CT Senator: Games a Factor in Sandy Hook Shootings

[RJ 17]

Conversely there is absolutely no link between violent video games and violent crime, there is always going to be violent crime regardless of whether there is any media that reflects it or not. People have been killing each other for centuries, well before there were FPSes to scapegoat.

You mean kinda like how there will always be violent crimes whether or not there's guns around? Or the fact that people have been killing each other for centuries, well before guns were around to scapegoat?

Edit: I'm not saying that guns don't make acts of violence easier, I'm arguing against the point "guns cause violence". They don't "cause" violence any more than games do.

 

[rayen020]

okay firstly this guy clearly says he isn't going to try and legislate against video games, because there isn't enough evidence (and there never will be). So lay off the legislating against other stuff Lanza was around argument. I think it's kind of cheap to bring up sandy hook in this debate because there were obviously bigger problems in Lanza's life.

However if you want to bring up a tragedy and point to video games i'd accept the Boston Marathon Bombings. those guys set off bombs in crowded areas, stole cars, got chased by the police, had shoot-outs with the police, and ran around hiding. hell thats 90% of GTA and Saints Row. plus they were from a former soviet state with shady pasts. sound familiar? they just figured out too late that Boston doesn't have any pay and sprays and they don't have regenerative health.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

The common thread is that they all have exposure to violent videogames? No fucking shit. I'd be surprised if there were many guys in America under 30 that hadn't had exposure to violent videogames.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

Actually they don't, no more than a hammer causes a house to be built.

Maybe not but it follows a certain sense of logic. If guns didn't exist or weren't readily available these kids couldn't shoot up the school. Conversely there is absolutely no link between violent video games and violent crime, there is always going to be violent crime regardless of whether there is any media that reflects it or not. People have been killing each other for centuries, well before there were FPSes to scapegoat.

You are quite correct. It would be difficult to insert bullets into people without a gun. But it is highly unlikely that the killers went to school with the intention of inserting bullets into people. They wanted to kill people, and that is very possible without guns. In fact, they could have taken out an even larger number of people with the right combination of easily obtained chemicals.

So yes, it does follow a certain sense of logic; just not the kind that is relevant to the situation. A gun is a tool. It's not the only one in the toolbox. There are an estimated 270,000,000 to 320,000,000 civilian owned guns in the US. In 2011, there were 11,718 gun inflicted homicides(617 of them judged to be justified homicide) in the US. That means that only 0.004% of all privately owned guns were used successfully as tools of murder in 2011. It seems to me that guns do not, in fact, kill people. They just happen to be a useful tool if that's what you have in mind.

 

[Frostbyte666]

this statement 'perhaps the video game exposure can put you over the edge' might be better recieved if he didn't handwave the easy access to firearms and the mental instability of the pyschopath. This idiot also doesn't seem to be addressing the issue of his constituents mental health and ways to improve their health care system.

 

[4RM3D]

Games a Factor in Sandy Hook Shootings

Games a(re) Factor in everything.

/thread

 

[Eiv]

I understand that guns themselves don't cause violence. I also understand that these people had mental illnesses that went untreated 90% of the time. I also understand that we are unfortunately this decades 'rock & roll'. It will pass, these idiots will move on to something else. In the mean time, the only thing that is going to solve this is a deeper understanding of mental health and appropriate care.

 

[Farther than stars]

Sighs.

"But we do see a trend where some of these shooters do have exposure to these video games."

I suspect he also ate food, drank liquids, slept in a bed and wore clothes. It's this wonderful thing called "cause and effect" Mr Murphy. Something being common in all of these cases does not mean that they actually had any relevance. Until we invent time travel so we can see if removing gaming from these peoples lives would have changed anything, it is nothing more than pointless speculation.

Equating eating and sleeping to playing violent video games is a false comparison. I think the link is a lot bigger between violent games and acts of violence than between drinking coffee and committing violent crimes. That's not to say that regular people can't separate fiction from reality, but I don't think it's a bad theory to suggest that the psychotically deranged people who go on spree shootings might not see that distinction quite so clearly.
If that is the case, then it might be a very good idea to stop at least mentally unstable people from accessing violent video games, the same way that it's a good idea to stop them having access to firearms. But, as you say, it's hard to devise an experiment which conclusively proves any such link, although it's not impossible and time travel is not a prerequisite.

 

[Gothproxy]

While Murphy does continue to believe games can be a factor behind incidents like the Sandy Hook massacre, he admits that there isn't sufficient research to back any sort of restrictive legislation. "What researchers will tell you, is that if you already have a severe mental illness, and a predilection to violence, perhaps the video game exposure can put you over the edge. But in and of itself, there is no research showing that there's a link," said Murphy. "Before we pass any legislation, which would limit the exposure that people have to these types of video games, I think it's important that we have the research and the data and that's what we're <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/121551-President-Obama-Asks-for-Research-Into-Game-Violence>trying to do right now."

Did just about everyone who has already posted here forget to read this final paragraph before posting the "facepalm / he's an idiot" response? Considering that many, MANY politicians would call for a ban on violent video games regardless of other facts (or even forgetting) this guy at least says "there is no research showing that there's a link,". Then he goes on to say probably the most brilliant thing to come out of a politician's mouth regarding video games that I may have ever heard: "Before we pass any legislation, which would limit the exposure that people have to these types of video games, I think it's important that we have the research and the data and that's what we're trying to do right now."

As an avid gamer and supporter of gaming as a whole, I'm all for research into the effects of our chosen hobby. The alternative is for these old people to just assume that video games are bad for people and should be done away with. So stop with the hate for this guy since he's actually making sense.

 

[Flatfrog]

Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it is scientific fact.

 

[Lilani]

Just to play devil's avocado for a second here, but isn't dismissing anyone who merely mentions the possibility of video games having an adverse effect on people equally idiotic.

I'm not saying I think video games contribute to violent tendencies in any way, I'm just saying I think we should keep our minds open lest we fall to the same ignorance that we assume has claimed our critics.

Considering the fact that they are willing to legislate on video games before equipping themselves with facts, I think it's safe to say these sorts of things are idiotic. This man has simply stated the obvious. Having a mental illness enhances the negative effects of certain stimuli. Yeah, no shit. But the sheer number of things that can possibly qualify as trigger stimuli is so vast that specifically targeting video games is both ignorant and pointless. If we start banning things that might trigger the craziness in people, then we'll have no media of any sort left by the time we're done.

 

[Fangface74]

It's clear we should ban oxygen. It's a fact all serial killers, rapists, game designers use it on a regular basis.

"No O2, no people, no problem"

 

[Mr.Squishy]

This is the equivalent of the 90's 'Satan devil music makes kids insane' scare. Bunch of old people who're out of touch with anything that happened after the 60's.

 

[Legion]

Equating eating and sleeping to playing violent video games is a false comparison. I think the link is a lot bigger between violent games and acts of violence than between drinking coffee and committing violent crimes. That's not to say that regular people can't separate fiction from reality, but I don't think it's a bad theory to suggest that the psychotically deranged people who go on spree shootings might not see that distinction quite so clearly.
If that is the case, then it might be a very good idea to stop at least mentally unstable people from accessing violent video games, the same way that it's a good idea to stop them having access to firearms. But, as you say, it's hard to devise an experiment which conclusively proves any such link, although it's not impossible and time travel is not a prerequisite.

It was sarcasm, because claiming that violent video games causes real life violence, when tens of millions of people play them without any noticeable effects is just poor rationalisation. If most people are not affected, then it is quite clearly something to do with the individuals who are. Yes, people with mental health issues may have a larger likelihood of not being able to distinguish from fiction and reality, but there are much more obvious and tangible factors to consider.

I wasn't claiming that eating, drinking or sleeping have as much of an effect, I was criticising the logic of "This person does X, and then they did Y. Therefore doing X must have caused them to do Y."

I never suggested it was impossible to provide a link without time travel, as I wasn't discussing a link between the two in general. They said that these specific crimes were possibly affected by them playing computer games. Considering in this reality they played those games, we cannot know whether they would have still done it if they hadn't. Hence the time travel reference. In regards to the actual links between violence in games and reality then yes, it is feasible to test for that, but to be honest I don't see the point considering violence in most developed companies is actually shrinking rapidly, whereas violent games are becoming more common.

Not to mention that people like to forget that violence is a part of human nature, as history has shown quite clearly. All of these wars and atrocities committed by our species are not some strange coincidence, nor are they all committed by "monsters" or "abnormal" people.

 

[ironfist86]

This guy! Ladies and gentlemen, Senator Chris Murphy! Trolling the video game community stronger and harder than a bad girl's dream! (to paraphrase the mighty Huey Lewis)

 

[hermes]

You know who is to blame? Vikings.

Think about it... How many Vikings were in the X century? A lot. How many shootings? Almost none. Compare it with modern day. So, I can't put myself in his mind, but its obvious that his actions where motivated by not enough exposure to Vikings.

 

[TrulyBritish]

While Murphy does continue to believe games can be a factor behind incidents like the Sandy Hook massacre, he admits that there isn't sufficient research to back any sort of restrictive legislation. "What researchers will tell you, is that if you already have a severe mental illness, and a predilection to violence, perhaps the video game exposure can put you over the edge. But in and of itself, there is no research showing that there's a link," said Murphy. "Before we pass any legislation, which would limit the exposure that people have to these types of video games, I think it's important that we have the research and the data and that's what we're <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/121551-President-Obama-Asks-for-Research-Into-Game-Violence>trying to do right now."

Did just about everyone who has already posted here forget to read this final paragraph before posting the "facepalm / he's an idiot" response? Considering that many, MANY politicians would call for a ban on violent video games regardless of other facts (or even forgetting) this guy at least says "there is no research showing that there's a link,". Then he goes on to say probably the most brilliant thing to come out of a politician's mouth regarding video games that I may have ever heard: "Before we pass any legislation, which would limit the exposure that people have to these types of video games, I think it's important that we have the research and the data and that's what we're trying to do right now."

As an avid gamer and supporter of gaming as a whole, I'm all for research into the effects of our chosen hobby. The alternative is for these old people to just assume that video games are bad for people and should be done away with. So stop with the hate for this guy since he's actually making sense.

Maybe I'm a little confused, but haven't there been plenty of tests and research to look for a link between video games and violence? That have pretty much conclusively said the equivalent of "Nope, not really"?
Could be a good move, but I'm not cheering until someone states this proposed research would do differently from what's already been done. Sure he's acting better than a lot of other politicians, but that's still too far back from being ideal.

 

[Flatfrog]

You know who is to blame? Vikings.

Think about it... How many Vikings were in the X century? A lot. How many shootings? Almost none. Compare it with modern day. So, I can't put myself in his mind, but its obvious that his actions where motivated by not enough exposure to Vikings.

No, no, pirates. We've already established that pirates prevented global warming, so they probably prevented gun crime as well.

 

[Jesse Billingsley]

Apparently just being bat shit crazy isn't a reason for doing something as deplorable and inhumane as shooting up an elementary school anymore.....Seriously Senator, a Republican Representative has already come out and said on national television: "Yeah, gaming causes aggressive behavior, but it won't cause someone to go out and shoot people."

 

[hermes]

CT Senator: "I'm an idiot."

Just to play devil's avocado for a second here, but isn't dismissing anyone who merely mentions the possibility of video games having an adverse effect on people equally idiotic.

I'm not saying I think video games contribute to violent tendencies in any way, I'm just saying I think we should keep our minds open lest we fall to the same ignorance that we assume has claimed our critics.

You do make a good point, but this can be summarized to a matter of credentials. Is he an MD? Is he a psychologist? Is he a social researcher? Is he a forensic expert? Is he involved in the case in any way? Is he a friend of the family? Has he met a serial killer? Has he lost someone due to violent videogames? Heck... Is he even a gamer?

No, he is a lawyer. He is a politician (unfortunately for the rest of us, he is an opinion maker), with an agenda. So, he is making comments based on misinformation, gossip and hunches, and expect people to act on them as if they were true. In other words, he is an idiot...

I would have little problem if people with real credentials and no agenda on one side or the other made a similar claim. But, in a way, all of us here are more qualified than this guy. Every single, random, anonymous user from all over the world, different in sex, race, age, religion and nationality that posted on this forum is more qualified than this guy, because we all have had first person contact with violent games on a daily basis; which is more credentials that he provides for making those claims.