PS3 News: Senator Wants Violent Game Study In Wake Of Newtown Tragedy - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Senator Wants Violent Game Study In Wake Of Newtown Tragedy

You didn't actually expect video games would come through this one unfazed and free of suspicion, did you?

After the terrible shooting tragedy in Newtown, CT that left 26 people dead (20 of which were children), West Virginia senator Jay Rockefeller (D) has introduced a bill to congress that would ask the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to study the effects violent video games can have on kids.

Rockefeller singled out the gaming industry in an official statement on his website:

"Major corporations, including the video game industry, make billions on marketing and selling violent content to children. They have a responsibility to protect our children. If they do not, you can count on the Congress to take a more aggressive role."

If passed, NAS would conduct a "comprehensive study and investigation" of the possible links between violent video games and violent behavior in children. It would try to determine if such media causes kids to act more aggressively or negatively affect their general well-being. That's not a bad idea from a scientific standpoint, although they've done this countless times before, and there have been interesting results.

It's the above statement that makes my teeth grind. More in a minute...

Tags: video games, violent games, gamers, gaming culture, newtown shooting

12/20/2012 11:17:55 AM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (104 posts)

Doppel
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 11:32:52 AM
Reply

Oh looky, old man who never plays videogames pulls out the "Protect the Children" card and the "Taking Advantage of a Panic Situation" card.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mounce
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:51:39 PM

Yea, silly old farts...

Where the fuck are the Violent Movie Studies in wake of the incident too? Maybe the shooter loved action movies with Arnold in it, rofl.

The ignorant blame game, boils my blood more than most other things just because I cannot stand ignorant 'adults' of Last and Last-last generation. That's why when us in this generation see a senior or adult that likes video games? They generally are MUCH MUCH more open-minded, much more open to common sense and they're 500% more interesting as a human being in general.

These 'People'?....You can just instantly see how closed-minded they are... it's sickening.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

newchef
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 11:34:46 AM
Reply

isnt it the parents job to look after their kids, not some random company? and what Canada doesnt have the same exact video games we do here? i wanna slap that man...

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

CH1N00K
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:04:59 PM

?? Canada?? what do they have to do with this?

But yeah, video games are becoming the scapegoat again...because kids weren't bullied and picked on and violent before them..forget about how many times I almost had my legs broken as a kid because someone wanted to try a new move they saw on wrestling, or something they saw in a movie...The fact the the shooter had mental/pshycological issues and easy access to guns is being swept under the rug, it had to be the video games fault! But hey, the media loves a good witch hunt...

Last edited by CH1N00K on 12/20/2012 2:12:18 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:28:39 PM

The 'gun-issue' is not being swept under the rug. Our hack media has been exploiting this horrible event for the last 5 days to further their anti-gun narrative. They refuse to acknowledge the gimping of our mental health system. The mom as a law abiding citizen had a right to own firearms. Her mistake was being naive about what her nutter son was capable of. No parent wants to believe their child is capable of such evil. She should have gotten rid of the guns. No one is arguing otherwise but to blame guns or games is nothing but knee jerk reactionary fluff meant to make the outraged feel better by acting like their doing something.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 4:45:14 PM

I don't want to make a political issue out of this, but the reports don't make sense. On one side, the former baby sitter said the mother was very particular about him not going to the bathroom on the clock or doing anything that would mean leaving the son alone, yet we're told that the mom herself would leave the son(albeit at an older age)alone at home with an arsenal of guns. And in all this madness, someone decides to blame video games?

Last edited by Shams on 12/20/2012 4:47:09 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 11:46:06 AM
Reply

Politicians are looking at any way they can to avoid addressing the gun control issue and this is the result. Fox News instantly stressed the "culture of violence" in Hollywood and Video Games to take pressure off the gun issue.

A study is fine. It should turn out favorable to gamers anyway and even if it doesn't nothing will result from it...

Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/20/2012 11:50:01 AM

Agree with this comment 6 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 12:51:45 PM

Exactly! They are just trying to divert attention from the real issue.
This tragedy has been a wake up call to many, and now murder advocates... I mean gun rights supporters ;) fear the President might get off his a$$ and finally do something about gun control. Assault weapons should never be sold to civilians period. The only real use for an assault weapon is to kill lots of people as fast as possible. Nobody goes hunting dear with a Uzi! Any person who buys one has in mind to use it in another human being, surely they might call the self-defense BS card, but all it takes is one bad day and a nervous breakdown for that to change...

Agree with this comment 8 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

pillz81
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:09:53 PM

Get off your gun-control soapboxes please. The politician that this article is about is a Rockefeller. The Rockefellers have historically been strict supporters of gun-control, so Jay Rockefeller is not trying to avoid the gun control issue.

I think you will be hard pressed to find a Dem who will be for stricter gun control laws and give a pass to violent video games. Even if the prez "finally do something about gun control", he will probably set his sights on violent video games as well.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 6 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 11:18:22 AM

Breaking news: NRA tries shifting blame to video games and hollywood in "press conference" without questions...

Typical.

Just for the record to all the haters here: I'm not anti-gun, I'm just for reasonable regulations like closing the gun show loophole so every gun purchased will be accompanied with a background check...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 12:37:04 PM

You have never been to a gun show. If you did you would know this 'gun show loophole' is a complete farce. Who's spewing talking points now?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:38:44 PM

How is it a farce? Oh because the right-wing media says it is, I see.

If it is indeed a farce, then why would you care if they close it?



Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 1:40:06 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:52:02 PM

Listen to yourself, rightwing this, rightwing that. Dude, keep going, your inane rambling is only further exposing your bias and unwillingness to except facts for what they are.

"If it is indeed a farce, then why would you care if they close it?"

My God, you're an idiot. I'll answer this and then I'm done. No point in arguing with people like you who don't want to deal in facts, just your emotional opinion.

Their goal is to shut gun shows down for good. There is no loophole to close. Any and everyone who buys a gun at a gun show MUST fill out the longhorn and go through the background check. If one wants to transfer a firearm from one owner to another there is a county Sheriff at the show who over sees the transfer to make sure the two parties are lawful.

But you see, you lie. You lie because it doesn't help or anti-gun case to let the truth come out. And your attacks on me for offering up factual data only exposes you and your lies. So don't stop! Ramble on and misinform people because you feel you have the right to lie as long as your agenda is heard. Listening to you and morons like you in the media talk about guns has been quite entertaining as NONE of you have no idea what you're talking about but still act as if you hold the moral authority.

Thank God the Founders gave us the Bill of Rights to protect us from people like you.

Haw a nice day chump.

Last edited by Jawknee on 12/21/2012 1:58:50 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:29:14 PM

Here's your facts and statistics:

"1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.


2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.


3. Across states, more guns = more homicide

Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).

After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.


4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)

Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64."

From the Harvard School of Health. NOT some crappy biased think-tank.


Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 2:32:29 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:34:38 PM

Interesting facts for perspective: the second worst country in the first world for gun related deaths per capita is Canada. Of the last 25 first world mass shootings, 15 were in the states. Second place was Finland with 2. The two most peaceful countries in the world who not only have the fewest gun related deaths, but also the fewest homicides per capita, are the same two countries with the strictest gun laws in the world: Japan and Iceland. And Japan has the largest city in the world. Japan only has a little more than a third of the population if the us, but it's got 4 times that of Canada... They had 443 homicides last year. (only a few dozen involved guns) to Canada's 500+ and the USA's 12k...

Draw your own conclusions. I'm staying out if this otherwise. It makes me so mad. You just can't kill that many 6 year odds all at once in other first world countries. It just doesn't happen. And no... I don't own a gun. But I still feel perfectly capable of bring able to protect my family. wake the flip up....

I'm not responding to any rebuttal because I already know it will be incorrect, stubborn, backwards, and... Like ugh.... This is why other countries paint America with those unfair generalizations Ben hates so much. Grow a pair and realize guns couldn't protect those children.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:53:02 PM

In regards to my point earlier about the NRA here's the headline from IGN:

The NRA points to “vicious, violent video games” as the cause of shootings, calling violent entertainment “the filthiest form of pornography.”

I saw the press conference, it was pathetic...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

pillz81
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:55:30 PM

A Slate article revealing that NRA backed politicians effectively blocked the CDC from gun studies seems to lend credence to people's thoughts on the right wing on the gun control issue.

Last edited by pillz81 on 12/21/2012 3:10:34 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 7:26:15 PM

And about the gun-show loophole Jawknee, we're talking about FEDERAL law not the state laws that your personal local gun show is adhering to...

Some state laws are strict (very few) some are extremely loose.

Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 7:28:23 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JoebooSauce
Sunday, December 23, 2012 @ 1:30:09 PM

Amazing how the right-wing is clearly trying to steer the debate away from the root cause of this violence. Appreciate the data posted by Poop. The facts are against the NRA and this grasping at straws shows that they are dying. The NRA is an antiquated organization that will die with the Republican party. As soon as these old farts with their ancient beliefs and prejudices die off the sooner the younger generation can move on. Move forward with the times please.

Have they considered the violent crime rate in Japan? They love them some video games and violent media. Where is there gun crime? Ludicrous.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 12:01:17 PM
Reply

Last time I checked, most violent games are rated fairly high so kids can't get them. Blame the parents not the games.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Knightzane
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 12:04:49 PM
Reply

Wow... and i thought we were past the point where video games would be blamed for a tragedy.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Zeronoz
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 12:27:05 PM
Reply

To shoot you need guns, now I`m not an American nor I live in a country that permit carrying guns but shouldnt the problem lies on the availability and accessibility of firearms?

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 12:44:38 PM

No, as the old saying goes "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." One problem lies between people and proper management of their firearms. People these days aren't taught to respect a firearm.

But in this particular issue. The real problem is media/news coverage. Every time something like this happens in the United States the news always informs us of Who the killer was, What he used, How he did it, personal background, and how many people died. The next depressed individual sees this and gets determined to top it once they reach the boiling point.

U.S. media in a sense glorifies these killers instead of focusing on the victims.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:06:51 PM

Nuclear bombs don't kill people, people kill people. Thus, should I be allowed to buy a nuke at my local Walmart?

Sorry, I just always thought that argument was sooooooo dumb.

You're right about the media's obsession with murderers though, killers know they'll be famous as hell after they're done. That is part of the problem as well...

Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/20/2012 1:10:47 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:15:26 PM

@PoopsMcGee
LOL Loved it!!
This is the best response I've seen to this dumb a$$ argument :-)

Agree with this comment 5 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:52:58 PM

What's dumb is blaming a inanimate object for the evil that lurks in men's hearts. Fact is there are over 150 million legal gun owners in the country and 99% of them do not commit crimes. I'll tell you as a gun owner myself it actually helps to reinforce my attempt to obey the law because I am responsible for the weapon I own.

Enough of this idiocy that a guns made an evil man commit murder. Guns can be used for evil and good. Days before this shooting a man walked into a Oregon mall and started shooting. He got 2 people before his gun jammed. A LAW ABIDING citizen with his carry conceal permit confronted him, guess what? The murderer then turned his gun on himself. But our hack media won't report that because it doesn't fit their anti-gun narrative. Two days after another would be mass murderer tried to shoot up a movie theater, guess what? An off duty cop tool him down before he could kill anyone with.....her gun.

If guns are so bad then the police and military shouldn't have them either.

My God, moral clarity is lost on so many people these days.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:02:48 PM

@PoopsMcGee

Nuclear weapons are WMDs not even in the same ball park of firearms. The weapons are simply created it takes a user to use them in a violent manner.

@Jawknee

You couldn't have said it any better

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Sir Dan
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:19:54 PM

It's illegal to own nuclear materials that make up a nuclear bomb. It's not illegal to own fire arms. Not a good analogy.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:23:35 PM

@Jawknee
I don't have much against owning a regular gun for self-defense, but assault weapons should not be allowed in the hands of regular people period.
What kind of attack are you expecting on you or your home that you need a machine gun to protect yourself? Does anyone expect a zombie apocalypse? LOL
You guys are right, guns don't kill people, people kill people. People with a knife kill people faster, with a gun even faster, with an assault weapon they can kill even more people even faster.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Dukemz_UK
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:29:51 PM

Actually, while I respect your opinions, the facts don't lie. We are not allowed to carry guns or knives here in the UK. What has happened? Deaths by shootings and stabbings have drastically dropped since these laws were passed. You get evil people with evil intent everywhere. By preventing them getting the means to commit violent crime, you decrease violent crime rates : fact.
(Specially trained UK police and military personnel are allowed firearms)

Last edited by Dukemz_UK on 12/20/2012 2:30:50 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:34:45 PM

Define assault weapon. The AR15 is no more dangerous than a hand gun. It's not a machine gun or a 'high powered' rifle. It fires a weaker round than your typical .45 ACP. It uses a .223 hunting round that's used to hit small game such as quail or squirrel.

The media is not being honest about these guns. Truth is most of them have no idea what they're talking about. I can tell you this as an avid law abiding gun owner. They want to ban the AR15 because it 'looks' like an M4 but functions nothing like one. It's no different then any other semi-automatic hunting rifle. If these politician and news media people had any balls they would say what they want to say and call for a ban on all semi-automatic firearms, pistols and rifles alike. But they won't because they think the public is stupid and wish to slowly demagogue people into giving up their 2nd Amendment rights.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:42:19 PM

Thank you for being respectful Dukemz but respectfully, you're wrong.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm

Banning guns from law abiding citizens doesn't stop criminals from getting guns. At that point people are left defenseless. I spent some time in the UK after the Bermingham riots, the overwhelming majority of the people I talked too wished they had their gun rights during that time. A lot of property would have been saved.

Example, during the LA riots, Koreans in Korea Town grabbed their weapons and stood their ground and their shops were the only ones spared from massive destruction and looting.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Zeronoz
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:02:57 PM

I expected the "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." reply but why do you guys insist in protecting the very tool that caused many deaths, both in the past and the present?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:06:50 PM

Guns don't have their own fingers to pull the trigger. A madman in TX on Saturday drove his pickup truck into a crowed of people killing 14, do you blame the truck or the driver?

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:09:08 PM

Assault Rifles are not even the problem in the U.S. The majority of killings whether individual or mass are usually done with hand guns. Not many people understand that. Assault Rifles and machine guns are two entirely different fire arms.

The fact of the matter is that people like this will always find an alternative. You take away a gun they get a knife. Take away the knife the use high powered bow & arrow. Take away bow & arrow they use home made explosives. Take away explosive material they will use poison. The possibilities go on forever and is only proven through the history of man.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:15:56 PM

I protect my right to bare arms because of how I was raised and the world we live in today. I was taught at a young age about gun safety, proper use, proper cleaning, proper storage, etc. I know you stated you're not from the U.S. but where I live, there's greater potential for home invasions, robberies off the street, and carjackings. I have a family and two boys I'd rather be able to protect them then not be able to.

Sure most would say "Call the police." That sounds like the right thing to do but response time has dragged over the years and by the time they get there you could've lost your life already

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:23:23 PM

@Slugga, cops are great and most do a fine job but when seconds matter cops are minutes away. Most of the police officers I have spoken to or heard speak on the issues actually encourage law abiding citizens to take a firearm training and safety course and get a CCW if you're willing. They understand the 2nd Amendment wasn't about hunting or target shooting and want law abiding people to be able to protect themselves if need be,.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:26:29 PM

@Jawknee
I won't argue with you about guns, I have been a long time reader here, and know I would be out of my depth trying to argue gun specifics with you.
The fact is that when people have easy access to extreme fire power they can do extreme damage, the SIG and Glock that guy used can fire 5 bullets per second! Is that correct?
I get what you are saying about opportunistic people trying to further their anti-gun agenda with miss information, but the fact remains that guns are just too dangerous to be available so easily as it is in our country...

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:45:17 PM

That's incorrect. Glocks and SigSaurs are semi-automatics. You can only fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. With recoil and blow backto affectingly hit your target you typical can accurately pop off 2 maybe 3 at most per second. In this case he didn't just randomly fire as fast as he could. He had a full 20 minutes before the cops showed up. He methodically executed these poor children one by one. People believe, (and of course there is no way of proving this)that he only stopped once he heard to sirens. Once cops with guns showed up. See my point? I know its easy to blame the gun but guns are only tools. Used for good or bad. As I said below, cops are wonderful and do a fantastic job most of the time but with a country as big as the US it's unrealistic to assume cops will be able to stop everyone from doing evil like this. Our Founders understood this. That's why they granted "the right of the people to bear arms" in our Bill of Rights among other reasons.

Also making guns less available to people like me who follow the law and would use them to protect my family or people around me in an event like this isn't going to stop criminals from getting them and using them. I mean here in the US we can't even control the people or the drugs that flood across our southern boarder, were not going to stop illegal guns either. All that does is make law abiding citizens less safe as the have no means of defense. Look at the gun deaths by gang bangers in Chicago. 450 this year alone, many of them kids and they have some of the strictest gun laws in the nations. Criminals ignore laws. That's what makes them criminals.

Last edited by Jawknee on 12/20/2012 3:58:18 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 4:04:54 PM

@Jawknee
I see what you mean, after a quick search online and watching a Youtube video, I can tell there is no way those guns can shoot 5 rounds per second, so much miss information about guns :(
Maybe that's the answer, people should be better trained, or training in operation and safety should be mandatory to anyone who purchases a weapon...
I'm out! I have a Math final to take :(
I hope this is the last we hear about tragedies this year.
Be safe and Happy holidays to all!!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 4:38:14 PM

@Jawknee I agree with that totally. A cop is the one who suggested to me to take CCW classes.

@Karosso You're right, people need to be trained/educated about gun use and safety.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 5:06:33 PM

Number of gun related murders in UK (2009):41
Number of gun related murders in US (2009):15,241

UK population as compared to US population: 1/5

The numbers speak for themselves. Guns don't kill people, the lobbyists and unregulated flow of guns kill people (and children).

Agree with this comment 5 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Simcoe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 10:20:12 PM

@Jawknee, I think Dukemz was more referring to deaths and violent crimes, that's not to say that all crimes that involve a firearm are not "violent", but not all crimes will result in an injured or murdered victim (violent crime).

It should also be noted that in many jurisdictions a "gun crime" could be considered even when the criminal uses a non-functioning firearm (a replica) or threatens the use of a gun. As long as the victim or police believe that the firearm was/is real, it can be reported as a "gun crime"

The study the linked article was written about would have had more credibility if it was conducted by some type of non-partisan Government Accountability Office or an all-party committee by Members of Parliament, instead it was published by an organisation calling itself the "Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting". Also, it would have been a bit more helpful if that report was based on more recent statistics and not over ten years old.

One thing that that should be taken away from all these posts is that the concern that so many people from outside the US have when we see news of events like these. Plus, as you pointed out, Newtown was not the only mass shooting that occurred last week. It's hard not to link a very clear element that seems to associated with all these incidences.

Regardless, I hope they find out how and why, the mother was not able to properly secure these guns and ammunition away from someone that was not the owner and permit holder.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 11:41:56 AM

I'm sorry Jawk, but you sound like a paid lobbyist for the NRA. You got their talking points down by heart! You could've been on stage for their "press conference". Good show!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 12:32:23 PM

And Poops you sound like an emotional twit who just projects your inanity onto others. I'm not even an NRA member nor do I care what they do or day. I believe in a free people, you believe in telling people what to do REGARDLESS of the countless evidence that proves you wrong and policies you advocate put people in further danger. A firearm is a great equalizer for woman who wish to defend themselves against would be rapists or an abusive ex. You wish to take that away from them.

Why do you hate woman?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:11:50 PM

You sound like an overly defensive moron with a bunch of loaded "statistics and facts" that anyone could counter with other "statistics and facts" that show the complete opposite.

As I stated above, I'm not against reasonable gun ownership for self-defense or hunting. At all. Just not this gun-nut dogma that all the 'initiated' spew left and right.

Yes, I hate women. You got me. How about we bring up the numbers of women who are shot and killed in abusive relationships, whereas these would've have probably ended in less than a loss a life otherwise...

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:13:07 PM

So why do you hate women?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:16:02 PM

...and as for being an "emotional twit" as you oh so elegantly put it, I held these views long before this mass shooting.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:23:54 PM

Thanks for proving my point with your oh so eloquent ramble. The difference between me and you, I believe people should be free to make their own choices in life and that includes how hey defend themselves from people who make the world a dangerous place. You feel you get to dictate how people choose to defend themselves against people who make the world a dangerous place. Your distrust of your fellow citizen proves you hold them in contempt. Why do you hate people?

And yes, I deal in statistics and facts. The HORROR!

Last edited by Jawknee on 12/21/2012 1:27:39 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:31:38 PM

No, you drown people in irrelevant statistics when there are more statistics proving the opposite point. Then act like your OPINION is fact and dismiss all other points of view. You are an arrogant blowhard that does nothing else but make people hate gun nuts. That's all.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:41:57 PM

"you drown people in irrelevant statistics"

No wonder this country is in the state it's in. Facts and data no longer rule the day. Only raw emotion that clouds people's thinking and policy decisions.

Tell you what, you go ahead and continue living in fantasyland with your emotions guiding your decisions in life, I'll rely on FACTS.

At the end of the day facts are facts no matter how hard you emotional, busy body nanny staters try to make them "irrelevant". The sunlight of truth is the best disinfectant against people like you who lie in order to make your point.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:52:24 PM

I do rely on facts, you fool. But you WOULD rather nitpick on a specific point I was making (that what you say are 'facts' are often nothing more than your opinions wrapped in some misleading statistics to prove your point) than address any of the issues I raise...


And where did I lie you venomous idiot?

Last edited by PoopsMcGee on 12/21/2012 1:53:16 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:56:16 PM

I'm giving you too much credit Jawknee: you don't even attempt to use your 'facts and statistics' much, you much more often rely on name calling and bullying.

Good show!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:53:49 PM

I bet I'm equally as capable of protecting my family as jawk if not better without a gun. Poops is right. Your arguments are frustrating. You're smarter than that. Surely you have legitimate arguments that could at least help me see your pov. Most if the time I disagree with you, jawk, I can see where you're coming from even if I don't agree. But here, you just seem completely out to lunch without proper use of the stats you do offer.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 3:46:53 PM

"I bet I'm equally as capable of protecting my family as jawk if not better without a gun"

That's fine Underdog, that is your choice as a free human being. You get to decide how best to protect your family. However, neither you, Poops, politicians or anyone else who were created by our creator as equals get to make that choice for anyone else. If someone breaks into your house and has a gun and you choose to try and fend him off with your bare hands, that's your decision. I however will not take that risk and you among others will ever get to make that decision for me.

Take care. I'm out.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

PoopsMcGee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 4:03:25 PM

Calm down bro. I'm not advocating that you lose your guns or the choice of how you defend your family.

You're being a paranoid nutball...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Dukemz_UK
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 5:56:13 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Some stats for peeps who want the facts. USA ranks highly at 60%

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bebestorm
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:08:14 PM
Reply

The issue isn't violent video games or guns its a human issue. If there was a easy fix it would of been done centuries ago. When tragedy strikes the best we can do is to keep those involved in our thoughts,prayers and help out when we can.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Sir Dan
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:08:54 PM
Reply

Neither guns nor video games are to blame. A mentally ill freak is to blame. The politicians, particularly liberls, will do the "never let a crisis go to waste" dance, and try and control both. He killed a person who had guns legally and took the guns. How are you going to legislate that away? 2nd amendment allows law abiding people to own them. End of discussion. You can't help that some freak kills said person and steals the guns to kill people. And mature video games are already not for sale to minors. The problem with linking violence to video games is the definition of violence. Is showing aggression during the game or punching a wall when you lose "violence"? Or is grabbing a gun and killing people after a game "violence". I think it's the latter and you won't find hardly anyone out of the millions who play that do that. You have to watch these "studies" carefully.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:44:02 PM

Maybe a little education for his mother, so you know, she considers removing weapons from the house where her insane son lives.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Clamedeus
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:48:12 PM

Exactly World.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Sir Dan
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:49:59 PM

We don't know the details of how he got them from mommy. For all we know she had them locked up properly. Ever think that's WHY she had guns? Too protect her from her insane roommate? I know I would.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:56:24 PM

I would refrain from judging the mother too harshly. From what it sounds like she was trying her best to take care of her insane son. Which is hard to do with our crap mental health system. But World is also right. As a gun owner myself, had my child been clearly insane I would have either gotten rid of them or given them to a family member along with my safe to keep them away.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

pillz81
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:37:34 PM

According to sources, the prospect of being committed may have been the motivating factor that sparked this rampage.

I would not blame the mother either, not for a lack of trying.

By accounts she was a devoted mother to her two sons, especially to Adam. She had hoped guns would teach her son, responsibility. Sadly, with his failing mental health, it was ineffective.

Last edited by pillz81 on 12/20/2012 2:58:07 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:40:37 PM

I wasn't blaming, I was saying education is our friend.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:29:31 PM
Reply

Did u see the pic of this shooter, he looks like a suspicious freak. It's parents responsibility to watch out/protect our children, not to people who make millions/billions.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 12/20/2012 1:31:17 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:44:34 PM

He looks like an extra-terrestrial, but I don't think that's how we find these people.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:18:54 PM

in some ways yah. He looked like a weird dude.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:48:29 PM
Reply

Another misinformed old guy. Analyze the culture of violence all you want, it isn't going anywhere.

Everyone is scrambling to DO something, and I understand that, but there's no sense in beginning from a false conclusion.

Need a place to start? Start with parents that let their kids do anything they want and let the entertainment industry raise them.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:02:15 PM

Apparently she was trying to get him help. If true I know how difficult it can be to help people who are severely mentally ill. A very close friend of mine had an older sister who around 18 started showing signs of schizophrenia. She was abusive and violent but her family could not commit her because she was over 18 and had not committed any crimes. She refused to take her medications and this cycle went on for 2 more years. When she was 20 she got pregnant and less than 6 months after giving birth to her son, she locked herself in the bathroom and stabbed herself to death with a butchers knife. Her family tried but was unable to get her the help she needed because our mental health system failed them.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:52:57 PM

I'm aware of the problems with mental health, my family has been involved for generations, I'm just saying that's only one aspect and if they are dead-set on going after our "culture of violence" then there are other places to begin.

Mental illness needs its own platform in my opinion since most sufferers aren't violent. The government thought it was doing good by cutting all those asylums and sending people into the street, they were wrong.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:11:03 PM

Oh agree. I'm not disagreeing with you at all. They had the best of intentions but as Edmond Burke wisely stated, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 1:49:53 PM
Reply

Stay away from GTA V.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:14:25 PM
Reply

These politicians have what like to call the Do Something Disease. They no longer have the moral courage to see that humans are capable of great evil and look to ban anything and everything they can because they aren't willing to deal with the truth that evil lurks in men's hearts. What's especially sickening about their reaction is to immediately politicize the horrible event. They couldn't even wait 24 hours before the news networks and the politicians started blaming video games and guns. They need to look at their own policy decisions like our broken mental health system and the fantasy that 'gun free zones' keep people safe.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Sir Dan
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:33:13 PM

You are right Jawnkee. Look no further than Deinstitutionalization and the Community Mental Health Act 1963 for the real roots of this problem. But a politician will never admit that. Poor woman was stuck with a time bomb. Ultimately innocent kids paid the price. Sickening. And it angers me to see these weasels blame guns and video games.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:35:13 PM

Yup. They seek to punish the majority for the sick actions of a few.

Last edited by Jawknee on 12/20/2012 2:35:58 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LowKey
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:36:33 PM
Reply

The Rockefellers.... Don't even get me started on those elietist scumbags...

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 2:57:29 PM
Reply

I doubt people will swarm to stores to buy up all the violent games though, that's what's happening with guns. Even ammo is wicked back-ordered here in Minnesota.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

pillz81
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 3:07:52 PM

Sales of bullet-proof backpacks are on the rise as well.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gordo
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 4:28:10 PM
Reply

After all this has settled down the main thing is how the majority of Americans still can't understand how the rest of the world views their stance on gun ownership. The USA has the highest gun ownership in the developed world AND the highest deaths by guns. QED.

There is a direct connection!

There seems to be a fear and paranoia in the states. Why does a normal office worker need a gun? No real reason. Can you not look at the UK, Canada, Europe and Australia and think what do they do differently that keep gun crime so low?

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 5:14:09 PM

How the rest of the world views our gun policies are irreverent. The rest of the world didn't write our constitution and doesn't get to dictate our policies. The Founders understood and feared this as they were dealing with a British occupation. Europe doesn't get to tell me I can't have the means to defend myself and my family from evil doers. It's not that we're paranoid, its that many of us, like our Founders understand there is evil in the world and that evil manafests itself in dangerous ways. Gun bans do not work. Germany still has 3 of the 5 worst mass shootings in modern history and guns are practically banned there. Guns were banned in the UK and violent crime went up. See the link above. Even the BBC isn't so naive to believe the gun ban in the UK had any meaningful affect.

Fact is, like the other examples I laid out, had someone at that school been armed, this killer, this monster would not have killed as many if any at all. It's no coincidence the mass shootings always take place in 'gun free zones'. Columbine, Verginia Tech, Aurora theater and now this. All had gun bans enacted. A silly sign that says 'gun free zone' will not deter a mass murderer or will a law banning guns deter a criminal from getting a gun. We're not Europe. We're a greatly diverse nation of over 330 million people who share a huge boarder with a failed state plagued by drug crime, cartel violence and human and gun trafficking. Stoping gun violence with more bans is a fantasy and only serves to undermine the ability of law abiding people to protect themselves.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 6:32:24 PM

Want less carnage? Put more guns in schools!

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Gordo
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:02:16 PM

Wow.

I'm sorry for you that you need to live your life with such fear. It is a vicious cycle. More guns cause more fear which causes more people to carry guns!

If you honestly think arming school teachers or making fortresses out of schools or public places is the answer then you have lost the ability for rational thought! How is the UK and Europe really different than the USA? It's only different in your mind. Europe was devastated by war 60 years ago. They have adapted and modernised without the need for a gun culture. The USA may have needed an armed militia 200 hundred years ago but certainly no need for an armed citizenry in the last 100. Excuses!

Agree with this comment 5 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:48:08 PM

@World, arming teachers in Israel stopped the mass shootings there. Deterrents work.

@Gordo, I just explained to you why we're different. Reading comprehension my friend. No one including me is calling for sweeping national policy to arm teachers but if state legislators wish to repeal these stupid gun free zones and give teachers the option they should be allowed to make that choice. They should have #therighttochoose no?

No offense Gordo, but your obtuseness and lectures on American policy and history will fall on deaf ears. I have laid out rational points that you ignore or rebut with emotional arguments. If it bothers you that we're allowed to protect ourselves from invaders foreign or domestic, too damn bad. I live in the real world where evil exist and police can't be everywhere at once. People do horrible things to one another, I choose to be prepared for the unexpected while you live in naiveland. You depend on someone else for your security, we don't. THAT's the difference between America and Europe.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 11:03:26 PM

The only problem I have with teachers being armed is that they are human just like anyone else, if they go bananas someday, get fired or something, they might just do something similar...
Maybe we should then arm the kids so they can protect themselves from the teacher, you know just in case... But then those kids could organize an armed revolt... maybe we could have the principal rig the whole place full of C4, that way he can just blow the whole school up, you know just in case...
It might be easier to just limit access to guns, but hey arming everyone to the teeth seen to be a very good idea too LOL

Last edited by Karosso on 12/20/2012 11:05:47 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 8:29:36 AM

I don't think Jawknee is saying arm the teachers per se. It sound like what he's saying is to have some form of security near the entrance who is armed. For example, there's one particular elementary school back in my home town that locks the front doors after school is in session. You have to get buzzed in if not staff and then they have a security counter with a armed officer.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 12:33:36 PM

" maybe we could have the principal rig the whole place full of C4, that way he can just blow the whole school up, you know just in case..."

This is such a stupid statement I don't even know how to respond...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:13:29 PM
Reply

So do u guys think to blame violent games was part of this guys planning? I think part of it, not enough socializing... other..

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 12/20/2012 7:15:47 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

homura
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:37:35 PM
Reply

Why there is no security guards in that school? That's my first question. It greatly prevents crime. But of course they will focus on the gun enthusiast and video games. They don't understand that people are capable of murderous acts even if they don't own a gun or don't play video games. Have you heard the news in China about a man stabbing kids going to school? Just have a tight security in school. Why are Banks more protected than the lives of children? A security guard or two in schools can make a difference.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 7:49:48 PM

Exactly, these politicians should give up their armed security and their carry conceal permits(Feinstien, Schumer) then maybe we'll talk....maybe.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Hand_of_Sorrow
Thursday, December 20, 2012 @ 8:04:03 PM
Reply

the key words are, violent & kids.

i think most, if not all violent games are rated M.

imo, "it's" the parents job to keep M rated games out of
their kid's hands.
but, that wont happen as long as some parents "use" video
games for a baby sitter.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

ZenChichiri
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:43:27 AM
Reply

After reading the entire comments section, I'm starting to formulate a theme:

1) To be safe in the U.S, I should carry around a gun, to school or work.

2) Items that are used for the explicit purpose of death should remain legal.

3) The solution to insane/evil people having guns is equipping the entire population with guns.

I think that if it continues like this, we could sincerely have a reality TV show based on action. We could have a cameraman go to densely populated areas where arguments may arise, and just watch the carnage begin. We could even have people trying to ignite mischief just to get people to turn against each other and start shooting each other. Imagine the ratings! Real drama, real death, in real time!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:43:49 PM

But we shouldn't ban guns because the bad guys will use then anyways. And we shouldn't ban drinking and driving either, because the drunk drivers will do it anyways. And we shouldn't ban stealing because thieves will steal anyways. We shouldn't have sexual predator register because the sexual predators will rape anyways. In fact, we shouldn't have any legal restrictions, because criminals will commit crimes anyways.

Hillbilly logic...

Iceland had 1 homicide last year. 1. You know who is allowed to own a gun? No one. You know what types of guns are legal? None. There is a direct correlation between country homicide rates and strength of gun control laws. Zero tolerance countries have near zero rates. And when 20 children are mass murdered, some peoples gut reaction is to defend guns. So twisted

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Dukemz_UK
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 5:44:01 PM

LOL @ Underdog. Love it, bro! Got me in stitches.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

ZenChichiri
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 7:18:52 PM

Let's just rip up all the laws. It'll feel similar to the Wild West then. You do like Red Dead Redemption don't you? If you like it then you obviously all want to live in that kind of world, as Jawk so eloquently put it.

I'm a forgetful guy, so the day I would accidentally leave my uzi at home is the day that someone pulled a gun on me. Even if I had it on me, by the time I noticed a person pulling the gun on me it would be hard to react that fast. It would be kind of exciting though, like a showdown outside of a Wild West saloon. Oh wow, here we are back at Red Dead Redemption again! I LOVE that game, so actually now that I think about it, it doesn't sound half bad.

But, can't forget the extra expenses that accrue while in America. These days you have to buy your children bullet proof backpacks, and I hear the medical bills from gunshot wounds are through the roof.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 12:31:04 PM
Reply

Funny, all you anti gun people, how many of you play or have ever enjoyed playing a FPS?

What hypocrites you are.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 6 down Disagree with this comment

CH1N00K
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 1:45:04 PM

Yeah but when's the last time you heard of someone walking into a school and killing a bunch of innocent people with a copy of COD?

That's the difference, a video game is designed for entertainment for the right age group. A gun is designed with one purpose in mind. Sure you can justify it by saying you need to use it to protect yourself against someone else, but the minute you thumb a bullet into it, you've already made up your mind that you are going to use it to harm someone else, whether it's in self defense or not...

Don't get me wrong, I grew up around guns, my grandfather had a whole collection of hunting rifles and shotguns, that were kept with trigger locks on them and locked in a gun cabinet. He kept the keys on him at all times. We used to go out and target practice with them but every time I touched a gun, I knew that it was an object to be handled with care and respect...But I don't feel the need to carry a gun with me and don't own one.

But I don't live in the US, and though I don't support the idea of guns that are designed to be pointed at people, I get the idea. American history is steeped in the tradition of the people rising up, bearing arms and defending their freedom, and if 4 assassinated presidents isn't enough to change the idea that the gun problem needs to be addressed, then nothing will.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:25:30 PM

^^Are you pretending or are you for real?

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 12/21/2012 2:25:51 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:25:47 PM

Columbine. Harris and Klebold loved Doom. But I don't believe the game made them do it anymore than the gun.

But that's okay, from what I can tell most of you outside the US have no problem letting criminals and politicians carry guns while you spout on from your soapbox a out how they're so bad in the hands of law abiding citizens while you pretend to shoot people with your PS3.

Yea no inconsistency there.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:36:11 PM

Jawknee, why don't you try again bro? That's the stupidest argument I've ever heard. You're smarter than that.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

CH1N00K
Friday, December 21, 2012 @ 2:58:57 PM

If they had only loved Doom, that wouldn't have been the problem would it? I love Doom, it was a great game, the fact that for a little while I could shoot little pixelated bad guys was fun. I also played cops and robbers with super soakers and nerf guns...I even took one to school and had a blast one Halloween until the teacher took it away.. But no one got hurt, no parents had to bury their children..The fact that 2 high school students were able to gain access to huge arsenal of weapons that they could put together the idea that it was plausible for them to be able to shoot up the school, means that something with the system is broken somewhere.

And I'm not saying that you should outlaw the gun, we all know that that wouldn't work, it would only put more guns into the hands of the wrong people, but what's wrong with legislating it a bit better? You have the right to defend yourself and your family, but how many guns do you need to do that?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Saturday, December 22, 2012 @ 12:02:05 PM

You do realize jawknee that you made yourself look like an idiot with that statement.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 12/22/2012 12:08:45 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alexeon
Sunday, December 23, 2012 @ 1:29:42 PM
Reply

Typical Senator bullcrap. He just wants to look like he's doing something in the hopes of getting reelected. I bet he won't care so much in a few weeks once everyone forgets about this tragedy. If he really cared about preventing this type of stuff from happening again, he would look into the real motivations of the killer and work to see if those are issues that need addressing in the general public.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ather
Sunday, December 23, 2012 @ 4:27:25 PM
Reply

Why would the NAS come up with this legendary link when everybody else has failed to? Why doesn't Congress take an aggressive stance on gun control? And no, the 2nd amendment doe snot give the avergae Joe the right to bear arms, not even to protect his home (The Supreme Court decided that the 2nd Amendment must mean this.)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Are you getting Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor?
Yup, I'm nabbing this one now.
Yes, but I'm waiting for a while.
Maybe...not sure yet.
No, not interested.

Previous Poll Results