Video Game Industry Responds To Colorado Shooting,Twisted Metal Director Wants Tougher Gun Laws

When a senseless act of violence, such as the Aurora, Colorado shooting rampage occurs, video games are usually singled out as the root of the problem. However, there are those in the video game industry who have their own opinion on where the blame should lie.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Them_Bones2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

I think the killer was inspired by the Joker.
I know that sounds strange but he chose batman to do the shooting, he chose the midnight launch so that he would make more of an impact on the headlines and he chose a shoot-out section of the film so he could try and blend his shooting in with the film's shooting, something devious that the Joker would do.
He also handed himself in at the car park without a fight and booby trapped his apartment beforehand hoping he could hurt or even kill some of the cops who went to investigate it.
Then again he's probably just some Satanist.

blind-reaper2280d ago

Anyfuckingway (and mostly important) he was nuts.

Patriots_Pride2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

I blame facebook and cyber bullying.

Disagree all you want but cyber bullying is real and it pushes people to do alot of crazy things.

FragMnTagM2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

Just gonna drop this here:

Guns are not always bad.

If everyone is packing, robbers would think twice about their crimes.

Stricter gun laws mean only criminals and the police force along with the army only have guns which is not a good thing.

The only thing that would completely stop shootings is to dismantle all guns in the world, then put up laws against them, but that is never going to happen.

A psychological evaluation being a requirement before the purchase of a gun/s along with a gun safety course would do more help than outright banning them.

I have several guns and use them for sport and hunting.

I would never use them on another person unless my life or someone around me was in danger.

Hell even my 4 year old son and 6 year old daughter shoot with me.

PoSTedUP2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

"A psychological evaluation being a requirement before the purchase of a gun/s along with a gun safety course would do more help than outright banning them."
very good idea.

Bimkoblerutso2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

But there have been many, MANY mass murderers throughout history that have had no discernible mental disorder. There's really no viable solution at this point.

Stricter laws = guns legally out of the hands of citizens and still illegally in the hands of criminals

Laxer laws = guns bought easily by everyone, but with the obvious caveat that there are a LOT of people out there (whether they are mentally stable or not) that should never be allowed to carry firearms casually.

It's not that I really disagree with you, but I think there's much more to it than just "if everyone carried guns, no one would mess with anyone."

DeadlyFire2280d ago

If guns were outlawed it would do nothing to protect the citizens. Things like this would still happen. As you can't stop under the table deals. Sure maybe it would be a little harder to find, but the minds of these individuals are already made up that they will use a gun on someone anyway so they will get one either way. I would rather carry a concealed weapon permit and protect my family.

People would fear drawing weapons on other people if they knew they could possess a means of self-defense under their belt. Most criminals think of citizens as harmless. So they don't mind threatening them at all. They see no drawback to hurting them either.

FragMnTagM2280d ago

After doing some thinking on this subject, I would like to add something.

There are far worse things than having guns.

We trust construction workers in huge cities with huge machinery like cranes with wrecking balls that could do way more damage to surrounding buildings and thus all the people inside of them, and as far as i know, no one is trying to ban cranes and wrecking balls.

Come to think of it, I can and have made far worse weapons than what a gunstore could provide me.

You would be amazed at what a small cylinder hid in sweater or coat could shoot out. Much more stealthy than any kind of gun. The whole apparatus could be easily concealed and in a noisy place, you could get away with quite a few kills.

I have built a homemade flame thrower that could be scaled down to assault a crowd of people. I built it just to mess around with on my property.

My point is that, I will never do anything malicious with what I am capable of, unless I have a very good reason of doing so.

Guns are not the problem, there are many things in this world that are much more harmful than guns. While a person toting a small arsenal could do some damage, guns are actually pretty low on the list of things that could harm people.

Hell, one drunk driver on the freeway could do a lot more damage than this nutjob did. Not to discount what he did, just saying that it could be a lot worse with things other than guns.

A small vial of a certain substance could have wiped out everyone in the theater and maybe even quite a few of the people in the lobby.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2280d ago
Hufandpuf2280d ago

If you take our guns, the government takes our rights. Protect the second amendment!

blind-reaper2280d ago

The government can take your rights any day of the week, do you think that the general population can stand a fight against the army?

Spydiggity2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

the army is comprised of americans who swore an oath to the constitution.

do you really believe they'll all fight against the american people? plus...1/3 of americans have guns...that's a pretty big militia.

i realize people don't know history anymore, so here's a brief lesson. this country fought off the most powerful military in the world without an organized military of our own to earn our independence.

@partiots_pride: you don't have a right to bare arms to protect yourself from thieves. you have a right to bare arms to protect yourself from an overbearing government. the founding fathers knew that governments throughout history have always sought to take power...this is just another one of the balances.

your view on owning just small guns is simply wrong.

also, criminals don't need guns to commit crimes, and even if they did, what's stopping them from getting one? they are criminals after all. the only people stricter gun laws will hurt are the law abiding...not the law breaking.

this is just common sense.

at first i thought your name seemed a bit contradictory, then i realized it was about a pointless spectator sport. this is where americans' priorities lie. the outcome of a game where you don't know the people on the team and have no vested interest in the outcome. this is one of the major reasons why we're slowly losing this country and the spark in the people that made it great.

blind-reaper2280d ago

"the army is comprised of americans who swore an oath to the constitution."

like the government.

"i realize people don't know history anymore, so here's a brief lesson. this country fought off the most powerful military in the world without an organized military of our own to earn our independence."

That was the 18th Century, when the government didn't have tanks, military airplanes, drones and all of todays technology. If the government want to fuck you, it will fuck you and you don't have much say. But don't worry it is highly improbable because USA is a pseudo-democracy where the use of this violent policies aren't necesary to fuck with the people.

Patriots_Pride2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

I am all for the rights to bare fire arms but why give people license to own Automatic assault riffles, shot guns and sniper rifles.

The purpose of having guns is to protect your home and family from thief's not to start WW3.

American should only be allowed to own small guns like a revolver.

V0LT2280d ago

What if WW3 did start and you didn't have an automatic rifle.

MRHARDON2280d ago

Patriots_Pride and all of his anti-gun friends would die cause only weapons they have would be pellet guns.

strauser3602280d ago

So basically your reasoning for protecting gun laws is the idea that WW3 might occur on your property? Seriously people don't need automatic rifles in their home unless you're under some extreme or strange circumstance.

Irishguy952280d ago

You have your ****ing army protecting you ylwzx, like they are supposed to

starchild2280d ago

It's not just about protecting oneself or discourage abuse by an out of control government, it's also about the fact that we have the right to own things for whatever reason we want.

We don't have the right to hurt another person whether it is with a hammer or an AK47, but we do have the right to own a hammer or an AK47 and use them responsibly.

Lord_Sloth2280d ago

That's about $3000 per year for a Federal Fire-Arms License and the Government keeps track of you when you do.

Only small guns? What about hunters?

Most guns used for crimes weren't aquired legally anyway. Your idea won't do any good and you'll just make it so hunters can't donate the deer to starving children. Do you want to starve children?

Irishguy952280d ago

I'm all for rifles. It would be much better if this guy had a bolt action rifle than either a pistol or an Automatic/ Over here in ireland, it's harder to get a pistol than a shotgun(single buck) or Rifle

'right' to own is a stupid reason, you don't have the right to own a nuke do you? Whether or not you will use int responsibly it doesn't matter. You don't have 'true' freedom. What's wrong with restricting Guns a bit more compared to restricting drugs? "freedom" is broad and overused when people are talking about gun laws. It's simple, you don't need an Ak, not for anything, want some protection, in reality a 6 shot revolver will do/ wanna hunt? Bolt action rifle will do/ It's better to stop the supply of automatics because of how much more dangerous they are/ The only reason people want an Ak is because

A: They want one for that 'extra kick'.
B: The have the 'right' to have one if they want.

If this was the case, 72 people wouldn't have been shot the other day/

madjedi2280d ago

You don't need better gun laws, you need better humans, that use them.

From the paranoid no one needs anything more powerful than a pistol.

To the idiots assuming the us military would bring arms to bear against unarmed citizens. Thats called war crimes.

Right just because the "government" can do something doesn't mean it will.

"That was the 18th Century, when the government didn't have tanks, military airplanes, drones and all of todays technology."

And if you merit that much time and money being sent to kill or capture you, odds are your a terrorist or planning something that will kill alot of people. Ie not a serious concern for the average person.

I love how people go into full drama queen mode when gun violence are brought up.

Lead your own life not dictate to others what they should or should not have access to.

Seriously a nuke, stop being idiotic. Besides a skilled sharpshooter with a scope and a rifle, is more dangerous to me that nut with a full auto ar.

I'll bet most of the people, knee jerking have never even fired a real gun before.

If they are not harming anyone and still following the laws, why do all you people get your panties in a bunch, because someone likes to shot bigger guns than pistols.

If you magically got rid of all the guns in the us, the criminals would just use knives or blunt objects for robbery or murder.

And the law abiding citizen is still screwed.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2280d ago
LastDance2280d ago

Reading Americans try to justify the reason they should own guns is one of my favorite pass-times.

Let the massacres continue.

IaMs122280d ago

It will only hurt the law abiding. People who want to massacre will massacre. The laws are not going to stop them...

iGaMei2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

They want a reason to ban guns well here is a great reason NOT to ban guns this guy used his gun to save lives.

LastDance2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

that fucking idiot started an unnecessary gun fight in the middle of a crowded area. That is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life.

He is lucky they didn't shoot back into the crowd.

Those robbers were there to steal money, not shoot guns and kill people.

That old fool put more people at risk because of his actions.

It's good to see America is devolving back to the wild west

blind-reaper2279d ago

they think everything is a fuckin movie that is the main problem.

AO1JMM2280d ago

Because criminal obey laws and wont find other ways to get their hands on a gun right?

sjaakiejj2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

Like they do in U.K.

Problem is that gun crimes are far more common in the U.S. than they are in any other western country, as guns in Europe are far harder to obtain.

I don't believe gun laws had anything to do with this particular incident though.

LastDance2280d ago (Edited 2280d ago )

The 24 year old gunman went to a gun shop, bought 2 high powered pistols, an assault rifle and a shotgun AT EASE.

What 24 year old needs those weapons???

How do gun laws not come into play?

sjaakiejj2280d ago


They don't come into play as the gunman also owned explosives and other illegally obtained weapons. He bought the guns legally because he could, not because he had to.

AngelicIceDiamond2280d ago

Wait? WTF ever happened to having to attain a gun license?

Show all comments (52)
The story is too old to be commented.