like a terrible person but, that wasn't the first school shooting ever. Gun laws never seem to change even though, after every shooting people go crazy about them. If you want some actually change or if you don't, how about we stop auguring over the internet and come to some agreement. We are suppose to be partying in here guys.
It's because people are under the impression that because school shootings are being reported more often, they are happening more often. Therefore, they believe that gun violence is out of control, and needs to be controlled.Black_Reaper said:
You have a fair point Mr.TheBobMaster, but it feels like its exploded larger than it has in a long time. Also, with this much talk, you would think that law makers would have addressed this by now. But nothing has been purposed yet.thebobmaster said:
... Pelosi? THE Pelosi? The only politician I know of that has rick-rolled people?
(Check around the 0:36 mark)
... Well it's good that someone is on our side, anyways.
(Check around the 0:36 mark)
... Well it's good that someone is on our side, anyways.
My Boss's daughter lost two friends in Newtown. He doesn't blame the guns.
I come from a different perspective. I was raised in what people would consider the 'ghetto'. The South Bronx. I was born in 1980 and lived there until 1992. I have family in Brooklyn and the Bronx, so I went back to visit at least several times a month. I have dodged bullets, seen people shot, and ran from situations with guns.
To me, this is just America catching up with something that's always been there. but before, when it wasn't at their doorstep, it was just gang violence. Urban Warfare. Things that you can turn your head from and say 'Well, it's no where near me, so what do I care?'.
And I see the tragedy over the last few years. The senseless violence. These... people going into helpless areas and living out whatever is in their sick minds. But I don't get the shift to guns as the problem.
Back when I was growing up, we knew who to blame. It was the gangs. The gang bangers who were trying to get turf, show that they were men, or who were just bored. No one looked at the weapons they held and said that was the reason. We knew it was the choice of the gangs. But now that these crimes are being committed by people who don't look like they belong in gangs, The once meek and over looked, we can't understand how these things could happen? And all of a sudden, it has to be that a saturation of guns just warped our minds? Bullshit. This is just a case of people now feeling the very real threat of violence and are just overreacting.
Don't misunderstand me. The criminals and the sick shouldn't have access to guns. But we have millions upon millions of people who do own these weapons. And a relatively small (relatively because any unnecessary death is distasteful in my eyes, but I do realize we don't live in a Utopia) amount of gun violence with these particular weapons. Getting rid of guns will not get rid of people's intent. And this is the age of the internet. I'm assured there will be some ne'er-do-well factions who will be more than willing to teach these crazy people how to make bombs out of household fixings just as long as they get a big enough body count.
I come from a different perspective. I was raised in what people would consider the 'ghetto'. The South Bronx. I was born in 1980 and lived there until 1992. I have family in Brooklyn and the Bronx, so I went back to visit at least several times a month. I have dodged bullets, seen people shot, and ran from situations with guns.
To me, this is just America catching up with something that's always been there. but before, when it wasn't at their doorstep, it was just gang violence. Urban Warfare. Things that you can turn your head from and say 'Well, it's no where near me, so what do I care?'.
And I see the tragedy over the last few years. The senseless violence. These... people going into helpless areas and living out whatever is in their sick minds. But I don't get the shift to guns as the problem.
Back when I was growing up, we knew who to blame. It was the gangs. The gang bangers who were trying to get turf, show that they were men, or who were just bored. No one looked at the weapons they held and said that was the reason. We knew it was the choice of the gangs. But now that these crimes are being committed by people who don't look like they belong in gangs, The once meek and over looked, we can't understand how these things could happen? And all of a sudden, it has to be that a saturation of guns just warped our minds? Bullshit. This is just a case of people now feeling the very real threat of violence and are just overreacting.
Don't misunderstand me. The criminals and the sick shouldn't have access to guns. But we have millions upon millions of people who do own these weapons. And a relatively small (relatively because any unnecessary death is distasteful in my eyes, but I do realize we don't live in a Utopia) amount of gun violence with these particular weapons. Getting rid of guns will not get rid of people's intent. And this is the age of the internet. I'm assured there will be some ne'er-do-well factions who will be more than willing to teach these crazy people how to make bombs out of household fixings just as long as they get a big enough body count.
Fully disagree with you there man. Getting rid of the guns will just cause bigger problems for everyone instead of an unfortunate few. If we're talking about new gun control rules to keep the guns out of the hands of depressed people, sure, why not, but you're pointing your finger at the guns themselves when it's the fault of the guy who pulled the trigger.Blablahb said:
There's a comedy routine in there: Cops dog-piling a gun held by a gunman and letting the gunman go because the gun was at fault.
Who the hell let her onto congress?
I'm pretty sure you are not allowed to be on congress if you are clear headed and rational? She's not even trying to hold on to traditions that really should be let to rest! She's insane!
I'm pretty sure you are not allowed to be on congress if you are clear headed and rational? She's not even trying to hold on to traditions that really should be let to rest! She's insane!
zdog jr said:
Atary77 said:
Truth is, she's pandering just like any other politician, she's a representative from California, their biggest money maker being violent media.Orks da best said:
If she was representing a state that made no movies/games but had a large voting population (and more importantly, tax base) that worked in Arms Manufacturing, she'd be saying the exact opposite.
Typical Washington DC political whoring, nothing to see here.