Comments (20)
GreenRanger  +   567d ago
The only people who should be shunned is parents who let their mentally unstable children play violent games, and who keep an arsenal of weapons in their homes.
#1 (Edited 567d ago ) | Agree(34) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Septic  +   566d ago
Precisely.

Should authors and movie directors also be treated in a like manner for the violent books and movies published and released?

Watching things like Hostel or the Saw films, video games pale in comparison to the sheer intensity of the violence on display.

But l guess its easier to blame video games than actually raising your children.
rainslacker  +   566d ago
Or perhaps media outlets, such as Time who report on these violent events? I mean why draw the line at video games?
#1.1.1 (Edited 566d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Mounce  +   566d ago
What I don't understand, is he's comparing Violent Games to Pornographic Movies...

WHY THE FUCK, is it not: Violent Games to, Well, Idunno...VIOLENT MOVIES.

Oh, because they've been around since days of the 70's and 80's like with Alien, Predator, and 100% Horror film movies.

Violent movies, are they shunned? No? They're widely loved and the violence is ignored if there's a story to be had?! Wait, well, what about games? PFT. Fuck that.

Logic doesn't need to exist when you have delinquents playing the blame game when they don't know jack shit.
crock7owu10  +   567d ago
Seriously, when are parents going to looking into the mirror on some of this stuff? There isn't just one thing to blame for all these shootings, you could say many things. But some people need to stop coming up with things to use as a scapegoat, and start taking responsibility for their own actions.
talisker  +   566d ago
We don't have problems with mass murders and public shootings where I live, despite that all the kids play GTA and other violent games (which I don't approve but most parents don't care much). Another fact is that I haven't even touched a real gun in my life because they are strictly prohibited and regulated and there's simply no chance you can get one without a lenghty process of getting a permit, training and psychological examination. Figure it out yourselves...
aiBreeze  +   566d ago
There is too much sense here for far too many Americans to comprehend.
#3.1 (Edited 566d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
frelyler  +   566d ago
Good one, not.
Dms2012  +   566d ago
Oh the irony.
palaeomerus  +   566d ago
Brazil and Mexico have stricter gun laws that the US and far exceed the US in per capita murder rate either with or without guns. Germany has far stricter gun laws than Switzerland but has a higher per capita rate of violent crime and shootings that Switzerland does.

Strict gun laws are not what they are cracked up to be and the statistics used to support them are pretty dishonest and cherry picked. The most common one is the US and the UK.

Well, the UK still had a gun massacre in 2010. Norway, who also have a low crime and strict gun laws had probably the worst one ever seen in 2011.

The UK actually ALREADY had much lower rates of gun crime and violent crime than the US did when they both still had very similar gun laws. That was before they banned handguns.

After the UK adopted its hand gun laws the violent crime rate actually went up (usually knives and break-ins), peaking in the 1990's. Since then violent crime has been going down in both the UK and the US (which had sun-setted its stupid assault weapon ban in 2004)having failed to accomplish much of anything with it. (Legal 'Greater than 10 round' magazines were still commonly available and post-ban guns just put hunter stocks on and removed little conveniences like bayonet lugs or flash suppressors to meet the mostly cosmetic guidelines.)

The whole time of the ban, the Ruger Mini-14 sport/ranch rifle did the exact same things the semi-auto AR-15 did (shot the exact same cartridges!)and yet they were treated as being different by ignorant lawmakers and gun control lobbyists who were more worried about whether they looked like the weapons criminals used on TV and in movies.

Meanwhile most people killed by guns in the US were killed by .22 pistols in rough neighborhoods and most of them were criminals killed by other criminals at close range after firing at least seven shots.

The story is much the same with Australia. Handgun ban-> more street crime until after 90's. And like the UK Australian ALREADY had a lower violent crime rate and gun crime rate than the US did BEFORE their gun ban laws were adopted.

Pick the right pair of countries and ignore the past and strict gun laws look great. Pick any other pair or look into what life was like before the strict gun laws and you usually start to see that the strict gun laws benefits are largely a crock.

Was Canada an orgy of gun violence or violence in general before they got strict gun laws? No. There was the Qeubec Massacre in 1989. Was Japan? Nope. Not really. They have some gang/youth violence, a few nuts, and a cult released Sarin Gas in the subway system once. But both were pretty peaceful places before they adopted strict gun control. Japan mainly did it because they were for all intents and purposes a conquered protectorate for a while.
#3.2 (Edited 566d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Despair666  +   566d ago
Articles like these should be shunned
rainslacker  +   566d ago
This article is actually reporting what another news outlet said (Time). It didn't offer up it's own opinion, and even offered some references to other media to show that the US hasn't banned things based on violence. Honestly this is an above average article for the examiner, and it's nice to know when people are talking shit about our hobby so we can respond.
extermin8or  +   566d ago
Wow just wow, what a rediculous, ignorant statement. Apart from the fact that why should the vast majority of people that are sane and fine with violent media have to suffer for the rare individual who can't, like saying no one can drive because some people will crash etc... Also he uses social science as a basis of his argument apart from the fact that studies so far show no link between violent games and violent behaviour in normal individuals but social science- the 'science' that a fair portion of cannot ever be prove nor Disproven to an acceptable level to be considered as near certain as you can get by a good portion of the wider scientific community due to the influence of thoughts on any activity they watch or record and the discrepancy between what a person says the cause oehow they feel is and the actual info they may just not be disclosing.
aiBreeze  +   566d ago
Here we go again, some political jerk-off is using a a tragic event to push his own agenda. How do these people sleep at night? Absolutely no integrity and zero sense of compassion.
#6 (Edited 566d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
ShaunCameron  +   566d ago
And I wouldn't be surprised if he's a leftist.
JasonKCK  +   566d ago
people spend 2 much time on things that dont matter and not enough on things that do
Dms2012  +   566d ago
Whats so bad about pornographers?
P_Bomb  +   566d ago
We don't have the frequency of problems that precipitated this article here in Canada. Or in many other "video game hotzones" like Britain and Japan http://www.theworld.org/201... . Then again those countries all have gun control.

Article has a Lieberman quote about 'social science', but Lieberman and Klein need to look at more variables. They're more likely to be shot *period* than have to c-c-combobreaker out of a fatality/brutality or a warp/pull biotic explosion. That Bushmaster behind the Walmart counter is more of a red herring than the $14.99 copy of Mass Effect in the bargain bin, imo.
#9 (Edited 566d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
mac_sparrow  +   566d ago
Exactly, while we're at it let's ban books too, I have a vivid imagination and those books can get pretty graphic. Oh shoot, seems we'll have to ban imagination as well, and theatre, newspapers, television...

Or we could accept that as long as the general consensus is that the content is suitable for a certain age then it's acceptable for that age to view it, oh and put the blame for atrocities rightly at the feet of those who committed them and the negligence of others that enabled them.

Or would that make too much sense?

Down with this sort of thing!
Sucitta  +   566d ago
ANTI DEPRESSANTS ANTI DEPRESSANTS ANTI DEPRESSANTS..

every last one of these shooters has been on mind altering anti depressants..

media is sponsored by pharmaceutical companies like phizer, eli lilly and the like..

an educated dog could connect the dots.. why not you?

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember