Nra press -- not bad, one epic fail

[Jonnin]

So far sounds like they want armed guards at schools and have offered to help train such.

 

However he totally flubbed and tried to blame video games.  First, games are a type of free speech, just as movies and music and other entertainment are.  They can be in poor taste, but they are protected and you do NOT fight for the 2nd by attacking the 1st.   Second, for every gun owner I know either online or real life, I know 10-20 gamers.   The % of idiots that snap due to video games compared to gamers is much, much, much lower than the % of idiots that snap and own a gun.   Third, movies are as bad or worse than the games, as are violent musical lyrics, so attacking the one form of media is dumb.  Also the news, which is basically just made up movie/entertainment, is also often graphic and violent. 

 

While I am happy with his gun related stance and commentary, the blame games stuff is total crap.

 

 

[PackinMama]

He attacked the music and movie industry too, not just video games.

[Jonnin]

Yes, I see that now.  The full text is lagging behind for me, I was only getting spotty one liner type updates but now I have the whole thing.

 

Still, same goes, its an attack on free speech that does not belong in the platform.   There is only ONE thing to blame here ....  the specific deranged individual and possibly his caretakers if any.

[QuietDan]

So far sounds like they want armed guards at schools and have offered to help train such.

 

However he totally flubbed and tried to blame video games.  First, games are a type of free speech, just as movies and music and other entertainment are.  They can be in poor taste, but they are protected and you do NOT fight for the 2nd by attacking the 1st.   Second, for every gun owner I know either online or real life, I know 10-20 gamers.   The % of idiots that snap due to video games compared to gamers is much, much, much lower than the % of idiots that snap and own a gun.   Third, movies are as bad or worse than the games, as are violent musical lyrics, so attacking the one form of media is dumb.  Also the news, which is basically just made up movie/entertainment, is also often graphic and violent. 

 

While I am happy with his gun related stance and commentary, the blame games stuff is total crap.

 

No. First person shooter video games need, at the very least, to be M for mature or something. They are not appropriate for impressionable youth. We are training a generation of unstable killers. 

 

The same goes for movies, which at least deal with PG-13 and R ratings. Ultra-violent movies, perhaps, ought to earn X Ratings. Easy enough to culturally adjust.

 

The first person shooter video-games and movies are very similar in content to the tools used to train soldiers, but without the moral and legal obligation training that surrounds soldier training.

 

Not all, but enough succumb to this. Some folks advocate for the First Amendment angle on this when in fact they are just video game aficionados or ultra-violent movie lovers making excuses for their own secret vices.

 

IMO.

Edited December 21, 2012 by QuietDan

[Jonnin]

They are marked M usually (?) or used to be?

If not, I accept that they should be marked appropriately according to the same standards as movies.

[PackinMama]

I agree 100% with QuietDan.

[Volzfan]

I place a lot of the blame on the media and the way they make these murderers famous. Thats what they are after! They want to be remembered for something even if it is for something horrible!

Treat them like a rape victim and never mention their names. A year from now most of us will not remember the names of the victims but the name of the shooter will be there. Take the OK City bombing. Everyone remembers Timothy McVeigh but try to name a single victim without using Google.

I also place some blame on the video games and movies but by themselves don't cause people to snap. I believe that some can't mentally handle the violence of these and those are the ones that need to be identified. The problem is that parents don't spend mear as much quality time with children these days and there are many more single parent homes that are struggling to get by further limiting that time. No parent wants to think that their child could possibly do anything like this but everytime it happens the one doing the shooting is someones child!

Whats the answer? I don't know. This is my opinion of where the blame falls and it's not the guns. McVeigh didn't use a gun but achieved a much bigger result than shooters.

[UncleJak]

While I do think that media, games, and entertainment are a big part of the problem, it is not the rating system that is the problem.  It is the parents who allow their children to play/watch despite the warnings.  Additionally, one set of parents controlling this is not enough.  ALL PARENTS must do this, otherwise kid will just see it somewhere else.  I do not think games, movies, etc are bad if handled properly.  But we cannot allow our youth to be subjected to this content.  It is everyones responsibility. 

[mikegideon]

I place a lot of the blame on the media and the way they make these murderers famous. Thats what they are after! They want to be remembered for something even if it is for something horrible!

Treat them like a rape victim and never mention their names. A year from now most of us will not remember the names of the victims but the name of the shooter will be there. Take the OK City bombing. Everyone remembers Timothy McVeigh but try to name a single victim without using Google.

I also place some blame on the video games and movies but by themselves don't cause people to snap. I believe that some can't mentally handle the violence of these and those are the ones that need to be identified. The problem is that parents don't spend mear as much quality time with children these days and there are many more single parent homes that are struggling to get by further limiting that time. No parent wants to think that their child could possibly do anything like this but everytime it happens the one doing the shooting is someones child!

Whats the answer? I don't know. This is my opinion of where the blame falls and it's not the guns. McVeigh didn't use a gun but achieved a much bigger result than shooters.

Wayne touched on that too. I watched the stream. It was a laundry list, that included video games and movies.

[R_Bert]

Now if we could combine this with what Billy Graham would tell Americans, then the problems would be illuminated.

 

It's a spiritual and moral compass problem, with implication/indictment of individual values in morality, ethics, character,honor, and sanctity of life and many others.

 

Its a "heart issue", not guns, health, safety, etc.

[G27]

I work in the entertainment industry, so if I may...

 

Anyone who thinks media doesn't influence them is a fool. The advertising industry spends almost $300 BILLION dollars annually because it WORKS. I know everyone wants to believe it only affects others, but media has an effect on all of us.

 

Now I'm not saying that someone playing violent games or watching violent movies is instantly more prone to violence, but to argue that our society as a whole - which glorifies violence - is somehow immune to the influence of media, when study after study has shown that advertising absolutely affects people, is simply denial. To what degree it influences us as individuals is up for debate, but we're all affected in some way.

[RobertNashville]

You are not incumbering "free speech" to keep such games and movies out of the hands of the children any more than you are by making child pornography illegal.

 

I'm not saying I necessarily agree that violent movies or video games and such should be controlled or banned or even that they are a problem (in fact, according to John Lott, at least I think it was him I heard say it, studies don't support this alleged connection between such games and violent acts); just saying that I don't see an 1St. Amendment problem with restrictions on this type of "speech".

[Jonnin]

You are not incumbering "free speech" to keep such games and movies out of the hands of the children any more than you are by making child pornography illegal.

 

I'm not saying I necessarily agree that violent movies or video games and such should be controlled or banned or even that they are a problem (in fact, according to John Lott, at least I think it was him I heard say it, studies don't support this alleged connection between such games and violent acts); just saying that I don't see an 1St. Amendment problem with restrictions on this type of "speech".

 

Unrelated.  The issue with kid porn is ... a kid was harmed making it, and for that reason alone it is a terrible thing.  No one is harmed in the making of a game.

 

Again, I agree the games should have age / maturity restrictions (and they already do).   The issue I have is a call to ban the games, or blame them (its on par with blaming the guns).    In this case, he was 20, and well past being of age to play a video game of any sort, so any age limits on media are not the problem (at 18 I think you can see *any* sort of legal film or game?). 

 

For the record, as I am not getting any younger, I started playing those things with wolf 3-d on a 386, when the first episode was freeware.   Graphics went gory in a hury time doom & heretic were out the were downright scary.  That was like 1993?  So 20 years of them and owning a fair number of firearms, and still no one dead from either hobby.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Jonnin

[Guest macmonkey]

Japan has games too violent for release in the US.  I'm afraid if games were so responsible they would be having a bigger problem than we are which just isn't the case.

[RobertNashville]

Unrelated.  The issue with kid porn is ... a kid was harmed making it, and for that reason alone it is a terrible thing.  No one is harmed in the making of a game.

 

Again, I agree the games should have age / maturity restrictions (and they already do).   The issue I have is a call to ban the games, or blame them (its on par with blaming the guns).    In this case, he was 20, and well past being of age to play a video game of any sort, so any age limits on media are not the problem (at 18 I think you can see *any* sort of legal film or game?). 

I think you missed my point which is that not all speech is protected speech and even speech that is protected can be controlled/restricted without violating the First Amendment.

 

If any real connection between violent video games (or movies or books, etc) and actual violence can be documented then such speech is not protected anymore than speech that incites rioting is protected.

Again, I'm not saying that their is such a connection or that such should be banned or controlled even if there is a connection but I don't see a First Amendment problem with the overall concept.

Edited December 21, 2012 by RobertNashville

[I_Like_Pie]

Japan has games too violent for release in the US.  I'm afraid if games were so responsible they would be having a bigger problem than we are which just isn't the case.

 

 

My sister and brother in law live in Tokyo and have for many years.  Having heard and seen the culture in person....that whole nation is a load of basketcase jackwagons.

Edited December 21, 2012 by I_Like_Pie

[strickj]

I work in the entertainment industry, so if I may...

 

Anyone who thinks media doesn't influence them is a fool. The advertising industry spends almost $300 BILLION dollars annually because it WORKS. I know everyone wants to believe it only affects others, but media has an effect on all of us.

 

Now I'm not saying that someone playing violent games or watching violent movies is instantly more prone to violence, but to argue that our society as a whole - which glorifies violence - is somehow immune to the influence of media, when study after study has shown that advertising absolutely affects people, is simply denial. To what degree it influences us as individuals is up for debate, but we're all affected in some way.

 

Apples and oranges. Or BS and peaches.

 

Companies pay millions to remind us to purchase the products we like, to try a new product that looks appealing or to advertise their services.

People were killing cops well before the NWA came along. Mario Brothers did not cause mass-turtle killings. Call Of Duty did not cause the 1996 school shooting in Washington. Street Fighter did not cause the Bath House bombings.

 

You're a music producer, correct? If entertainment is really the cause of this, then why don't you stop working in the industry that is causing it?

[Guest macmonkey]

My sister and brother in law live in Tokyo and have for many years.  Having heard and seen the culture in person....that whole nation is a load of basketcase jackwagons.

 

My wife lived there for 8 years and I heard different.  I'm sure we've all got them.

[RobertNashville]

...You're a music producer, correct? If entertainment is really the cause of this, then why don't you stop working in the industry that is causing it?

Whether his observation is correct or not, I don't see any reason to get on your high horse with him; do you even know what kind of music he produces?

If it's "I want to rape you and kill you" stuff then yeah he probably should quit..I would.

If it's "I've got tear in my ears from lying on my back in my bed as i cry over you leaving me" type stuff then I don't think that's a problem.

[Guest 270win]

He was right that every school needs armed security.  I do not think video games or other entertainment should be restricted or blamed by the government, but parents need to watch and see what their kids are doing.

[Jonnin]

I think you missed my point which is that not all speech is protected speech and even speech that is protected can be controlled/restricted without violating the First Amendment.

 

If any real connection between violent video games (or movies or books, etc) and actual violence can be documented then such speech is not protected anymore than speech that incites rioting is protected.

Again, I'm not saying that their is such a connection or that such should be banned or controlled even if there is a connection but I don't see a First Amendment problem with the overall concept.

Well, I agree with all that.

 

And I will even disprove it for you and put that to rest.

Number of people that own a first person shooter game, estimated:

about 50+ million -- worldwide (added up sales of several popular game titles).

Number of shooters who spent a great deal of time playing these games:

about 10.  Of those 10 the most notable were the columbine shooters, IIRC?  And, of those 10, as far as we know the guy last week was not playing these games (?).

 

Similar numbers can be found for number of cars stolen to number of grand theft auto players --- there is no correlation.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Jonnin

[mikegideon]

Whether his observation is correct or not, I don't see any reason to get on your high horse with him; do you even know what kind of music he produces?

If it's "I want to rape you and kill you" stuff then yeah he probably should quit..I would.

If it's "I've got tear in my ears from lying on my back in my bed as i cry over you leaving me" type stuff then I don't think that's a problem.

He does too much stuff for me to keep up with. I don't think any of his work product promotes rapin' and killin'. If it does, he snuck it past me. Just not in his personality.

[MacGyver]

I really see this as a family and community problem as opposed to a government problem.  Like Hurricane Katrina, there are times when we expect way too much of our government (and they are complicit in gladly taking on the role of sugar daddy.)  Our society has this nice shellac of modernity and sophistication, but at our core, we are as broken as we've ever been.  In fact, with our modern disregard for things like personal responsibility and the public embracing acceptance of any position under the stars, we may have set ourselves up for an even harder fall.  When you strip away that outer veneer, you see quickly that we're not really at all as sophisticated as we thought.  The things that we think are important really show themselves to be worthless.

 

The media and entertainment companies are producing exactly what the public wants and demands.  You're not going to legislate away brokeness.  As long as there is a demand for violent, hyper-sexualized content, there are plenty of people and companies willing to produce and provide exactly that.  And, they will always continue to push the boundaries just a little bit further.

 

But like the failure we saw in Hurricane Katrina, we blamed the wrong group.  This wasn't a government failure, because it wasn't something the governement could reasonably fix.  It was a family and community failure.  When you don't care about anything more than yourself, it shouldn't surprise you when no one around you does either.  We're asking the government to do something which they cannot do.  You cannot legislate brokeness.

 

There is certainly something I can do, though.  I can be involved with my family and community.  I can care about my neighbor.  I can monitor what games my kids play and what movies they watch, just as I should really regulate what I play and what I watch.  I can surround my family with people who support those same values in their families.  I'm not going to act surprised when media companies act according to Adam Smith's laws and provide content for which there is an audience.  Hopefully they'll not be surprised when I fail to partake of it.

 

None of my three children are old enough to shoot, yet.  But, two of the three already know what not to do with a gun.  I don't expect someone else to teach them this.  That's my job.

 

Maybe it's my libertarian roots showing through.  Maybe it's my belief that the governement is incapable of creating value.  Maybe it's something I've not even thought of yet.  But, I don't expect the government to keep me safe from all harm and provide for every need that I have.  But I do expect it stay out of the way while I do it.

[G27]

Japan has games too violent for release in the US.  I'm afraid if games were so responsible they would be having a bigger problem than we are which just isn't the case.

Different cultural entirely, compounded by a totalitarian-like band on ownership: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's not the game, but the lack of "parenting" and everything R_Bert said. Parents have a hard time doing their

primary job when society gets in the way.

 

The first person shooter, or whatever you call them(been a long since I played any of those games) isn't the

problem, but can be part of it, like many other things in life. Good and evil rest right smack dab in the middle

of the target, and it appears every once in a while, evil wins.

 

Just like when Tipper Gore got on her rampage about certain types of music, she missed the whole point she

tried to make.