Perhaps the honourable Senator should instead consider an investigation into the physiological effects of bullets on the flesh, organs and inner workings of childrens' bodies as they pass through them at high speed.
U.S. Senator Seeks New Study of Violent Videogames
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Violent Video Games are the current boogeyman, like rock music was for previous generations. In the wake of a tradgedy like this, politicians want to be seen doing something, so kicking the most recent boogie man is the way to go for them. We've done this song and dance before. Hopefully intelligence will overcome fear and both recent backlash attempts at tighter gun control, and the whole "blame media" (especially video games) will disappear quickly. Especially seeing as they are scapegoats for the more contreversial societal issues that are actually responsible.
I'll also be honest, while I don't believe the world will end tomorrow, a decent number of people do believe something will happen. I kind of wish something cool would happen (albiet not an end of the human race) but it will just be another boring day. It's my theory however that the kid doing these shootings was probably someone who believed the world was going to end and freaked out over it. Sort of like what people feared from "Millenium Madness" back with Y2K, except in this case and situations like the mass slashing attack in China, we're actually seeing results. I actually recommend staying inside tomorrow, not because of any supernatural hocus pocus, or meteors hitting the earth or anything (and honestly if humanity is going to end that way, nothing you can do about it, so why worry?), but because of crazy people.
On the conspiricy theory front for those who must have one, I'm favoring the whole "liberal brainwashing" angle that was present going back as far as Columbine. The basic theory being that these kinds of school shootings are done to create public panic, weaken the gun lobby and sentiments for individual freedom, and cause people to sell out their freedoms for security, in a way big goverment democrats actually support. Now this is a nutso conspiricy theory and not one I'm actually selling, but it's oddly plausible especially if you start looking at certain patterns of behavior, especially in this case. Politicians like Obama himself were unusually prepped and ready to go, even stopping by to make personal apperances when clearing the schedule for disasters can be a chore in most cases no matter how sympathetic. Not to mention some rather hokey occurances like the teenage/child shooters always killing themselves, and things like the sabotages hard drive which is somehow so badly wiped/damaged that federal authorities who have been able to get data from terrorist hard drives after bombs have gone off can't recover the data. A lot of this started back with columbine when the shooters in that case who "offed themselves" were reported as having been cornered in the school library by the authorities, followed by some initial reports that they were found dead "execution style" which were never repeted. There are other tidbits but those are some of the big ones for anyone who wants some imagination fuel (unconnected to the point of this article). To be honest I'm not going to even consider conspiricy theories until we have a third big incident with these kinds of huge information gaps/matching the pattern. Once is fine, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action and all that.
I'll also be honest, while I don't believe the world will end tomorrow, a decent number of people do believe something will happen. I kind of wish something cool would happen (albiet not an end of the human race) but it will just be another boring day. It's my theory however that the kid doing these shootings was probably someone who believed the world was going to end and freaked out over it. Sort of like what people feared from "Millenium Madness" back with Y2K, except in this case and situations like the mass slashing attack in China, we're actually seeing results. I actually recommend staying inside tomorrow, not because of any supernatural hocus pocus, or meteors hitting the earth or anything (and honestly if humanity is going to end that way, nothing you can do about it, so why worry?), but because of crazy people.
On the conspiricy theory front for those who must have one, I'm favoring the whole "liberal brainwashing" angle that was present going back as far as Columbine. The basic theory being that these kinds of school shootings are done to create public panic, weaken the gun lobby and sentiments for individual freedom, and cause people to sell out their freedoms for security, in a way big goverment democrats actually support. Now this is a nutso conspiricy theory and not one I'm actually selling, but it's oddly plausible especially if you start looking at certain patterns of behavior, especially in this case. Politicians like Obama himself were unusually prepped and ready to go, even stopping by to make personal apperances when clearing the schedule for disasters can be a chore in most cases no matter how sympathetic. Not to mention some rather hokey occurances like the teenage/child shooters always killing themselves, and things like the sabotages hard drive which is somehow so badly wiped/damaged that federal authorities who have been able to get data from terrorist hard drives after bombs have gone off can't recover the data. A lot of this started back with columbine when the shooters in that case who "offed themselves" were reported as having been cornered in the school library by the authorities, followed by some initial reports that they were found dead "execution style" which were never repeted. There are other tidbits but those are some of the big ones for anyone who wants some imagination fuel (unconnected to the point of this article). To be honest I'm not going to even consider conspiricy theories until we have a third big incident with these kinds of huge information gaps/matching the pattern. Once is fine, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action and all that.
I don't think this guy is against violent video games.
I think he's against people ignoring age ratings for games.
Which, yeah, that's an issue.
Ultimately, I think it should be guidance, but, I think as he puts it, a lot of people aren't entirely aware of the content of these games exactly, and educating them on exactly what they're allowing their children to view is not a bad thing.
I think he's against people ignoring age ratings for games.
Which, yeah, that's an issue.
Ultimately, I think it should be guidance, but, I think as he puts it, a lot of people aren't entirely aware of the content of these games exactly, and educating them on exactly what they're allowing their children to view is not a bad thing.
Well said.The Lunatic said:
Kinda makes a change from all the knee-jerk reactions in this thread - from both sides.
Honestly, I kind of support this action.
I mean the worst that could happen it that video games get a harsher rating. Games like Black Ops/Far Cry 3 and other violent games will not be allowed in the hands of anyone under a certain age. And honestly, I think that's a good thing.
You minds can be influenced by the violence experienced in these games. And would it truly be a loss that while playing COD online that you didn't have someone in a squeaky voice yelling offensive things about your mother?
That's just my opinion, it's a grey area when you consider the difference between oppression and freedom of media to audiences.
As long as the subject of Guns isn't changed to Video games. I"m sure many would prefer to pin these things on gamers rather than pistol-packing firearm owners.
I mean the worst that could happen it that video games get a harsher rating. Games like Black Ops/Far Cry 3 and other violent games will not be allowed in the hands of anyone under a certain age. And honestly, I think that's a good thing.
You minds can be influenced by the violence experienced in these games. And would it truly be a loss that while playing COD online that you didn't have someone in a squeaky voice yelling offensive things about your mother?
That's just my opinion, it's a grey area when you consider the difference between oppression and freedom of media to audiences.
As long as the subject of Guns isn't changed to Video games. I"m sure many would prefer to pin these things on gamers rather than pistol-packing firearm owners.
Sounds like a similar debate to one I had recently. Draech, you are right. But some people are too stubborn to admit they're wrong and will just yell the same things back at you against the obvious. It's a shame it happens over there but if the general population is willing to suffer through monthly massacres for their right to bare arms then so be it. Let them be stubborn.Draech said:
It's a shame things have to escalate before they'll finally submit. I just feel sorry for that particular country, and am glad I don't live there.
I picked up on the use of the word "Children" once or twice in that article and, while no politician would ever come out and say it, he is closer to the root of the issue here and that's PARENTING!!!
If children are playing "violent" video-games like Call of Duty, Manhunt, Hitman etc. why not ask the parents what the jumping monkey-fuck they were thinking? The games have age-restrictions that are clearly-marked on the box and, in Britain at least, have content-guides on the back, which can inform you as to what the game contains. If you buy alcohol or tobacco for someone who is underage then you can be prosecuted and I am damn sure this can also happen if you buy little Johnny an 18-rated game for his 9th birthday!
Sadly this argument will never penetrate the mind of a parent because they always throw up the "I'm a parent [and you're not]..." deflector-shield, which is the one-size-fits-all cop-out line, not unlike the "God moves in mysterious ways" excuse for when people with brains try and reason with those without them. Also, no politician would ever dream of daring to blame the parents any more than they'd try to blame God because everyone knows that parents are as infallible as God, right?
No!
The truth is that most parents just flat-out refuse to accept that it is THEIR responsibility and will blame everything and everyone under the sun rather then themselves for their kids bad behaviour and woe betide anyone who tries to call them out on their BS!
Anyway, who are you trying to kid Mr. Rockerfeller Skank? You use the Sandy Hook tragedy as a reason to look into the effect violent video-games have on Children and yet you forget that the killer in this instance was an adult. I put it to you that what you are really doing is hoping to score political-points off the back of this hideous massacre by picking on a convenient scapegoat! I am pleased you are calling for a study rather than outright blaming the games but when it was an ADULT who killed CHILDREN, it does seem to be a bit irrelevant to talk about the effect of games on children.
If children are playing "violent" video-games like Call of Duty, Manhunt, Hitman etc. why not ask the parents what the jumping monkey-fuck they were thinking? The games have age-restrictions that are clearly-marked on the box and, in Britain at least, have content-guides on the back, which can inform you as to what the game contains. If you buy alcohol or tobacco for someone who is underage then you can be prosecuted and I am damn sure this can also happen if you buy little Johnny an 18-rated game for his 9th birthday!
Sadly this argument will never penetrate the mind of a parent because they always throw up the "I'm a parent [and you're not]..." deflector-shield, which is the one-size-fits-all cop-out line, not unlike the "God moves in mysterious ways" excuse for when people with brains try and reason with those without them. Also, no politician would ever dream of daring to blame the parents any more than they'd try to blame God because everyone knows that parents are as infallible as God, right?
No!
The truth is that most parents just flat-out refuse to accept that it is THEIR responsibility and will blame everything and everyone under the sun rather then themselves for their kids bad behaviour and woe betide anyone who tries to call them out on their BS!
Anyway, who are you trying to kid Mr. Rockerfeller Skank? You use the Sandy Hook tragedy as a reason to look into the effect violent video-games have on Children and yet you forget that the killer in this instance was an adult. I put it to you that what you are really doing is hoping to score political-points off the back of this hideous massacre by picking on a convenient scapegoat! I am pleased you are calling for a study rather than outright blaming the games but when it was an ADULT who killed CHILDREN, it does seem to be a bit irrelevant to talk about the effect of games on children.
Correct me on this, but isn't most violent media rated above K16-K18 or M18?
Like... Children shouldn't be playing the to begin with... I think what study America should fund is "How bad parenting and lack of discipline affects children's mental health"... Because I got this feeling that America wants to generally blame the bad behavior/violent behavior to the media instead parents taking responsibility over their children.
I was grown up free with no parent looking after what I watch or play. I had Doom on my first computer at the age of... 3 or 4... I watched horror/gore/splatter/violent movies with my eldest brother regularry (Basically only interaction I had with him). But I talked with my parents of the things I saw, they helped me to understand the things I saw. Also there was 3 rules they engraved to my head: 'Do not Lie', 'Violence solves nothing', 'If you have problems talk to us or someone'.
Now I am academically graduated in philosophy. I am a pacifist, pro-free media and pro-free reign parenting + anti-bullying advocate.
Many issue could be solved when problems with mental health are taken care of early.
Like... Children shouldn't be playing the to begin with... I think what study America should fund is "How bad parenting and lack of discipline affects children's mental health"... Because I got this feeling that America wants to generally blame the bad behavior/violent behavior to the media instead parents taking responsibility over their children.
I was grown up free with no parent looking after what I watch or play. I had Doom on my first computer at the age of... 3 or 4... I watched horror/gore/splatter/violent movies with my eldest brother regularry (Basically only interaction I had with him). But I talked with my parents of the things I saw, they helped me to understand the things I saw. Also there was 3 rules they engraved to my head: 'Do not Lie', 'Violence solves nothing', 'If you have problems talk to us or someone'.
Now I am academically graduated in philosophy. I am a pacifist, pro-free media and pro-free reign parenting + anti-bullying advocate.
Many issue could be solved when problems with mental health are taken care of early.
I think we're all ignoreing the bigger picture here.
This mans name is Jay Rockefeller. Jay. Rockefeller.
Also hes not doing the usual thing of blaming straight away, and he said "young" minds not "all" minds; he seems to know the issue is with the parents, not the games.
This mans name is Jay Rockefeller. Jay. Rockefeller.
Also hes not doing the usual thing of blaming straight away, and he said "young" minds not "all" minds; he seems to know the issue is with the parents, not the games.
Some people would say "Why are you angry? They are just calling for a study, if you're so sure, why are you afraid?"
Well, the fact is that this guy and the government at large will only say what the people want to hear right now. What they want to hear is "This wasn't my fault. I can continue to mock mental illness and brush actual problems under the carpet so I don't have to face the reality of such things. I can continue to keep my guns."
No, if there's to be a study, it must be undertaken by people as far away from the government and other influences as possible. This will not be it. We have already seen recently that given the opportunity, people will twist the results to produce a more popular opinion.
Well, the fact is that this guy and the government at large will only say what the people want to hear right now. What they want to hear is "This wasn't my fault. I can continue to mock mental illness and brush actual problems under the carpet so I don't have to face the reality of such things. I can continue to keep my guns."
No, if there's to be a study, it must be undertaken by people as far away from the government and other influences as possible. This will not be it. We have already seen recently that given the opportunity, people will twist the results to produce a more popular opinion.
That...snowfi6916 said:
and the usual three factors in this tragic equation are...
1. chronic depression (or possibly a much worse mental illness like say... schizophrenia)
2. Excessive bullying
3. parental abuse
ALLL OF THIS BULLSHIT AND NOT A DAMN PERSON CARES ABOUT THE VICTIMS!!!! Want to stop this? Harsher sentences for killers, and their crappy parents, and someone help the freaking victims!!!!
Oh and BTW China and Japan have had mass stabbings so gun control is a waste of time people will kill people if they want to.
http://nyctalking.com/mass-stabbing-in-china/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre
Oh and BTW China and Japan have had mass stabbings so gun control is a waste of time people will kill people if they want to.
http://nyctalking.com/mass-stabbing-in-china/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre
A study already showed that most gun massacer psycopaths were inspired by self fiction. Like that Norwegian guy, with his Crusader Manifesto.
You do not deserve a civil response, but you'll get one because the forum rules dictate it must be so.Gilhelmi said:
The treatment is simple. Stop raising your children in a dysfunctional society, which predisposes them towards committing murder, let alone MASS murder. But if you think banning violent video games is even remotely anywhere near the top of the long, long laundry list of changes that have to occur in order to make that happen, then I'm sorry to break this to you but in the grand scheme of things your personal problem with violent video games simply doesn't rate.
What saddens me most about this tragedy is that fact that while people are lining up round the block to exploit it in order to tell others what can and cannot be done, what is or what isn't permissible, if everyone, everyone for even second all together stopped pointing fingers at other people and instead asked themselves what they could do, what they could change about their own behaviour, and if they applied and stuck with those changes, then perhaps we'd fill less coffins with kids.