Fox Saying Violent Video Games Training Kids to Kill (About Newtown Incident)

#101JonicitePosted 12/17/2012 11:36:52 AM


The founding fathers also wanted us to have guns to protect us from our own government and from outside invaders. This country would not be safer with no guns, there are hundreds of thousands of people with guns who do not kill. Just because a psychopath kills people with a gun does not mean that everyone who owns a gun should have to get rid of theirs. We should be figuring out how to make our school/public security better and our mental health institutes better.


Ack, that wall of text was getting to be a bit much. I don't think the Founding Fathers' entire line of the thought for firearms was protection from just our government, but I'm going to move on and we'll just disagree on this point.

Let's go through a little story time and take the CT shooting into a world where the teachers were armed. Scum comes in and starts shooting. Teacher 1 starts shooting at Scum. Teacher 2 sees two people shooting and takes a 50% chance and starts firing away. Teacher 3 sees the battle and hops in. Police arrive and start shooting at everyone. That's what a fully armed populous would look like.

We, as a people, are pretty stupid. I saw some data recently that suggested most kids today can't read outside of an 8th grade level. So yes, I don't think stupid people should have guns; no more than I want stupid people to drive cars. However, drivers at least have to go through a license process which, surprisingly, does weed out the garden gnomes. Gun folk have a stupid low bar.

Ack, before I get lost in my post... if one psychopath goes on a rampage with an assault rifle, why shouldn't we have a debate about their future in our country. How many more of these do we need to have before it's a national issue? Two a month? 100 kids? You tell me where the line is so I can prepare myself for the body count. You want to hunt? Fine. You don't need an assault rifle for that. That's my entire point. There is no reason for them in this country, and we're just going to see more kids dying if we choose to do nothing. I hate seeing people die in vain. (vane?)
---
PSN Alias: EmailFail CoD Clan: D3TH
---
#102badbutttuesdayPosted 12/17/2012 11:39:36 AM
I didn't bother to read all of it so this may have been said.


The people who brought us the Simpsons is taking the high ground and blaming media... brilliant. I can't wait till my son is old enough to choke just like Homer. And when I'm in jail for child abuse I can blame Fox.
#103Prototype_1Posted 12/17/2012 11:50:05 AM
ZodiacKillerJr posted...
They are kind of right...

It desensatises children from violence, that's why violent games are rated for Adults. On top of this, Al Queda actually uses Call of Duty as a training device for it's soldiers (one reason why one of our soldiers can kill hundreds of theirs)

I totally hate those who say video games are bad because they're violent. I say it's a parents responsibility to know when their child is mature enough for a game that is violent. But sadly parents are letting toddlers play these games.


Totally agree with this. I have played video games, violent and non-violent ones for a long time. My first console was an Atari 2600 Master System when I was 4. I had an original NES at 5. I have played games on every major console released in the US from NES to Genesis to NEO-Geo to Atari Jaguar to Dreamcast. I am 30 years old and have never been playing a game and thought to my self "Gee, I think I will obtain a semi-automatic rifle, get in my car, and shoot kids in an elementary school", ever. Maybe there is a desensitizing attribute to video games, but there is a psychological aspect to those who take a weapon into their hands and perform an act of violence like what occurred on Friday. FOX News is just trying to spin this into a frenzy and get things that they and the right-wing religious fanatics want, to take the problem away from availability of semi-automatic rifles, hand guns, and mental illness and put it on something that has little to no relationship to ths actual problem, video games. The Columbine shooting was also focused on video games and heavy metal music. I do not know if the Virginia Tech shooting was spun in the direction of video games or not. But what I am getting at is that this is not the first time this has occurred. And it will not be the last. As long as people can get their hands on weapons without having to pass some kind of psychological evaluation or anger management type evaluation, this will continue to plague our nation, our freedoms, and our way of life. I am not preaching for a reversal of the 2nd amendment in anyway, shape, or form. The right to bear arms is not in question. Its the individuals that are allowed to receive those arms and the types of arms available to them.
---
PSN ID - Ho-Runner
Hey! How -- ah, these pretzels suck... So how's your day been, buddy? - Handsome Jack
#104badbutttuesdayPosted 12/17/2012 11:57:04 AM
Prototype_1 posted...
ZodiacKillerJr posted...
They are kind of right...

It desensatises children from violence, that's why violent games are rated for Adults. On top of this, Al Queda actually uses Call of Duty as a training device for it's soldiers (one reason why one of our soldiers can kill hundreds of theirs)

I totally hate those who say video games are bad because they're violent. I say it's a parents responsibility to know when their child is mature enough for a game that is violent. But sadly parents are letting toddlers play these games.


Totally agree with this. I have played video games, violent and non-violent ones for a long time. My first console was an Atari 2600 Master System when I was 4. I had an original NES at 5. I have played games on every major console released in the US from NES to Genesis to NEO-Geo to Atari Jaguar to Dreamcast. I am 30 years old and have never been playing a game and thought to my self "Gee, I think I will obtain a semi-automatic rifle, get in my car, and shoot kids in an elementary school", ever. Maybe there is a desensitizing attribute to video games, but there is a psychological aspect to those who take a weapon into their hands and perform an act of violence like what occurred on Friday. FOX News is just trying to spin this into a frenzy and get things that they and the right-wing religious fanatics want, to take the problem away from availability of semi-automatic rifles, hand guns, and mental illness and put it on something that has little to no relationship to ths actual problem, video games. The Columbine shooting was also focused on video games and heavy metal music. I do not know if the Virginia Tech shooting was spun in the direction of video games or not. But what I am getting at is that this is not the first time this has occurred. And it will not be the last. As long as people can get their hands on weapons without having to pass some kind of psychological evaluation or anger management type evaluation, this will continue to plague our nation, our freedoms, and our way of life. I am not preaching for a reversal of the 2nd amendment in anyway, shape, or form. The right to bear arms is not in question. Its the individuals that are allowed to receive those arms and the types of arms available to them.


"Right wing religious fanatics" is quoted from your post... perfect

There have been 10's if not 100,s if not a billion people killed because of religion. The U.S. is still fighting a religious war right now. It may not be on the U.S. side but it is on the other.

the thing that has desensitized me to death and killing is the news coverage of war my entire 38 years of life.
#105the_grey_bushPosted 12/17/2012 12:01:20 PM
why is it that fox gets to say "don't blame guns cause of one nutjob that went crazy" but we don't get to say "don't blame video games cause of one nutjob that went crazy"? oh, cause they're hypocrites.
---
when i asked you if you knew what a rhetorical question was, that was a rhetorical question.
#106poppen695Posted 12/17/2012 12:01:30 PM
Lodiss posted...
poppen695 posted...
I would never put myself in that situation. I'm not a criminal. Again, stupid argument on your part. However, send a government employee to my house and have him tell me "we are here to take all your guns because there is a new law saying you can't have them" and yes...someone will get shot that day.


So in other words, you're above the law. If the law is a bad law, you elect to ignore it. Yeah, guys like you NEVER have run-ins with cops.

Do you hear yourself? Nobody "puts themselves" in the situation of a police confrontation. Sometimes things just happen.

You get rear ended and someone smashes your tail light. The next day, on your way to have it replaced, a cop pulls you over because of the busted tail light. You fancy yourself a "real man", so you felt the need to take a pistol to the garage.

The cop notices you are carrying, and asks you to step out of the car with your hands up, as he has been trained to do.

What now? Do you argue with the cop about the second amendment, or do you put the gun on the ground and back away like you're told? Or do you go out in a hail of bullets screaming about tyranny?

Personally, I would hope you choose the third option.


I'm not above the law. You are not above the constitution. My second amendment right, which is inaliable (that means you can't take it away, for those dense lefty types that like to try and twist the constitution to their liking) means you will not make a law that takes away my right to be a responsible adult gun owner, and if you try to, you will get shot. Your hypothetical is again, rubbish stupidity (as expected). I live in Louisiana, a state that understands the fundamentals of gun ownership and repesects fully the right to carry. I have been stopped by the police for speeding 5 years ago. The officer asked if I had a firearm in the car, I said "of course" and he responded "smart man".
#107Hales69Posted 12/17/2012 12:05:03 PM
I didn't read all of this thread so maybe someone else has said this already but this kind of thing really annoys me. The media(especially the right wing media) are all too quick to look for a scapegoat whenever anything awful happens. Guy walks into a school and shoots a bunch of kids? He must play violent video games! Or listen to heavy metal! Something must have corrupted him!

Which is of course BS. The fact is that some people out there are just messed up. If anything has corrupted them it'll be their upbringing, or the company they keep, or any number of things. What it so the is a video game. If someone has it in them to do something horrible, they'll do it regardless of what music they listen to or what game they play. Some people just don't work properly.

I live in the U.K and a few years back, in Leicester(which is where I live) a boy tortured another boy to death, which is horrible, obviously. I remember the media were all over it, saying the boy had played Manhunt(which was making headlines at the time) for hours on end and that's what gave him the idea. It turned out that the kid who had been killed was the gamer, and the other boy had never even played Manhunt, but the media didn't care. Manhunt was an easy thing to blame.

In fact, this led to ITV broadcasting a 'Tonight with Trevor McDonald' special about video game violence, which was one of the most one sided pieces of journalism I've ever seen. All these people crying about how the horror of video games is 'destroying our kids' and not a single person to provide a counter argument. What boll**ks
---
I have a man crush on Charlie Brooker!
#108Prototype_1Posted 12/17/2012 12:05:43 PM
badbutttuesday posted...
Prototype_1 posted...
ZodiacKillerJr posted...
They are kind of right...

It desensatises children from violence, that's why violent games are rated for Adults. On top of this, Al Queda actually uses Call of Duty as a training device for it's soldiers (one reason why one of our soldiers can kill hundreds of theirs)

I totally hate those who say video games are bad because they're violent. I say it's a parents responsibility to know when their child is mature enough for a game that is violent. But sadly parents are letting toddlers play these games.


Totally agree with this. I have played video games, violent and non-violent ones for a long time. My first console was an Atari 2600 Master System when I was 4. I had an original NES at 5. I have played games on every major console released in the US from NES to Genesis to NEO-Geo to Atari Jaguar to Dreamcast. I am 30 years old and have never been playing a game and thought to my self "Gee, I think I will obtain a semi-automatic rifle, get in my car, and shoot kids in an elementary school", ever. Maybe there is a desensitizing attribute to video games, but there is a psychological aspect to those who take a weapon into their hands and perform an act of violence like what occurred on Friday. FOX News is just trying to spin this into a frenzy and get things that they and the right-wing religious fanatics want, to take the problem away from availability of semi-automatic rifles, hand guns, and mental illness and put it on something that has little to no relationship to ths actual problem, video games. The Columbine shooting was also focused on video games and heavy metal music. I do not know if the Virginia Tech shooting was spun in the direction of video games or not. But what I am getting at is that this is not the first time this has occurred. And it will not be the last. As long as people can get their hands on weapons without having to pass some kind of psychological evaluation or anger management type evaluation, this will continue to plague our nation, our freedoms, and our way of life. I am not preaching for a reversal of the 2nd amendment in anyway, shape, or form. The right to bear arms is not in question. Its the individuals that are allowed to receive those arms and the types of arms available to them.


"Right wing religious fanatics" is quoted from your post... perfect

There have been 10's if not 100,s if not a billion people killed because of religion. The U.S. is still fighting a religious war right now. It may not be on the U.S. side but it is on the other.

the thing that has desensitized me to death and killing is the news coverage of war my entire 38 years of life.


Oh I know that it is quoted in my previous post. Think about it, FOX News is a news source from the right point of view (and MSNBC is from the left point of view), which is also the more religious point of view, and more towards 2nd amendment rights statistically speaking. I am in total agreement with you that religion is the cause of the most loss of life in wars or conflicts. And it may not be a true statement but it may as well be that if you are from the Bible Belt, when you are born you are given a Bible and a gun. Sure its a stereotype, but its a true one since most of the religious gun totters in this country are from that area of the nation.
---
PSN ID - Ho-Runner
Hey! How -- ah, these pretzels suck... So how's your day been, buddy? - Handsome Jack
#109melbye80Posted 12/17/2012 12:08:08 PM
Gun-control=bad because humans and not the guns are responsible, but blaming games is OK?
#110JonicitePosted 12/17/2012 12:08:23 PM
poppen695 posted...
Lodiss posted...
poppen695 posted...
I would never put myself in that situation. I'm not a criminal. Again, stupid argument on your part. However, send a government employee to my house and have him tell me "we are here to take all your guns because there is a new law saying you can't have them" and yes...someone will get shot that day.


So in other words, you're above the law. If the law is a bad law, you elect to ignore it. Yeah, guys like you NEVER have run-ins with cops.

Do you hear yourself? Nobody "puts themselves" in the situation of a police confrontation. Sometimes things just happen.

You get rear ended and someone smashes your tail light. The next day, on your way to have it replaced, a cop pulls you over because of the busted tail light. You fancy yourself a "real man", so you felt the need to take a pistol to the garage.

The cop notices you are carrying, and asks you to step out of the car with your hands up, as he has been trained to do.

What now? Do you argue with the cop about the second amendment, or do you put the gun on the ground and back away like you're told? Or do you go out in a hail of bullets screaming about tyranny?

Personally, I would hope you choose the third option.


I'm not above the law. You are not above the constitution. My second amendment right, which is inaliable (that means you can't take it away, for those dense lefty types that like to try and twist the constitution to their liking) means you will not make a law that takes away my right to be a responsible adult gun owner, and if you try to, you will get shot. Your hypothetical is again, rubbish stupidity (as expected). I live in Louisiana, a state that understands the fundamentals of gun ownership and repesects fully the right to carry. I have been stopped by the police for speeding 5 years ago. The officer asked if I had a firearm in the car, I said "of course" and he responded "smart man".


Constitution doesn't say diddly about your right to own high powered assault rifles OR AMMO. It simply says you have the right to bear arms. Nothing more, and nothing less. Additionally, before calling people dense about constitutional analysis, remember that any Amendment can be changed with a new Amendment. Regardless of what you think. If you're willing to murder people to have guns, that's your problem. Don't hide behind the Bill of Rights to justify your obsession with guns.
---
PSN Alias: EmailFail CoD Clan: D3TH
---