Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by chariot13, Jan 1, 2013.
So you think that if they go after videogames, people who play those games will be on their side? That sounds kind of dumb. I play violent videogames, I don't spend all day sitting on my butt, and them going after violent videogames despite the studies over decades that show no correlation between violent videogames and violent crime statistics both pissed me off and made them look out-of-touch, which is exactly the wrong look the NRA needs right now. It's like Penny Arcade said about it, it's like they are attacking the 1st Ammendment to protect the 2nd. Honestly, I was about to join the NRA, but after that snipe at videogames, I'm not 100% sure I want to now, still on the fence.
It can work, if people realise they're being treated like a baby. The first thing you learn as a parent to a newborn when they are getting pissy, is distract them. From whatever is upsetting them to instead that rattle, that funny face, whatever it takes so you can get some sleep. Except I dont care if any government sleeps when it dont care about our freedom.
With the millions of things intended to distract people nowadays, to keep them busy & always available, just so you don't think about what truly pisses you off. The key is to give you something to find solace in. In prison it might be a tv or a radio, or getting out one day. All it has to be is enough of something to make you think its worth not thinking about whatever is pissing you off & acting upon it. This is the real war that i don't think our forefathers either had to fight back then, or its possibly been compounded severely as our generation & future generations advance with 'technology'. Its a war for your mind to be compliant no matter how wrong the government becomes. Basic Psyops against citizens. Finding our rattle's.
No i dont think going after video games is the answer. I play video games with fake violence too. Just realising whats going on around us in the real world is more important than a video game is what im saying.
Exactly. Plenty of young people in the gun culture got interested via video games. The NRA was pretty out of touch on this.
Not to mention name checking Mortal Kombat. It's 2012, not 1992! The people who played Mortal Kombat as kids are nearly in their 40s now!
The anti gun lobby blames the type of gun instead of the person because they won a battle in the past by doing so. They use the distraction that it is the gun at fault. The NRA lost that battle when letting them know it was the individual that did it and not the 10's of millions of owners of the same type firearm, 'THAT DID NOT DO IT'. Logic doesn't matter in politics. Now the NRA i think doesn't know what to do because they can't blame the individual because they already lost on those grounds with the 94 AWB, so they are trying to use a distraction just like the anti's but they have stupidly picked video games. It doesn't work. Redcap is right but im hopeful of something greater working. The anti- gun lobby will always be drawn towards where they won a battle in the past at. Right now its semi auto's with 10+ rounds again. Next time it will be all semi auto's. Then handguns, then they will label hunting rifles like they did to semi auto's (now assualt weapons) but the hunting rifles will be labeled sniper rifles (anything that can hit a target 100+ yards away). Then just as england and elsewhere shotguns will be all that you can own. 2 rounds in the tube and one in the chamber. If people don't push back with equal or greater force, by whatever means 'neccesary', any force it takes to maintain our current freedoms, we will one day be where i say.
Some publications were referenced in one of the recent threads, with researchers concluding that there is in fact a connection. I haven't personally invested time in verifying much of it. But the real question is, if there is a connection between violent entertainment and violence in life, is it all banned in other developed countries ? Can one get violent video games in Switzerland, Germany, Sweden ? If so, then why is their violent crime lower than ours ?
They are better educated, about everything, including the value of life.
I don't think LaPierre's argument against video games should be judged in a vacuum.
The overall meaning of his message was clear to me, and is what bears scrutiny.
Many here have given props to the spoof and mockery of the "demand a plan" video by Hollywood celebs, due to the hypocrisy they display after their huge profits from portraying gun violence in their chosen profession.
Yet, how many of you have researched the gun-politics of game writers/marketers?
Doesn't Bill gates as well as the company he founded, Microsoft, support gun control? Yes they do.
Yet they are more than willing to profit tremendously off the sales of violent video games that depict guns, gun violence and gun deaths in their products.
As another example, I have an acquaintance in Vancouver B.C. that thinks our gun laws are horrible, and claims he has no use for guns at all.
Except for when he had to buy a couple of Gun Digest type reference books for his job.
You see, he works in the video game industry, and has a hand in creating the very games (and their violent depictions) you guys are defending.
He defends them also, as fantasy.
Regardless of the fact that they are an expression of fantasy that is available to anyone smart enough/old enough to turn on a game console or computer.
I contend (as does Mr. LaPierre) that we as a society (all over the world) have embraced extreme levels of violence as a form of entertainment.
Is that entertainment clearly delineated as fantasy?
And is everyone capable of distinguishing that delineation?
As we as a society search for reasons for tragedies like the Sandy Hook incident, we need to look closely at all the "whys" for it.
What Mr LaPierre's contention is/was, is that society's "norms" for entertainment and behavior need to be examined thoroughly before we start tossing our 2nd Amendment rights under the bus.
And I for one, agree with him.
I agree with some of that but I say no matter what the norm is in society & no matter how depraved even a great majority in society become, it is all the more reason for the few that are NOT depraved, to be well armed. For no reason ever should any further limit be placed on firearms, we should do away with the limits we have now for full auto's etc... especially since there seems to be more and more depraved people out there :funnypoint:
I think that.violent movies and video games do desensitize a young mind. I think it also gets them thinking about joining our armed forces, which is why there is a lot of information, tips and insight given by our armed forces.behind scenes to help further enhance the overall feel of the game and experience.
I also think movies and music play a big role in culture as well, take gang bangers for example. They idolize listen and watch those god awful movies and music glorifying gang life, drugs, fights, firearms and promiscuity.
They always have that cliche look that they all further perpetuate pass down to the next generation.
I was wondering when they changed the slogan to "Guns don't kill people, video games kill people".
It undermines their case, IMO.
If that were true then the NRA would be going after drity movies, sports, and fast food too.
This is pathetic.
The NRA is using the same pathetic scare tactics to blame video games that the anti's are using to blame the guns.
This is where the NRA and the Brady Campaign play on the same level.
Instead of focusing on real problems and solutions, they're going to go after a popular talking point. Distraction above action. Don't defend the guns, attack and blame another liberty.
Trying to take away peoples video games is at very least just as ridiculous as trying to take away guns.
It's sad to see how many self proclaimed liberty and freedom loving people will jump to take away anothers rights if they think it will lessen the argument against their own.
That is a tremendous understatement.
They're not trying to "take away" your video games. They're trying to get people to wake up and understand that violent video games depicting murder, warfare, and other forms of violent combat CAN have a negative effect on a young mind. There is a reason the game industry came up with their rating system - it's a voluntary rating system instead of having a government mandated rating system slapped onto them. Modern Warfare, Battlefield, Far Cry - etc - should NOT be played by young, impressionable minds. These are adult video games - they should treated either like rated R movies, or depending on the severity of the violence - maybe even treated like pornographic movies and kept in the adult realm. There are plenty of games that do NOT depict gory, graphic, realistic violence that are suitable for young kids.
There's no reason to expose children to such images, or to make such horrific violent entertainment a normal part of their life. Once my boy is old enough to play games - he'll be sticking with children's games - Angry Birds, Little Big Planet, Mario, etc - he's not going to be playing any of my more adult violent games until he's much older and has demonstrated his ability to differentiate real violence and death and make-believe violence and death. That age differs with every child - and the point that some of you are failing to realize is that the NRA, among others, are at their core calling on parents to be parents of their children and keep the violent entertainment away from them until they are ready. Mentally unstable or mentally handicapped people won't process that information the same way. These are people that already have problems separating fantasy and reality.
The NRA is doing what they can to push the focus away from the guns and toward sources of the violence - and it is very possible that violent games and movies can blur that line for some kids and adults. A kid who grows up playing Grand Theft Auto, Battlefield, and Saint's Row could very well have a different view on violence than one who was playing Mario Kart, Grand Turismo, and Wii Sports. I'm not saying violent video games are the ONLY factor, but they can be a factor in these violent crimes, in the same way that guns do make it easier for most people to kill others verses knives or clubs. Doesn't mean they need banned - just means that we, as a society, need to be educated and teach kids their proper uses.
I don't think it can be all blamed on video games alone but I do believe that they can contribute to the problem when added into the equation. Lack of parenting+mental instability+psychopathic medication+violent video game+access to AR15=mass shooting.
Insert any tool, chemical, device you want. It's not the fault of the method used, it's the person.
Fixed it fer ya.
Yet, keep in mind, we had mass killing well before video games were the buzz. Before video games and TV, we had "imagination", which is just as good as at warping someones psyche.
I'd like to shift responsibility to the individual. Pertaining choices, I'd add "lack of a solid, trusty Moral Compass + the belief his/her existence is over after death".
If there was one specific entity to blame, and I don't believe there is, it would be the drug pushers of America re: the Pharms. Much farther up the ladder than ANY video game BS. Of course, the NRA knows better than to tell the truth about Pharm drugs because the Pharm lobby makes the NRA lobby look like kids on a playground. Legal poison/drug pushers that write their own ticket, control what the FDA does, etc. When SHTF, Americans that cannot get their fix will have to be put down.
I have a friend who has melted his brain with Effexor. If he misses a couple days he goes into deep, deep depression and thoughts of suicide. I asked him how long his prescription is for, how many pills does he have. He said 30-45 days worth. After that, ie SHTF he'll just off himself.
How Many Pills Until Pharmageddon?
Separate names with a comma.