Cooler heads are speaking out
- Thread starter gym
- Start date
- Status
Some people are wanting to blame anything for the insane.
Also I was thinking today; Mexico has one of the more serious gun bans for it's population in this hemisphere. There is a drug war there just as our leaders claim and fund @ $500 a second we have here. The people cannot protect their lives, property, or livelihood and look at how many people are killed there yearly. Governors, police, news people, are prime targets. Yep those gun bans work for those who have their own private security detail but it appears not so well for the peons or those whose security is lacking.
Also I was thinking today; Mexico has one of the more serious gun bans for it's population in this hemisphere. There is a drug war there just as our leaders claim and fund @ $500 a second we have here. The people cannot protect their lives, property, or livelihood and look at how many people are killed there yearly. Governors, police, news people, are prime targets. Yep those gun bans work for those who have their own private security detail but it appears not so well for the peons or those whose security is lacking.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
This is possibly the most idiotic thing I've read in the last 6 hours.
I have yet to see one reputable, peer-reviewed study that shows any sort of correlation between violent video games (and/or their purported "realism") and a propensity for violence, and with good reason, because there quite clearly isn't one. Violent crime has been falling for years, while video games have been getting more quote-unquote "realistic."
If there were any correlation whatsoever between gaming skills and shooting ability, you'd see all of the best 3-gun shooters playing the latest COD variant.
News flash: They aren't, because video games cannot confer any sort of actual real-world skill.
On a related note, that some people here are willing to sacrifice other rights in order to save their own rights is just slightly more detestable than those who wish to "compromise" with the forces of anti-gun bigotry in an attempt to "save" gun rights.
After all, if the 2nd Amendment exists to act as a bulwark against the infringement of our rights and liberties, I see it as nothing more than the utter height of hypocrisy that some supposed 2nd Amendment supporters would throw other enshrined liberties to the wolves as a distraction against coming after their precious guns.
Some of you are pathetic.
Screamin'Eagle
Member
WardenWolf,
Asperger's Syndrome is part of the autism specturm, correct? There are varying severities as well, right? If so, could that mean that some with Aspergers function at a high enough level to responsibly use guns while others might be unfit?
Asperger's Syndrome is part of the autism specturm, correct? There are varying severities as well, right? If so, could that mean that some with Aspergers function at a high enough level to responsibly use guns while others might be unfit?
Screamin'Eagle
Member
What we are not talking about yet is the objective evidence that people's attitudes towards violence has changed drastically over the last couple of generations.
The Army has kept track of the number of soldiers who will shoot to kill when they are shot at. Sounds silly, but the number of soldiers in WWII was surprisingly low. Today, nearly all will shoot to kill when shot at.
http://www.military-sf.com/Killing.htm
What accounts for these differences. By the time Viet Nam came around the number of those that would shoot to kill jumped from 15-20% up to about 90%. That was only one generation.
Now we are plagued with mass killings by a number of kids with many common factors. It defies common sense that there is not some definable variable that explains these findings. I won't venture an answer, but the Army for some reason uses video games to increase the likelihood that their soldiers will shoot to kill. Are we saying that those same video games used by the Army have no effects on civilians?
http://www.stripes.com/news/not-playing-around-army-to-invest-50m-in-combat-training-games-1.85595
The Army has kept track of the number of soldiers who will shoot to kill when they are shot at. Sounds silly, but the number of soldiers in WWII was surprisingly low. Today, nearly all will shoot to kill when shot at.
http://www.military-sf.com/Killing.htm
What accounts for these differences. By the time Viet Nam came around the number of those that would shoot to kill jumped from 15-20% up to about 90%. That was only one generation.
Now we are plagued with mass killings by a number of kids with many common factors. It defies common sense that there is not some definable variable that explains these findings. I won't venture an answer, but the Army for some reason uses video games to increase the likelihood that their soldiers will shoot to kill. Are we saying that those same video games used by the Army have no effects on civilians?
http://www.stripes.com/news/not-playing-around-army-to-invest-50m-in-combat-training-games-1.85595
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
Threads like these always have one basic premise and motivation: "I don't care if you take or ban what other people like, just don't take or ban the things I like".
Revolver shooters being okay with banning standard capacity semi-auto magazines. Hunting rifle owners being okay with banning AR15s. And now people who don't like video games being totally alright with infringing the First Amendment, as long as it doesn't affect anything they're personally interested in.
Shameful.
Revolver shooters being okay with banning standard capacity semi-auto magazines. Hunting rifle owners being okay with banning AR15s. And now people who don't like video games being totally alright with infringing the First Amendment, as long as it doesn't affect anything they're personally interested in.
Shameful.
12131
Member
Sad truth written here.
Cosmoline
Member
We don't have his psych records yet, and it's clear his family was highly protective of him. There's no connection between Asperger's and violence. Quite the contrary. The guy likely had much more serious problems which may be why the mom never let anyone interact with him.
It is amazing how one can shake their head at others for blaming something they are passionate about as the cause of society's ill, and then turn around and blame someone else's passion for it. Talk about hypocrisy...
How about instead of blaming every inanimate object for causing people to CHOOSE to do things, we actually tackle the fact that even with all the opulence we enjoy in the modern world, people aren't finding meaning in their lives like they once did.
How about instead of blaming every inanimate object for causing people to CHOOSE to do things, we actually tackle the fact that even with all the opulence we enjoy in the modern world, people aren't finding meaning in their lives like they once did.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Don't worry guys, the American public will never stand for a ban on certain movies or video games. But, they might stand for a ban on guns. If the media wants to beat up on video games and movies instead of guns, I'm quite pleased to hear that.
Frankly, though I support no ban on these media materials, I do think parents would do well to limit how much exposure their children have to violent movies and video games. A member of my girlfriend's family (non-violent, so far as I know) is one of those types: he spends 20 hours per day hidden in a room playing video games by himself, not working, and not socializing (he's 21 years old). I believe he's more into the role playing games, but the behavior still isn't normal. Now, take a kid who is facing severe social challenges and mental illness and plop him in front a graphic killing game for 20 hours each day... the results might not be good.
Frankly, though I support no ban on these media materials, I do think parents would do well to limit how much exposure their children have to violent movies and video games. A member of my girlfriend's family (non-violent, so far as I know) is one of those types: he spends 20 hours per day hidden in a room playing video games by himself, not working, and not socializing (he's 21 years old). I believe he's more into the role playing games, but the behavior still isn't normal. Now, take a kid who is facing severe social challenges and mental illness and plop him in front a graphic killing game for 20 hours each day... the results might not be good.
Screamin'Eagle
Member
Cosmoline said:
While Aspergers itself may not be linked to violent tendencies, like stated before, there may be other conditions that people are more at risk for if they have Aspergers. Not trying to single them out, just stating that in the process of trying to prevent these tragedies, they might be under a bit more scrutiny because of associated psychological problems they are at more risk for than the general populous.
It still comes down to people taking notice and doing what's right and getting people help if they need it.
Last edited:
Great post, Justin. Although I will say that there are a few games out there that accurately portray how weapons work, and my first time going to a shooting range I found it easier to figure out the controls and sight picture on a 9mm AR-15 and a semi-auto pistol because of my experience in game (comparing to my Dad and brother-in-law who did not play video games).
That said, the games don't teach you trigger techniques, stance, grip, how to manage recoil, etc...and for long-range usually don't include bullet drop.
That said, the games don't teach you trigger techniques, stance, grip, how to manage recoil, etc...and for long-range usually don't include bullet drop.
Blaming video games and heavy metal music (Like they have done in the past) is not an answer either, I have been a "Megadeth" fan and many others since the '80's along with having had played GTA video games and 1st person shooters for a few years now along with studying different religions/cults if you will and nothing weird has ever come across in my skull.... However, not everyone is built the same way. I truly believe "Evil" has to reside in you to begin with, or "Mental Illness" which ever be the case. Some people may be mentally ill and may not even really know it >(Although killing innocent people is never justified IMO no matter how "ill" you may be). "Evil" people know they are evil and will do anything to carry out the evil deed.... This is an ongoing sick/ twisted trend and unfortunately evil people still will continue to walk among you all you can do is protect yourself and your family the absolute best you know how.
I for one can state with fairly good confidence that playing a realistic game helps in using a specific rifle. For example, before I went to basic, I played the game America's Army for maybe 20 hours or so.
That game had an accurate simulation of the infantry qualification range at Fort Benning, and you had to actually make expert at that range in order to be issued a sniper rifle in the actual FPS. So I had to try for over an hour before I finally managed to hit the 36 targets.
In real life, I found that in fact part of the Army manual is wrong. You can still peg a 300m target if you "click" on it rather than give it a slow trigger squeeze over 1 second. I didn't have any trouble hitting 38/40 in real life, though I still needed training in details like how to hold the rifle and so on.
That game had an accurate simulation of the infantry qualification range at Fort Benning, and you had to actually make expert at that range in order to be issued a sniper rifle in the actual FPS. So I had to try for over an hour before I finally managed to hit the 36 targets.
In real life, I found that in fact part of the Army manual is wrong. You can still peg a 300m target if you "click" on it rather than give it a slow trigger squeeze over 1 second. I didn't have any trouble hitting 38/40 in real life, though I still needed training in details like how to hold the rifle and so on.
Cesiumsponge
Member
A ten nation study shows no correlation in murders and video games. Let's not throw some other freedom under the bus to save our own. It's cowardly.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/w...-no-link-between-video-games-and-gun-murders/
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/w...-no-link-between-video-games-and-gun-murders/
Romeo 33 Delta
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2011
- Messages
- 402
Alaska444 may be onto something here ... but there's still something missing.
At 68 years of age, having been a gun owner for 58 of them ... and an Infantry Combat Vet (got to my unit January 6th, 1968) and product of the Army's "more effective" training system I have to point this out.
With the exception of my combat experiences, I have never before or after used any of my firearms to threaten, wound or kill a human being. The reason is that I have a properly formed conscience, moral compass if you prefer and understand that my God has commanded me to "do no murder". I also realize that the society in which I live has passed laws against that behavior.
Some individuals do harm to others because a mental condition renders them incapable of understanding right from wrong. Other individuals do harm to because they lack a moral compass or are truly evil.
My point is that it is not the training videos or silhouette targets that creates a propensity to murder or violence because neither I nor millions and millions of my fellow Vets have seen fit to murder. Further, neither has this been the case for even more millions and millions of non-veterans. Thus, I'm not inclined to blame the video games either ....
BUT, given exposure to the same external stimuli and circumstances and situations there is a difference in behavior and it is precisely this difference which needs be the focus of the debate. Why is it that one person reacts negatively while another peson does not? This is difficult and people and politicans like easy solutions, hence the demand to ban certain guns, to ban certain magazines ... but it doesn't get to the root of the problem. For my part, I'm going to start demanding that my representatives refocus the debate to the failings of the mental health system. Afterall, wasn't the first recorded murder the result of jealousy and wasn't the weapon of choice a rock or a club? It sure wasn't an "assault rifle with a 30 round clip"!
At 68 years of age, having been a gun owner for 58 of them ... and an Infantry Combat Vet (got to my unit January 6th, 1968) and product of the Army's "more effective" training system I have to point this out.
With the exception of my combat experiences, I have never before or after used any of my firearms to threaten, wound or kill a human being. The reason is that I have a properly formed conscience, moral compass if you prefer and understand that my God has commanded me to "do no murder". I also realize that the society in which I live has passed laws against that behavior.
Some individuals do harm to others because a mental condition renders them incapable of understanding right from wrong. Other individuals do harm to because they lack a moral compass or are truly evil.
My point is that it is not the training videos or silhouette targets that creates a propensity to murder or violence because neither I nor millions and millions of my fellow Vets have seen fit to murder. Further, neither has this been the case for even more millions and millions of non-veterans. Thus, I'm not inclined to blame the video games either ....
BUT, given exposure to the same external stimuli and circumstances and situations there is a difference in behavior and it is precisely this difference which needs be the focus of the debate. Why is it that one person reacts negatively while another peson does not? This is difficult and people and politicans like easy solutions, hence the demand to ban certain guns, to ban certain magazines ... but it doesn't get to the root of the problem. For my part, I'm going to start demanding that my representatives refocus the debate to the failings of the mental health system. Afterall, wasn't the first recorded murder the result of jealousy and wasn't the weapon of choice a rock or a club? It sure wasn't an "assault rifle with a 30 round clip"!
Habeed, not only availability of guns, but also availability of video games. I'm an avid gamer, and from what I understand the monthly subscriptions for playing World of Warcraft in Asia are significantly lower than they are in the US, for the sake of getting subscription numbers.
And yes, America's Army is the game I was referring to. Although I had more than 20 hours under my belt before I shot the 9mm AR
And yes, America's Army is the game I was referring to. Although I had more than 20 hours under my belt before I shot the 9mm AR
+1, going back to the first murder, it was indeed God that spent several thousand years bringing the remedy, but one that America in the last few decades has progressively dismissed and excluded from our society. We have gone from a Judeo-Christian heritage and culture to a secular humanist society in the last 50 to 60 years.
As a Christian myself, I have a lot of personal opinions on where we have gone wrong and why we are seeing these events, but simply put, what do you expect when you eliminate God from our culture? Embracing the work of the devil, is it any wonder he rears his ugly head in such events? In any case, I won't proselytize, but that is a consequence of getting rid of God. It's not just video games alone, it is the entire fabric of our society today.
Lastly, once again, why is the Army spending 50 million dollars on video games to teach soldiers how to respond to combat? Are their data sources all classified? I doubt it. I guess pilots in flight simulators don't effect performance either. Sorry, but I was under the impression that in stressful situations we respond with muscle memory and basic training over and over again. Stating that sitting in front of a video game that graphically reflects death at your hands and thinking it won't have any influence on how folks react does not reflect that facts of how humans respond.
You say that this is how we will respond. Well, the people going out and commiting planned mass murder attacks aren't "responding". They are acting, and others are responding. I also highly doubt every person who plays Need For Speed will start racing every time they pass a car with a body kit in real life, same applies to FPS games.
I also disagree with your notion that religion has anything to do with this. Immorality is not limited to the non-religious, and even someone who does not believe in a deity can have morals. I don't want to debate religion on this forum, but I want to make it very clear that just because someone doesn't have the same beliefs doesn't mean they don't have a sense of right and wrong.
Actually, the topic has entered on what is causing all of these events and indeed, folks can and do have convictions outside of the Christian community. No one disputes that but when you look at the society I grew up with in the 50's and 60's, we have strayed greatly.
My mother was a virgin when she married according to her own testimony and that was the expectation of all of her friends in the 1950's. My mother is not a Christian sad to say, but she was greatly influenced in her values by the Judeo-Christian ethos that permeated our American culture in that time. Remember, we had school prayer openly until the early 60's. The Bible was not castigated as it is today. Prayer started each school day. I learned the golden rule in school. The ten commandments were taught and adhered in public schools.
Today, what is the moral foundation of US kids in school? Well, just about whatever folks want. There are no more absolutes, no more universal agreed upon morals. To each his own. Well, some kids take it to the extreme and we end up with tragic events as last week.
I would venture that even the old timers who are not Christians remember the Christian values taught in our schools in the 40's, 50's and 60's that are no longer taught to these generations. Why would it not have an influence my friend?
I readily understand the gospel of Christ is now openly rejected in our society. I believe we are paying the consequences of rejected God and His Holy Word and many including me consider this a primary cause of the tragic shooting events we saw last week. It is much more than video games and movies my friend.
Last edited:
HoosierQ
Member
The reason the so few (apparently) WWII soldiers did not "shoot to kill" is not based on moral compass. First of all, I think it wise to be skeptical of those numbers. But, assuming they are true, WWII was such a huge war that an enormous number of men never saw the enemy. Also, in those days, the Army was just getting over many generations of the whole "wait 'til you see the whites of their eyes" type of training. So a lot of those vets didn't fire their rifles at all of they could not see the enemy.
Army doctrine changed after WWII and they began to employ fields of fire for individual soldiers in addition to crew served weapons. This served to keep the enemy pinned down so that men could manuever. This was almost exclusively the job of a crew served weapon in the second world war.
Add to that fact that Vietnam forward, air mobility changed doctrine in such a way that men are placed quickly into the face of the enemy when he's located. In WWII, you were holding down your stretch of "the line" and if there were few or no Germans there, well lucky you.
I would also suggest that the number of soldiers that shot at the enemy would have varied a great deal from battle to battle, theatre to theatre. I am pretty sure the guys assualting Casino shot back.
Army doctrine changed after WWII and they began to employ fields of fire for individual soldiers in addition to crew served weapons. This served to keep the enemy pinned down so that men could manuever. This was almost exclusively the job of a crew served weapon in the second world war.
Add to that fact that Vietnam forward, air mobility changed doctrine in such a way that men are placed quickly into the face of the enemy when he's located. In WWII, you were holding down your stretch of "the line" and if there were few or no Germans there, well lucky you.
I would also suggest that the number of soldiers that shot at the enemy would have varied a great deal from battle to battle, theatre to theatre. I am pretty sure the guys assualting Casino shot back.
Cesiumsponge
Member
Considering crime has been on a 30-year low and realistic video games have only been around for a decade, one could erroneously argue video games are responsible for lower gun crimes. Maybe we can blame comic books again.
The fact of the matter is that enough variables exist that anyone can point at anything and blame that thing. Correlation is not causation.
The fact of the matter is that enough variables exist that anyone can point at anything and blame that thing. Correlation is not causation.
I agree about neither the games or the movies influencing normal people. But if someone is unbalanced, and has no social life other than sitting in front of the screen all day watching slasher movies and video games, an unbalanced mind may not be able to tell reality from fantasy. Don't forget you are talking about a person who for all intensive purposes was not socialized, had no friends , didn't play sports or have a girlfriend. He is not your normal person. Then to overexpose him to violence in any form, is a stupid thing to do.
And I may be selfish, but I if I had to choose between loosing something it would be violent movies that have no plot other than shedding as much blood as possible for the effect.
i heard another expert explain why this is done so much in movies latelly. Because he explained it's the last bastion of censorship that hasn't been taken away. They can't show T&A as readilly, but they can show somones head being blown off, so they over use the ability they have to get this by the censors.
If that's true it's merely a manipulation of the censorship laws. So you can't show virtual sex, but can show a gory bloody murder.
I really don't care if they stop making that kind of movie, or restrict people under 18 from seeing it. Perhaps showing 8 year old kids people being shot down in the streets or run down as in GTA, is a bad thing to show a kid. We are adults, but many people play these games with their kids, no one knows what effect this is going to have on a kid 10 years from now.
If the kid is a normal well adjusted kid it probablly won't have any effect, buy I know plenty of parents who won't let their 10 year old kids play violent video games. They just feel it sets a bad example. Each to their own. But if experts decide that they are going to write laws that are going effect all of us, I would prefer that it doesn't prioritize guns.
Let them worry about mentally ill people and not allowing kids to see or play games unless their parents buy the game and allow them to play or watch it. Which is worse, they have to do something, so why not choose the least harmful one, one that you can overcome if you choose in your home anyway.
One that the majority of us won't be affected by unless we choose it to. If you want to play the game and your over 21 no one can stop you, and the same holds true for movies.
Now if they stop them from producing them, then you have a court case similar to the "art vs porn", which would end up making a big splash and being overturned in the supreme court, like Larry Flynn did. So they get headlines and nothing changes.
There is too much money being made for any of these things to be stopped.
It's only a headline until the next headline. How many remember the congressman who was on the cover of every newspaper every day, until 9/11. Or what story bumbed OJ off the front page.It just takes time,
And what Alaska said is true, much of the training done on simulators today is proof that you can actually learn how to operate systems that are complicated, even fly a plane, from a computer screen
And I may be selfish, but I if I had to choose between loosing something it would be violent movies that have no plot other than shedding as much blood as possible for the effect.
i heard another expert explain why this is done so much in movies latelly. Because he explained it's the last bastion of censorship that hasn't been taken away. They can't show T&A as readilly, but they can show somones head being blown off, so they over use the ability they have to get this by the censors.
If that's true it's merely a manipulation of the censorship laws. So you can't show virtual sex, but can show a gory bloody murder.
I really don't care if they stop making that kind of movie, or restrict people under 18 from seeing it. Perhaps showing 8 year old kids people being shot down in the streets or run down as in GTA, is a bad thing to show a kid. We are adults, but many people play these games with their kids, no one knows what effect this is going to have on a kid 10 years from now.
If the kid is a normal well adjusted kid it probablly won't have any effect, buy I know plenty of parents who won't let their 10 year old kids play violent video games. They just feel it sets a bad example. Each to their own. But if experts decide that they are going to write laws that are going effect all of us, I would prefer that it doesn't prioritize guns.
Let them worry about mentally ill people and not allowing kids to see or play games unless their parents buy the game and allow them to play or watch it. Which is worse, they have to do something, so why not choose the least harmful one, one that you can overcome if you choose in your home anyway.
One that the majority of us won't be affected by unless we choose it to. If you want to play the game and your over 21 no one can stop you, and the same holds true for movies.
Now if they stop them from producing them, then you have a court case similar to the "art vs porn", which would end up making a big splash and being overturned in the supreme court, like Larry Flynn did. So they get headlines and nothing changes.
There is too much money being made for any of these things to be stopped.
It's only a headline until the next headline. How many remember the congressman who was on the cover of every newspaper every day, until 9/11. Or what story bumbed OJ off the front page.It just takes time,
And what Alaska said is true, much of the training done on simulators today is proof that you can actually learn how to operate systems that are complicated, even fly a plane, from a computer screen
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked