Politician Asks Game Makers to End Real-Life Gun Licensing

[Saltyk]

Tools are tools. Nothing more. You should have problems with those using, or misusing, the tools. Not the tools themselves. I'm sure someone could make the same argument you just did for any number of things. Ranging from cars/trucks to religion. Besides, so called "assault weapons" are hardly used in crime. Pistols are far more frequently used.

And there are some statistics that claim that guns are most often used as a tool of self defense and as a deterrent. Often without a single shot being fired. The exact number isn't agreed upon, but one of the lowest numbers I've heard was around 50,000 times a year (compared to a TOTAL gun deaths of 30,000). Of course, I've also heard them as high as 2.5 million a year. That high end is probably unrealistic, but even the low end is worth noting. And I've even heard that low end used as a claim for why guns don't deter crime, so it could even be unrealistically low.

I agree their tools and the user is the issue, we just disagree on weather the general public needs access to the tool or weather its better off not being allowed. I'll leave it at that and just say lets agree to disagree.

EDIT: I'd just like to say probably the main reason for the disagreement is that we live in different worlds, over here in Australia there is no need for guns, their a collectors item or for the shooting range. Police etc have them but general public don't have the need. I'm trying to say the US needs to work towards improving themselves to not need them, like everyone else.

It's fine. We can agree to disagree. I'm of the belief that no one way is the best way. Your way works for you.

It comes down to a long standing tradition on top of the legal issues. Despite what some would tell you, the people of United States have been using guns since before there was a United States. It probably doesn't hurt that guns helped in forming the nation (it also probably is one reason Americans tend to be less trusting of government).

Also, I know plenty of people who use guns for hunting and sport. It's not just a self defense issue. There are tons of legal uses of guns. And I'm of the mindset that you don't punish everyone just because one person is irresponsible.

I heard that a lot of overpasses have fences over them because someone threw a turkey off of one and people got hurt. It's all because of one idiot that we can't have nice things. And that's a shame.

I'm also not under the delusion that if I were living in some other country, I would be championing gun rights or anything. I'd probably find them just as stupid as some of the other people here do.
Oh, and for the record. I don't have a gun, but have considered it.

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

Dear Speaker of the Connecticut House of Representatives:

Stop the war on drugs or GTFO.

(Translation: Your lame little soapbox grandstand is not for real.)

Sincerely,

238U

 

[TK421]

I dunno... since none of the content is going to change, what possible use could this be? If they comply, however, it could easily be "interpreted" as the games companies recognising a link between their products and violence, and taking "responsible" action to head things off. From there, it's a really short step to trying to censor the content, since the companies themselves have already "admitted" the link.

Sure... it's /tinfoilhat thinking... but we're talking about American politicians here. Morons who think regulating vidya-games (while simultaneously ignoring books, movies, advertising and... you know... actual guns) is gonna solve their problems. I don't think the above is a significant stretch for mentally challenged lug-nuts like that.

I think that you are spot-on with your first paragraph. They are trying to get people to "admit" that guns are "bad" so they can start censoring even more of our lives, and eventually be able to take away our rights. This drives me insane, I really hope that the companies do not comply with this request.

 

[RicoADF]

It's fine. We can agree to disagree. I'm of the belief that no one way is the best way. Your way works for you.

It comes down to a long standing tradition on top of the legal issues. Despite what some would tell you, the people of United States have been using guns since before there was a United States. It probably doesn't hurt that guns helped in forming the nation (it also probably is one reason Americans tend to be less trusting of government).

Also, I know plenty of people who use guns for hunting and sport. It's not just a self defense issue. There are tons of legal uses of guns. And I'm of the mindset that you don't punish everyone just because one person is irresponsible.

I heard that a lot of overpasses have fences over them because someone threw a turkey off of one and people got hurt. It's all because of one idiot that we can't have nice things. And that's a shame.

I'm also not under the delusion that if I were living in some other country, I would be championing gun rights or anything. I'd probably find them just as stupid as some of the other people here do.
Oh, and for the record. I don't have a gun, but have considered it.

Yeah that's what it comes down to, the US's culture is based around the gun due to your war of independence. Add to the fact you don't trust your government (and honestly who ever does) they wont be given up without a fight. Hunting and sports is fine, heck even over here guns are legal for those reasons, their just not allowed without a reason and self defense isn't considered a legitimate reason (unless you live on a farm/in rural, wildlife threats). Also the other issue/difference is that I heard that it's not the police's job to protect you (apparently some court ruled this), so I can understand wanting a gun for defense. Where as over here it is the job of the police to serve and protect, thus guns aren't generally needed.

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

Over here in Australia there is no need for guns...

Last I checked, Australia was a huge expanse of wildlands full of funny named, super-poisonous creatures that will try to kill you. That usually warrants carrying around a bit of hardware, yes?

Also, I know plenty of people who use guns for hunting and sport. It's not just a self defense issue...

Here in the United States, plenty of people like guns and that is cause enough for them to be legal (just as it is legal to own a motor vehicle or power tools, regardless of their applicability).

Considering the amazing amount of guns in the US, and the amazing amount of gun owners, it is rather astounding how most of them by far go through their entire lives never shooting a human being even once.

Despite the rather gross ideologies that are associated with pro-gun-ownership, the fact is, our fear of guns is a moral panic much like our fear of video games. It's not the excess of guns or our fascination with weapons that is propelling our murder rate.

238U

 

[GonzoGamer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ssYezFw_Qs

I wonder if he approached the gun companies about licensing of their names....
of course not.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Asks Publishers to stop stunning the real names of various assault rifles.

Allows various assault rifles to be legally sold.

Can you say 'misplaced priority's?'

 

[Saltyk]

It's fine. We can agree to disagree. I'm of the belief that no one way is the best way. Your way works for you.

It comes down to a long standing tradition on top of the legal issues. Despite what some would tell you, the people of United States have been using guns since before there was a United States. It probably doesn't hurt that guns helped in forming the nation (it also probably is one reason Americans tend to be less trusting of government).

Also, I know plenty of people who use guns for hunting and sport. It's not just a self defense issue. There are tons of legal uses of guns. And I'm of the mindset that you don't punish everyone just because one person is irresponsible.

I heard that a lot of overpasses have fences over them because someone threw a turkey off of one and people got hurt. It's all because of one idiot that we can't have nice things. And that's a shame.

I'm also not under the delusion that if I were living in some other country, I would be championing gun rights or anything. I'd probably find them just as stupid as some of the other people here do.
Oh, and for the record. I don't have a gun, but have considered it.

Yeah that's what it comes down to, the US's culture is based around the gun due to your war of independence. Add to the fact you don't trust your government (and honestly who ever does) they wont be given up without a fight. Hunting and sports is fine, heck even over here guns are legal for those reasons, their just not allowed without a reason and self defense isn't considered a legitimate reason (unless you live on a farm/in rural, wildlife threats). Also the other issue/difference is that I heard that it's not the police's job to protect you (apparently some court ruled this), so I can understand wanting a gun for defense. Where as over here it is the job of the police to serve and protect, thus guns aren't generally needed.

Yes, that is true. It was the Supreme Court as I recall. Which, I'm sure you know, is the single highest court on the land. It would basically take a second case that held the same basic issue making it to the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling. Something that I don't expect to happen.

And, I agree with the ruling. It basically makes it so no one can sue the police because they didn't prevent a criminal from being a criminal. America is a VERY sue happy country. I think I read that we have almost twice as many lawyers or more than other countries. So, you can probably imagine that it would happen.

This doesn't mean the police don't answer calls, investigate crimes, or arrest people. It just means that if they don't stop someone from harming you or your property, you can't hold the government responsible.

Also, I know plenty of people who use guns for hunting and sport. It's not just a self defense issue...

Here in the United States, plenty of people like guns and that is cause enough for them to be legal (just as it is legal to own a motor vehicle or power tools, regardless of their applicability).

Considering the amazing amount of guns in the US, and the amazing amount of gun owners, it is rather astounding how most of them by far go through their entire lives never shooting a human being even once.

Despite the rather gross ideologies that are associated with pro-gun-ownership, the fact is, our fear of guns is a moral panic much like our fear of video games. It's not the excess of guns or our fascination with weapons that is propelling our murder rate.

238U

The Second Amendment says that it is legal to own guns. That's cause enough in my book. Even if someone doesn't like or even fears them.

But, I agree. It's not really about guns. It's just easy to blame a thing. I've never once seen a gun levitate and start acting on it's own. Which would be pretty damn amazing.

Also, propelling what murder rate? There's not been an actual increase in violence in the US in going on two decades. Sure, one year had a small increase from the year before, but it was an anomaly. And it barely raised at all before dropping every year after. The idea that people are using AR-15s or "Assault Weapons" to commit murders is a joke. The number of people killed by such weapons each year is a statistical blip. One that could be chalked up to an error.

Unless there has been some spillover from Mexico's Drug Cartels, that I am unaware of. Admittedly, that is a problem, regardless of any spillover. I'm hoping the Mexican authorities can bring them under control.

 

[Quantum Glass]

Wait, are gun manufacturers paid royalties for the portrayal of games in video games?

Is that what he's trying to fight? If so, I honestly don't mind.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

I think the logic here is not "guns in games are bad" but "guns licenses are fueling the real life gun industry, allowing them to stay in business."

It is sort of a round about way of finical gun control. Well, I am assuming their is SOME logic here. >_>

Now, for the debate on if guns should be legally sold, I will only refer to this very well study preformed by Harvard on the subject: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

 

[Something Amyss]

It's still retarded. He's basically admitting that guns are bad. But he doesn't want to do anything about real guns. Instead he thinks video games should take the heat.

Bullshit.

Sharkey has been involved in gun control legislation within the State of Connecticut since well before the Sandy Hook shooting.

It's one thing to not know better, and another thing entirely to indict someone without bothering to do even cursory research. Fine, you don't want to spend 12 seconds googling? Don't go accusing him of hypocrisy because he doesn't want to do something he not only clearly does, but already has.

While at the same time we're putting armed guards in schools because Second Amendment.

Maybe you should try something about the actual guns. Might help a bit more than trying to get rid of some licensing deals.

But it still kinda feels like he's going after games and not the gun manufacturers.

You guys are aware of what's been happening in CT since Sandy Hook, right? Huge, sweeping gun control reforms in a state that was already one of the strictest in the country? New gun laws in effect with more likely coming down the pipe?

Connecticut took the Sandy Hook shooting really seriously. Nobody is shirking gun control here. I'm pretty sure nobody from CT proposed armed guards in schools as an alternative to gun control. My friends/family from the area are barking mad because the evil fascist commie nazis are taking away their freedom (which is funny because they still LEGALLY own guns, but whatever), and people are actually acting as though all they're doing is targeting games?

Come on, folks. We as a community are better than dog-whistle cries of persecution, aren't we?

OT:He went a bit too far in the "Think of the children" way but I do like the idea of less real guns as it gets the arms industry less money.

In this case, in his state, it really was the children. And the impact across the country is that children are treated to a more hostile school environment.

The NRA does want armed guards in school. We have increased police presence and laws are being passed allowing civilians to carry weapons into schools, playgrounds, etc. Maybe it doesn't entirely jive with the message of licensed guns in games, but then it's not exactly out of the blue or meritless, either. He's not exactly Mrs. Lovejoy here.

 

[Something Amyss]

Asks Publishers to stop stunning the real names of various assault rifles.

Allows various assault rifles to be legally sold.

Can you say 'misplaced priority's?'

No, but I can say "Research before you speak."

CT has had some fairly significant firearm reforms, and Sharkey's been a part of them.

Care to tell me about misplaced priorities now?

Wait, are gun manufacturers paid royalties for the portrayal of games in video games?

Is that what he's trying to fight? If so, I honestly don't mind.

Ayup.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

The Second Amendment says that it is legal to own guns. That's cause enough in my book. Even if someone doesn't like or even fears them.

But, I agree. It's not really about guns. It's just easy to blame a thing. I've never once seen a gun levitate and start acting on it's own. Which would be pretty damn amazing.

Also, propelling what murder rate? There's not been an actual increase in violence in the US in going on two decades. Sure, one year had a small increase from the year before, but it was an anomaly. And it barely raised at all before dropping every year after. The idea that people are using AR-15s or "Assault Weapons" to commit murders is a joke. The number of people killed by such weapons each year is a statistical blip. One that could be chalked up to an error.

Unless there has been some spillover from Mexico's Drug Cartels, that I am unaware of. Admittedly, that is a problem, regardless of any spillover. I'm hoping the Mexican authorities can bring them under control.

Here is a image of the US murder rate since 1900. It has been falling since the mid nineties, through several major changes in gun laws (the creation and repeal of the Assault Weapon ban, the heavy increase in amount of shall issue states, etc.) Of all the top ten guns traced to of been used in crime, only ONE of them was a long gun, the rest being pistols and it was actually a type of shotgun ( http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF )

Now, the Mexican drug wars spilling over into the US is a really big problem. I have extreme doubts that the Mexican authorities can do much about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Asks Publishers to stop stunning the real names of various assault rifles.

Allows various assault rifles to be legally sold.

Can you say 'misplaced priority's?'

No, but I can say "Research before you speak."

CT has had some fairly significant firearm reforms, and Sharkey's been a part of them.

You mean there are US politicians that are actually competent?

If so do you have any to spare?

 

[keserak]

Thats roughly the same as giving a person a sweater so they dont get cold... in the desert...

Deserts are perilously cold at night. What are you talking about?

 

[Jamous]

Frankly I can appreciate this, even if that connection to Adam Lanza seems a little desperate. We don't -need- to have real life gun licensing. We do just fine without it often enough. Besides, perhaps it might force us to get a little more creative.

 

[Nurb]

How about a big apology to game makers for your constant finger pointing first?

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

Changing the name or likeness of a gun in a game doesn't help anything in the real world.

Much like changing anything, within any non existent virtual world doesn't change anything, anywhere in the actual real universe.

This just seems like another shallow attempt to shit on everyone's day and get in the way of a creative medium.
Good job government.

 

[Strazdas]

Being one step lower than pants on retarded is still pretty retarded folks.
ALtrough personally i find myself agreeing with EA that you should not need license to put same name on a gun than exists in real life. but we live in a crazy world where you do, because profits.

 

[Piorn]

So we have to fall back on the old A.K.A 47?
Personally, I play a lot of shooters, and I don't know the real names of the guns, why should I?
I know how to use a pistol from my time in the federal army, but I don't even remember it's proper name.

If anyone buys a weapon simply because it's his favourite weapon in CoD, I'd say get your priorities straight.
It just perpetuates the arms race between common criminals and households in the US.