Guns, Games and Giving up our Rights: Alex Jones vs The Truth

With the violence and gun-control debate heating up in the US, games are increasingly being singled out as reasons for aggression and killings. FPS games like Call of Duty have been repeatedly used as examples of how games are turning children into walking killing machines. They were also originally created by the Pentagon… according to Alex Jones. Seb and Dan from Daily Reaction discuss the problems with shady sources, misleading facts, energetic presenters, the evil British and how all this confusion is just clouding a very legitimate problem.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
doctorstrange1888d ago

Alex Jones is like a real-world Jim Sterling

Foolsjoker1888d ago

Opinions are great, but too many people confuse them with facts.

doctorstrange1888d ago

Yup. That's a true fact, imo

guitarded771888d ago

@ Foolsjoker

I keep clicking "agree", but it only lets me agree once :( The media should take much of the blame... FOX took tabloid BS and brought it into the newsroom, and retarded people gobbled it up. Once everyone else saw FOX's ratings going through the roof, they followed suit. Walter Cronkite is probably rolling around in his own vomit in his grave.

1888d ago Replies(4)
NeverEnding19891888d ago

Do games cause violence? No.

Does a 14 year old playing an M rated (17+) game cause violence? Possibly.

nrvalleytime1888d ago

Your point? Anyone playing a M rated game has the capacity to cause violence. Acting on potential is very different than simply having potential.

Timesplitter141888d ago

I'm pretty sure his point is that games don't cause violence but surely there will be violent people who play games.

It's as if he said :
"Do apples cause violence? No.

Can a 14 year old eating an apple cause violence? Possibly."

Basically, he meant that games don't cause violence but retarded people will think they do because they saw a violent person who happened to play video games.

doctorstrange1888d ago

Should a parent be responsible for which clearly-rated games their child plays, just like how they're responsible if he/she watches Saw IV or reads The Anarchist's Cookbook? Definitely.

Foolsjoker1888d ago

A game sitting on a table has 0 potential to cause violence.

Every person as the potential for violence, even those who had slaughtered each other for centuries before games existed.

Remember, correlation does not prove anything.

Riderz13371888d ago

I've been playing video games since I was 8 and never have I once had the urge to even hit someone for no reason, let alone kill them.

caseh1888d ago

Next they'll be telling us the install screen on MGS4 where Snake is seen smoking to be the primary cause for people to take up smoking. :o

Foolsjoker1888d ago

Thinking about that makes me need a smoke...

Soldierone1888d ago

They tried that already. There was a short "smoking on TV" ban. Any actor that didn't smoke in real life was not allowed to smoke on TV. It was later removed because it didn't make a difference. How ironic.

Software_Lover1888d ago

Again I'll say it.......

When there was slavery..........there were no video games.
When people were burned at the stake for being fake witches ............. there were no video games
When the Catholic Church murdered thousands of Christians just because they had bibles........ there were no video games
WWI............. no video games
WW2............. no video games
When Kennedy was shot......... there were no video games
When King was shot............ there were no video games

Do I need to add more?

steven83r1888d ago

No but what they did have was religion teaching hate. So i would suggest these fools wanna ban games lets ban religion.

Qrphe1888d ago

As much as I find religion cancerous to the mind, religion should never be banned (I'm against the banning most banned things already to be honest).

nrvalleytime1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

Illogical. Smoke detectors, the internet, and cash dispensers also didn't exist during these events.

It it completely fair to notice that some events are caused by individuals who have played video games. Notice I only have mentioned that they only played the games, just like I would say they watched movies or listened to music. Yes, I completely agree it is wrong to blame those same games for the any type of tragedy, but what your argument appears to do is just as bad as accusing games.

Completely ignoring the presence of games in a situation is just as bad as blaming them. We need to have intelligent and quantified debate on the subject, not alienate ourselves to one side of the fence.

DragonKnight1888d ago

Sorry, but stating that Software_Lover's post is illogical and just as bad as people blaming games is in fact a fallacy.

The propensity towards violence is no more affected by video games than it is books, movies or television. It's akin to saying that the colour red drives bulls insane. Bulls are colour blind to the colours of red and green. If a person wants to commit violence, they will. Games literally have nothing to do with it. That isn't an opinion, that's a logical, common sense based fact. There is no definitive correlation between real world violence and games and having only those two factors present.

Timesplitter141888d ago

no it isn't "as bad as blaming games".

The fact is that there was violence before and there was violence after video games. The introduction of video games did not have an effect on the violence, except for the fact that the violence rates have been dropping in the last few years (which isn't the video games' fault either, imo).

nrvalleytime1888d ago

@dragonknight when did I say anything about the propensity of violence being affected by video games? I said - very clearly - that we have to notice if video games are part of a situation. That's all. No judgments calls should be made beyond that, but we have to notice their presence.

Also, your comment mentions having "only those two factors present." When did I say those were my only two factors? There are only two things being addressed here:

1. Games didn't exist in the past; stuff happened. It's easy to see there is no connection at all.

2. Games do exist in the present; stuff happens. If games are present where the stuff happens, then let's at least sensibly talk about it. We - the gaming community - should be having these discussions, like the group of gaming executives did last week in DC. We are an entertainment medium, and discussing the presence of games (whether they affect a situation or not) is our responsibility.

One last thought - regarding the statement that "that isn't an opinion, that's a logical, common sense based fact," I cannot say I completely agree. Games are not responsible, but spending an inordinate amount of time playing a particular game or title (see the last paragraph of this article - http://www.psychologytoday.... can help us identify what's missing or wrong in person's life by examining their gaming habits.

That's a very real connection between video games and a person's life, and one that deserves to be examined more. And sorry for the long post - this is a topic I love discussing. PM me if you want to keep the discussion going. Cheers.

aliengmr1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

There can't be an intelligent because what it comes down to is "belief".

History is completely logical. Video games are part of a very non-violent era compared to history. If video games cause violence then logically speaking the number of violent people must correlate in some way to the number of games and people playing them. It doesn't. End of debate on whether violent video games cause violence.

If we are just going to make up pointless arguments, then I say violent video games cause less violence. My evidence: History.

DragonKnight1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

@nrvalleytime: When you mention noticing their presence, you're implying they have any impact towards the propensity for violence and they don't. Video games literally have no impact on any but those with an already damaged mental state, and in which case it still isn't the fault of the video game, thus there should be no mention of it having any effect.

I didn't say they were YOUR two factors, I said they would be the only two factors that could legitimately claim video games influences violence.

The presence of games is a non-factor. It's a scapegoat. It's like when John Hinkley Jr. tried to assassinate Reagan to impress Jodie Foster. He became obsessed with the movie Taxi Driver and Jodie Foster, but THEIR PRESENCE didn't MAKE him do anything. They didn't contribute to his assassination attempt, he was just insane.

And spending an inordinate amount of time with a game is not an indicator of something from the game being missing in the person's life. If that were the case, South Korea would be an absolute mess and I, who have been playing nothing but Dragon's Dogma for 2 weeks now, would then apparently have a life that's missing the satisfaction of eviscerating Hobgoblins.

I mean seriously, games have literally nothing to do with violence. In point of fact they can be a way to release the stresses and anxieties of daily life which are greater factor for violence.

Hydralysk1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

"History is completely logical. Video games are part of a very non-violent era compared to history."

So are assault rifles and Abrams tanks. You can't use 'history' as a direct comparison, because the cultural norms, technology and standard of living of our societies have changed so much.

"If video games cause violence then logically speaking the number of violent people must correlate in some way to the number of games and people playing them."

I agree with most of this, while in general I agree that video games don't increase violent tendencies, it's irresponsible to say they never do. For mentally unsound people a video game CAN be the thing that puts them over the edge, it could also be a film, a book, an angry editorial, or any number of things.

I don't accept that video games cause more violence than any other form of media, but if we're going to have that debate we can't be completely dismissive of the exceptions that arise.

Soldierone1888d ago

You can't. Its like science, you can't generalize things.... you need to be precise so you find the EXACT cause of it to further your research.

MILLIONS of people play games, thats a lot of people that can randomly go stupid.

How many of the idiots shooting others read a magazine? Watched the news? Read a book? watched a movie? Yet the media never makes a connection to any of these things? Its ALWAYS just video games. "bla bla played GTA!" yeah? And he also watched Fox News, got inspired by all the famous murderers, and decided to go down in history. Good job Fox.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1888d ago
Main_Street_Saint1887d ago

Not too mention the 1966 shooting in the University of Texas.... No Video games, either.

ScubaSteve11888d ago

LOL Alex Jones thats all i gotta say about that nutcase

Show all comments (54)
The story is too old to be commented.