Top
210°

Gamer Community Unhappy With NRA Statements

A CBS newscast from Dallas got the thoughts of someone in the gaming world in the wake of the NRA's statements toward violent games.

Read Full Story >>
patrickscottpatterson.com
The story is too old to be commented.
HarryMasonHerpderp1314d ago

Good for this guy.
Nice to hear the gamers opinions for once instead of just the people that constantly oppose them.

SilentNegotiator1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

I'll say it again because I absolutely never tire of it; Neither guns or games are responsible.

All studies that have "concluded" that video games cause violence have had glaring holes. I believe the most recent one took place over the course of LESS than a week. They tested (without a control) how people playing violent games and sports titles would have a character in a story solve issues. The violent game players chose more violent solutions more frequently. But then here's your biggest hole; HOW DOES THAT TRANSLATE to these people making more violent decisions in REAL LIFE?!?

There are a few problems with blaming guns. One, you're ignoring human nature if you place a disproportional amount of blame on the type/caliber of weapon. Several attacks in China have taken place in schools with just knives, one man claiming 8 children, another seriously injuring about 20. In the UK, you're twice as likely to be victim of knife crime than you are gun crime in the US. Point being violence is universal. Second, the worst school attacks involved no gun deaths, such as the Bath disaster (a gun was used only to ignite a bomb). Home chemicals can make much more dangerous of weapons. Third, while other countries might have lower violent crime rates, you aren't going to get rid of 300M guns - and states with lower restrictions tend to have lower violent crime rates.

You can't blame guns for causing violence, you can't blame guns for allowing violence, and you can't blame the irreversible existence of guns in the US for violence.

The real issues are that we don't address loners and mentally ill well enough and we don't have security in all schools. These mass murders just about always are loners or mentally ill. We have several, several anti-bullying groups that tend to focus on LGBT groups. However, we barely/don't address making everyone, of all groups and stature, social and not feeling left out. And among all the sweating schools do over funds, there is rarely basic attention to testing for psychological issues.

Schools need to be secured. We can't tightly pack our children into a building 7 (or so) hours a day and not have security. Security is necessary at ALL grade levels, not just HS/college/University. It isn't even an issue of "armed guards"....just security in general to watch for suspicious activity and such.

iamnsuperman1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

But tighter guns laws means less gun related deaths. You use the UK as an example it is true you are more likely to get stabbed than shot but it is also more likely that a mass shooting is goin to occur to a mass stabbing. In the UK you can get certain guns. However it is so hard to get the license and once the licence is got strict rules have to be enforced and are checked. It has been a long time since a mass shooting/anything occured in the UK.

It is time the USA stop thinking like it was back when the law was introduced. There government needs to take a stand and just be like the rest of modern society and just make really strict rules. It will be benifital in the long run

I agree it is mentially unstable people who do this. However screening for metal illnesses isn't full proof and so a lot slip the cracks. A good solution is tight gun control. Some people just snap and have no sign of mental illnesses. Security in schools is fine but you need to stop turning the school into a prison and a more friendly enviornment to encorage learning. You need to just train teachers in awarness than having guards (especially armed ones. Disaterous idea). You just do not get this problem in the UK

SilentNegotiator1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

No guns =/= tighter gun laws.
No guns = no guns.
Like I said, 300M guns aren't going to simply be taken. You say the US can't think like when the law was introduced? I say YOU need to stop thinking in terms of OTHER countries; otherwise, you'll never see the US's situation in realistic light.

STRICTER GUN LAWS IS NOT A SOLUTION TO WHAT HAS ALREADY TRANSPIRED. The guns are out there. Trying to get rid of the worst of them will leave just criminals with the worst of them. Trying to restrict them in the future will not make existent guns evaporate.

The Sandy Hook shooter, Virginia tech guy, Bath killer, etc....they ALL had SEVERAL signs. You can't simply wave away that screening has "cracks" and ignore that making stricter gun laws also has "cracks"

"Security in schools is fine but you need to stop turning the school into a prison and a more friendly enviornment to encorage learning. You need to just train teachers in awarness than having guards (especially armed ones. Disaterous idea). You just do not get this problem in the UK"

1) I said NOT armed guards. I'm talking surveillance.

2) You want teachers to do what? Teach and survey hallways and the courtyards for serial killers?

3) Guards do not make schools "like prison". In HS, we had several guards (not armed, FFS) that were trained to spot suspicious behavior in and outside of the school. They were friendly and they did their job. If anything serious came up, they reported it and teachers were informed in seconds to pre-cautiously lock their doors (or whatever the case was) as opposed to the surprise at Sandy Hook. At university, we have a few guards and 2 or so police officers on duty, because the building is huge and large government, public buildings with massive amounts of people in it SHOULD have some security.

iamnsuperman1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

"Like I said, 300M guns aren't going to simply be taken. You say the US can't think like when the law was introduced? I say YOU need to stop thinking in terms of OTHER countries; otherwise, you'll never see the US's situation in realistic light."

Those guns don't have to disappear. Just stricter laws on how they are stored and having the person with the licence the only person to have acess to them. Also make it difficult to aquire a licence. If they do not like to store weapons safetly then they shouldn't be allowed to keep their weapons.

The truth of the matter is, it is insane to arm a population. It is essenstially a militia in a society that doesn't need one. You are trained to drive cars because they are quite dangerous to operate. But picking up a gun is quite easy to do and requires not training. Where is the logic there. It may take some time and it isn't going to be a solution that will solve things tomorrow. It will just lay the ground work that means in 50 years time you are not having multiple mass shootings in one life time.

It is time the USA realises that an armed population is an archaic idea. It isn't about stopping the next shooting as you said the guns are out there. It is stopping another generation having this problem and if you enforce stricter rules now, the amount of useable guns in circulation in the future will drop dramatically. Weapons do not last forever

At edit: 1. I can tell you know children/young adults will not like being watched on CCTV.
2. It is part of the teachers job to see bad signs. They are there to not only teach but look after student well being. They do not need to patrol just do their job in classes.
3. I had security at my universty. But they are not there to look after students. Just maintence of a public building (as it is a public building). Schools is a different matter. I have been to schools (through childhood and on work placements- training to become a teacher) and no security guard is needed. The teachers do that part as it is their job (again) for student well being. Security gards give off a bad vibe for schools which should be a fun and happy enviornment which is hard if you hae securty guards around the place (obviously it would be a alot worse if they were armed)

SilentNegotiator1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

"It is time the USA realises that an armed population is an archaic idea"

Actually, thinking that the government has your best interests at hand and thus should be the only one with weapons is archaic thinking. We threw that one out with "divinely" chosen government centuries ago. We need social change, not bigger government.

BTW, coming from a country that has CCTV and a phobia of civilians, I'm surprised that the idea of surveillance in schools seems so strange and prison-like to you.

"2. It is part of the teachers job to see bad signs. They are there to not only teach but look after student well being. They do not need to patrol just do their job in classes"

HOW THE HECK does that protect them from people that might threaten the school?!? Teachers are TEACHING, not watching for threatening people! Get the trope of big, mean guards with assault rifles out of your brain! They're just people watching for trouble (not even just "shooter" sorts of trouble...squabbling students, truants, etc)! Normal, friendly people!

EDIT:
You think democracy is working. How adorable.

iamnsuperman1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

*now (on my comment)

"Actually, thinking that the government has your best interests at hand and thus should be the only one with weapons is archaic thinking. We threw that one out with "divinely" chosen government centuries ago"

You do realise how democracy works right? They should have your best interests at heart as you voted for there policies. Well it wouldn't be a problem if the USA didn't have 300million guns in circulation. You wouldn't need to arm all the USA's police force if the population wasn't armed (look at the UK we have an armed repsonse unit for the police and that is it. They are essetially the UK SWAT). It is archaic to have an armed public because why are they armed. Your goverment is there to protect you and your country's interests. If they don't you vote them out.

@ edit: "HOW THE HECK does that protect them from people that might threaten the school?!? Teachers are TEACHING, not watching for threatening people! "

Well they are there to watch out for children well being. Teaching isn't just teaching and then home for the day. From a family of teaches I can tell you that is a rubbish teacher. Also for the random guy coming into the school and shoptig up the place. You wouldn't have that problem if the population wasn't armed/ loose gun laws. There isn't a great deal in cultural differences between the UK and the USA ( which is why we get on so well) so you have to look at the UK. Why haven't we had a mass shooting in recent years especially in schools? We have ourfair share of mental unstable people. I can't find the figure but pressure groups think more of us are mentally unstable but are not diagnosed until it is too late becuase there are no signs

Burackus1314d ago

Thank you, finally someone with some since, im so sick off hear about games blaming guns and guns blaming games when neither are to blame ITS FREAKING PEOPLE ARE TO BLAME, PARENTS, SOCIETY,you could take both guns and games out and this kind of sad thing would still happen.

FreshRevenge1314d ago

Okay I have few issues with your comment. Attacking loners as being the only perpertrators who commit crimes is absurd. Being shy doesn't make you a convict or a criminal.

Not every one needs 10,000 friends to be socially adept. Putting loners in this negative category isn't acceptable. Many historical figures that helped paved our way were loners. There are loners that are perfectly content on being alone.

We don't need our schools turning into prisons. People will start turning to homeschool instead if that is the case.

madpuppy1313d ago

Just for the record, The United States of America is NOT a Democracy....It's a Republic. it was founded a republic and it still is a republic.

It amazes me that there are US citizens out there that don't even know that fundamental aspect of their own government.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1313d ago
Ravenor1314d ago

Loved this, and really enjoyed how you pointed out that not all games are fit to be consumed by anyone of any age and that parents need to be far more proactive in monitoring what their kids play.

dragonyght1314d ago

yeah he should also have mention about the parent control option available on the system. i think that was a missed

OriginalPSP1313d ago

99.9 percent of what I said wasn't in a 2 minute story. That was mentioned... just didn't make the cut.

titans99991314d ago

The problem once again, is not video games. The problem is the kids and parents combined. The shooter was alone in his parents basement, doing God knows what, and it seemed odd to people that visited the family...ummm....hello....no wonder!!! Parents, time to start blaming yourself instead of external factors which are nothing but a distraction to your failed parenthood!!!!!

TekoIie1314d ago

The problem is no one wants to take the blame and there are a LOT of parents who will try to find something to shift the blame to.

jeeves861314d ago

The problem wasn't necessarily that the shooter was alone in his mother's basement, it's that he had a serious personality disorder.

deadfrag1314d ago (Edited 1314d ago )

The problem in Usa is the stupid legislation,the problem is not games,the real problem is stupid guys like this that support weapon sales just for profit and come and blame video games because he knowns is multi.. profit is about to stop!Its time!This is not the western days anymore!

Show all comments (27)
The story is too old to be commented.