lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Virginia Tech blame game
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 04-29-2007, 01:33 PM   #1
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Virginia Tech blame game

As is the case every time someone carries out an act of unspeakable evil, people desperately look for a convenient scapegoat, pointing fingers in every direction - to the point of hilarity.

Who'd have thought the shooting was the result of Space Laws, colleges where students major in English, and, of course, the Jews? Read and discover who to blame for the Virginia Tech massacre!

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 01:55 PM   #2
steven
^I'm with Genius^
 
steven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Doesn't matter. The question u should be asking is "where r u?"
Posts: 2,602
Although I haven't completely read the list, I know I can safely say most of these comments are completely bull.

Quote:
"It’s the hippies’ fault."
How in the name of all that is holy, do hippie's cause a murder masscure? They believe about freedom, aliens and goofy government conspiracys for heaven sake.

And it goes on to blame the victims of the massacure... Am I the only one who see's a problem with this? Do people even think before they say these things?


Make love, not toast.
steven is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 02:43 PM   #3
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Although I haven't completely read the list, I know I can safely say most of these comments are completely bull.
That's kinda the whole idea - they're crazy. They're even more

I haven't visited too many of the links yet, but I've been told they're even crazier. My favourite so far:
Quote:
Blame massacre on PC

Regarding the massacre at Virginia Tech by the student gunman, Cho, it is amazing that his suitemates were apparently unable to recognize Cho's anti-social personality and behaviors that he allegedly exhibited on a daily basis.
Cho's roommate described him as expressionless and non-engaging, and that he had no friends nor made telephone calls. He mostly sat at his computer putting together documents.
No doubt Cho's nonjudgmental roommates, products of the current trend of political correctness that assigns equal validity to all viewpoints and behaviors and exhorts college students to refrain from making any judgments, rendered them constitutionally incapable of recognizing Cho's anti-social personality and acting appropriately.
Isn't it possible that a suite full of college men could have confronted Cho, and this massacre might have been averted?
Political correctness only helps to create evil persons like Cho.
May I ask what 'political correctness' and failing to notice that a roommate needs psychiatric help have to do with each other?

Oh, and as a side note, many students and faculty members did worry about Cho. The ignorance of this woman, and her readiness to use a tragedy she obviously knows nothing about to further her agenda, is frightening.

This one is crazy, too. Apparently, the blame of the massacre lies with an innocent woman who happened to have broken up with Cho. Who'd have known.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 04:05 PM   #4
Davinq
I wear a fez now
 
Davinq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 2,442
Current Game: Portal
Good Lord... after reading that, I can no longer take this whole situation seriously. I mean, it's probably LF's fault too!

Davinq is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 04:26 PM   #5
Jediphile
Persona non grata
 
Jediphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,452
This just so sad on so many levels...

Honestly, how the hatemongers exploit the general ignorance to peddle their nonsense just makes me cringe, and not in a good way...

Somebody should file a lawsuit for slander, really. I mean, that's US they're talking about!! We all play videogames. Yet I don't see all of us shooting people left and right. Simple statistics alone will reveal this people as the liars they are - how many gamers are there, and how many crazed shooters are there? Thank you...

Now kindly shut your mouth, Dr. Phil, and try to speak only about stuff you actually know anything about!

It's like they say, nothing ruins a good discussion as much as someone who actually knows what he's talking about...


"It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built" - Kreia

Visit my KotOR blog at Deadly Forums.
Jediphile is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 05:10 PM   #6
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Here's my favorite:


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 05:35 PM   #7
Negative Sun
Death to all but metal!
 
Negative Sun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tropical Scotland
Posts: 2,683
Current Game: NWN
Forum Veteran Folder extraordinaire LFN Staff Member Helpful! 
I'm sure the people he killed's families are having a good chuckle about this too...



"I killed a man cause he killed my goat."
Negative Sun is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 05:43 PM   #8
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
As someone who's suffered from some pretty serious mental illness and have tonnes of 'crazy' friends, not to mention that I'm seriously considering psychiatry as a profession, I personally find the attack on psychiatry to be the worst one so far. Such a stigmatized and at the same time life-saving practice does not need more ignorance-induced attacks upon it.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 07:07 PM   #9
zelda 41
Loop Zoop
 
zelda 41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,546
Current Game: FFX HD/Persona 3 Portable
D
Quote:
It’s Simon Cowell’s fault.
lol


zelda 41 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 08:17 PM   #10
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Shame. I thought this topic would lead me to a website where you get to actually play a game where you get to blame people.
===
Quote:
Somebody should file a lawsuit for slander, really. I mean, that's US they're talking about!! We all play videogames. Yet I don't see all of us shooting people left and right. Simple statistics alone will reveal this people as the liars they are - how many gamers are there, and how many crazed shooters are there? Thank you...
Acutally, I disagree. Violent video games will not go and turn people into killers, but they could act as a strongly dehumanizing agent.

I mean, it's logical. If you hear that someone is killed in real life, it's horrifying. But, well, if you have just killed someone in-game before you hear that someone was killed in real life, well? You wouldn't care as much about that person.

For example, if I hear that a person died in Africa, I shrug my shoulders. Heh, if I hear that a person died in my hometown, or if an Iraqi man was killed in Iraq, I shrug my shoulders. They are just mere stats, they mean nothing. Add in it that it was likely I killed that same person in say, GTA or an Persian Gulf War game, and well, you can see the dehumanizing effect is there.

Violent video games can also increase the aggressiveness of the person playing the game, according to some studies. And there is the case of one school shooter using a video game to learn how to aim a gun.

Am I calling for a ban? No. I play violent video games too. I just want people to understand that the people claiming that violent video games are wrong...well, have a point. I would just consign it to a factor instead of something so important...
===
You know who I'm going to blame? The Mass Media.

The Mass Media is focusing so, so much on the tradegy that it provides fame to any copycat shooters. No, a person won't pick up a gun automatically if he hears that he gets on TV and gets his message and works read...but it would be a good impetus towards that direction. I called it "success", in that this person has gained lots of fame (or infamy), and well, frankly, it will be copied by other people upset with society, and wanting to destroy society as well as themselves.

The Mass Media have to do it, but maybe, ease off on the coverage, please? You guys are creating the trend you are deriding here...

Actually, now I'm worried of "lone wolf" terrorists/activists starting to use school shootings as a way to cause terror and strike at American infrastructure. It's easy to do a school shooting...if you just add at the begining of the shooting, "I'm doing this for the [so-and-so] cause! Death to America!" well, there we go, we just suffered the worst terrorist attack since 9/11. Combine the 'lone wolf' with the traditional coverage provided to school shootings, and we got ourselves a good recipe for lots of media coverage by the Mass Media, causing for more copycat school shootings/terror attacks. (Lone wolf attacks are bad...while they do less damage than when people band together...they also are harder to prevent.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-29-2007, 08:53 PM   #11
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
SilentScope actually make some good points. I could launch into how I and most others got desensitized by the violent video games and mass media, how the media doesn't ever care too much about the harm it does, as long as it makes money, and about a lot of other things. But I'll just go with saying that I agree with what he writes.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 12:14 AM   #12
Rogue15
Reconnaissance Specialist
 
Rogue15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Kaas City
Posts: 18,638
Current Game: The Old Republic
Roleplayer 10 year veteran! 
it was the weatherman's fault!


Battle is a pure form of expression. It is heart and discipline, reduced to movement and motion. In battle, the words are swept away, giving way to actions-- mercy, sacrifice, anger, fear. These are pure moments of expression.
Rogue15 is online now   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 12:32 AM   #13
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
The devil made him do it.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 01:31 AM   #14
Aash Li
Speak nerdy to me! ;P
 
Aash Li's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Some boring hole in Michigan..
Posts: 1,918
Current Game: LotRO, EQ2 & RoM
Hot Topic Starter 
Lots of people, and I do mean lots of people grew up watching cartoons like Buggs Bunny and tom and jerry, that are now deemed too violent for children. And I doubt anyone that watched them with the regularity that I did turned out to be psychotic killers. If they were going to be psychopaths, then taking away the cartoons and video games isnt going to help.


I clicked on this link expecting to find something about it being the conservative christians fault or something like that... O,o
Aash Li is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 05:36 AM   #15
Ztalker
Saving the world casually
 
Ztalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Normandy SR-2
Posts: 2,780
Forum Veteran 
Since when do groups get the blame for the failure of one?

It's so easy to blame groups...look at the Second World War. One single individual (Hitler) decided all the suffering in the world was to blame on one single group of people(Jews) , and systematically tried to erase these people from history.
This article is doing something similar...disgusting.

What happend at that school had possibly many mistakes or groups involved, but the main atagonist remains the shooter himself. He is the one to blame, he shot those people.

Ztalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 12:07 PM   #16
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
What happend at that school had possibly many mistakes or groups involved, but the main atagonist remains the shooter himself. He is the one to blame, he shot those people.
Course not. Who got the Shooter to shoot? If we change those factors, could we change the desicion of the Shooter?

After all, the Shooter is mentally ill. If the Shooter was not mentally ill, he wouldn't have done the crime, no? Therefore, is the Shooter responsible for the crime...if he did it only because he was mentally ill? Of course not, the Shooter has no control over him doing it, since he did it only because he had a mental illness. Since control is necessary to be responsible for anything, the Shooter therefore is not responsible for the crime, only the mental illness.

All you have to do is correct the mental illness, and the Shooter will not shoot. And all the other risk factors that made the Shooter shoot. Especially the Mass Media frenzy that started up the blame game at all the other School shootings that sort of encourage Shooters to shoot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 01:01 PM   #17
Ztalker
Saving the world casually
 
Ztalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Normandy SR-2
Posts: 2,780
Forum Veteran 
So we actually blame the murders there on Death Metal/Internet/Random group of people who had influence on the kid?

He commited these murders out of hate against the rich people, right? (Haven't seen the whole video/heard the whole story).
So if i'd stand up, for example, and say "I hate rubber ducks" and continue to kill of a bunch of people, would rubber ducks be the reason behind my killing spree?

'course not. It's the way I interpreted rubber ducks.
(A silly example, I know...)

Just like the shooter at Virginia Tech. He thought the rich/poor balance sucked in this world. I wouldn't go shoot people for it, but apparently he did.
Of course it's a kind of ilness that made him choose this way to 'fight' for his ideals, but it's still his own responsability. He could have chosen to send a letter to politicians, or donate money, but he didn't.
Again, imo, it's his own responasbility, Not that of the mass, or the things that influenced him.

Don't want to flame or anything, just my op.

Edit: @ post below:
Sure. Enjoyed the discussion though.


Last edited by Ztalker; 04-30-2007 at 02:23 PM.
Ztalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 01:57 PM   #18
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
Of course it's a kind of ilness that made him choose this way to 'fight' for his ideals, but it's still his own responsability. He could have chosen to send a letter to politicians, or donate money, but he didn't.
I doubt a mentally insane person would go and peacefully campagin for the total destruction of the rich. None of us are insane, you know, so we cannot go and pass judgement, "Oh, he could control our actions", and I sincercly doubt that the person has any control over his actions.

Also think that if the person did not have the mental illness, he wouldn't have this rage against anything, rubber duckie or rich people. So, the mental illness plays a huge role in motivating him to do such a thing. To go and blame the shooter for shooting seems essentially a copt-out, avoiding the main issues that actually pushed him to the crime.

But actually, I'm not really interested in playing the blame game right now. Is it okay if we stop blaming "mental illness"/"the shooter" and agree to disagree on this point?


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 06:48 PM   #19
MTV2
It's all our turf
 
MTV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,173
Helpful! 
I think it's Gods fault. If He never made the Korean kid, this would have never happened.
MTV2 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2007, 09:27 PM   #20
JediMaster12
Dum Spiramus Tuebimur
 
JediMaster12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Buried in books...literally
Posts: 5,933
Current Game: Assassin's Creed
LFN Staff Member Veteran Fan Fic Author Contest winner - Fan Fiction Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTV2
I think it's Gods fault. If He never made the Korean kid, this would have never happened.
Why not have God be made responsible for creating the kid's parents then? Were there is one finger being pointed there are three pointed right back at you with this statement you just said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
As someone who's suffered from some pretty serious mental illness and have tonnes of 'crazy' friends, not to mention that I'm seriously considering psychiatry as a profession, I personally find the attack on psychiatry to be the worst one so far. Such a stigmatized and at the same time life-saving practice does not need more ignorance-induced attacks upon it.
The problem is that there are other factors that influence this opinion. I know this is TV but on an episode of SVU, I recall a psychiatrist saying that the mental state or the anger was induced by bad genes or something. I am probably off the mark with that but the point is the media and other things have portrayed psychiatry in a bad light thus creating the stereotypes. I admit that I am not impressed by clinical psychiatrists mainly because like me they are human.

JediMaster12 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 06:46 PM   #21
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Acutally, I disagree. Violent video games will not go and turn people into killers, but they could act as a strongly dehumanizing agent.

I mean, it's logical. If you hear that someone is killed in real life, it's horrifying. But, well, if you have just killed someone in-game before you hear that someone was killed in real life, well? You wouldn't care as much about that person.

For example, if I hear that a person died in Africa, I shrug my shoulders. Heh, if I hear that a person died in my hometown, or if an Iraqi man was killed in Iraq, I shrug my shoulders. They are just mere stats, they mean nothing. Add in it that it was likely I killed that same person in say, GTA or an Persian Gulf War game, and well, you can see the dehumanizing effect is there.

Violent video games can also increase the aggressiveness of the person playing the game, according to some studies. And there is the case of one school shooter using a video game to learn how to aim a gun.

Am I calling for a ban? No. I play violent video games too. I just want people to understand that the people claiming that violent video games are wrong...well, have a point. I would just consign it to a factor instead of something so important...
People heard that a genocide was happening in Rwanda back in 1994. People shrugged their shoulders and left a bunch of people to die. This was 1994, before the age of violent games domination. I realize that Doom was released in 1993, but it's still before their domination.

People had enjoyment when they saw two persons gutting each other in an arena back in ancient Rome. This was before the age of violent video games domination.

My point? Linking both as a causality is impossible.

Also, if you've actually used a gun in your life, you'd know that it's quite different then pressing the R button for reloading and the right-mouse for zooming. I still don't understand those who can actually blame a game for teaching them how to "shoot". Hell, an idiot can use a gun, you don't need video games to teach you exactly how to pull a trigger. There's also a difference in gunning down a bunch of pixels and seeing a real person getting killed in real life. I've cut heads and found some sick pleasure doing it in some game. When I saw an actual person getting his head cut off, I vomited.


I do, however, blame the media for a lot of things. Though video games portray fiction, the media report reality. It emphasizes on all these cases of murder, of killing, of X,Y,Z acts of violence ad nauseam. I don't think however that it's something inherently new. Did the people in Great Britain in 1909, care about some random guy who got killed in South America? Do people, living in big cities, cry about some girl who was murdered by her boyfriend across the city? Is it something new?


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 07:11 PM   #22
montnoir
Junior Member
 
montnoir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: the icy north or Cloud City, depends
Posts: 443
We've got mentally ill people in my country too and sometimes they crack and grab a weapon and start... stabbing! So someone gets a cut hand and someone else gets a gashed leg, then the madman/madwoman is brought to ground by some random, or a few random passersby.

US citizens;
Having free access to automatic weapons then whining about mental illness leading to mass destruction is self-delusion on a grand scale.

By all means, keep selling your weapons in supermarkets it's a wonderful idea. When you're at it why not sell atomic bombs at K-Mart? Because after all "atomic bombs don't kill people, people kill people". Right?


in vino veritas
montnoir is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 07:47 PM   #23
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Deaths without any visuals, specifics, or knowledge of the dead is too impersonal to seem a tragedy to pretty much everyone. I found the shooting at Virginia Tech even more horrible when I saw pictures of the victims and descriptions of their lives and how they died.

Numbers alone are extremely impersonal, and get to be even moreso when there are lots of them. To quote Joseph Stalin, "The death of one man is tragedy. The death of a million men is a statistic."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 08:29 PM   #24
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
People heard that a genocide was happening in Rwanda back in 1994. People shrugged their shoulders and left a bunch of people to die. This was 1994, before the age of violent games domination. I realize that Doom was released in 1993, but it's still before their domination.

People had enjoyment when they saw two persons gutting each other in an arena back in ancient Rome. This was before the age of violent video games domination.

My point? Linking both as a causality is impossible.
...Come on!

For the first situation, you can argue that people did not care because it was in Africa. For all intents and purpose, it was a war between Rwanda Hutus and Tustis.

For the second situtation, people enjoyed seeing two people gut each other. Culture said this was the right thing to do. There was violent works of arts too, you know. Violent poems, glorifying decapatication? Sort of the equivilant of our modern day violent TV shows and video games, no? Plus, what the point of violent video game domination when you can actually join the military and see actual violence?

I was never arguing casualty, I am arguing however that exposure to violence makes people desentized. Video games are one way.

Quote:
Also, if you've actually used a gun in your life, you'd know that it's quite different then pressing the R button for reloading and the right-mouse for zooming. I still don't understand those who can actually blame a game for teaching them how to "shoot". Hell, an idiot can use a gun, you don't need video games to teach you exactly how to pull a trigger.
Still, any sort of training is good, and it can help grant the shooter self-confidence that he can indeed shoot.

Quote:
There's also a difference in gunning down a bunch of pixels and seeing a real person getting killed in real life. I've cut heads and found some sick pleasure doing it in some game. When I saw an actual person getting his head cut off, I vomited.
...Actually, I doubt it. I see blown up body parts and I shrug my shoulder. You may have a different reaction, but you do not speak for everyone, and neither do I. But, prehaps, in the hands of a person who like violence, violent video games could be the equilivant of "snuff" films.

Quote:
I do, however, blame the media for a lot of things. Though video games portray fiction, the media report reality. It emphasizes on all these cases of murder, of killing, of X,Y,Z acts of violence ad nauseam. I don't think however that it's something inherently new. Did the people in Great Britain in 1909, care about some random guy who got killed in South America? Do people, living in big cities, cry about some girl who was murdered by her boyfriend across the city? Is it something new?
Just because it's not a new trend doesn't mean we should go and shrug it off. It exist. It's real. And we should not discount it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 09:23 PM   #25
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
I doubt a mentally insane person would go and peacefully campagin for the total destruction of the rich. None of us are insane, you know, so we cannot go and pass judgement, "Oh, he could control our actions", and I sincercly doubt that the person has any control over his actions.
Agreed, although I feel you use the term 'insane' a bit too broadly. But that's just me.

Quote:
Also think that if the person did not have the mental illness, he wouldn't have this rage against anything, rubber duckie or rich people.
Seeing that we, as far as I know, hardly even know what he suffered from, that's not such a sure thing. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but you can perfectly well hate something and be mentally healthy. Murdering 32 people on the basis of that hate, though... that is probably not exactly a sign your brain's working well.

Quote:
But actually, I'm not really interested in playing the blame game right now. Is it okay if we stop blaming "mental illness"/"the shooter" and agree to disagree on this point?
We can. However, I sure as Heck hope researchers don't. School shooting cases need to be studied, as do the perpetrators. The more we know about what motivates these things, the more we can do to prevent them.

Quote:
I am probably off the mark with that but the point is the media and other things have portrayed psychiatry in a bad light thus creating the stereotypes.
There are lots of reasons. Bad portrayal in the media is but one.

As for video games causing unstable people to kill, I don't know, but I do know for a fact that portrayal of suicide in certain ways in movies, and the discussing of suicide attempts, etc. can 'push suicidal people over the edge'. Suicide is contagious (note, however, that asking someone if they're suicidal is not going to make them more suicidal, but on the contrary less likely to kill themselves. Likewise, discussions on alternatives to suicide, how you can get help, etc. are life-saving). So I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing was true for individuals with homicidal tendencies subjected to works that portray homicide?

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-02-2007, 09:28 PM   #26
MTV2
It's all our turf
 
MTV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,173
Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediMaster12
Why not have God be made responsible for creating the kid's parents then? Were there is one finger being pointed there are three pointed right back at you with this statement you just said.
OMG, it wasn't supposed to be taking seriously.


Quote:
Originally Posted by montnoir
Because after all "atomic bombs don't kill people, people kill people". Right?
There's no such thing as the Atomic Bomb, it's just Chuck Norris jumping out of a plane and smashing the ground with his fist.
MTV2 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-03-2007, 12:13 AM   #27
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
We can. However, I sure as Heck hope researchers don't. School shooting cases need to be studied, as do the perpetrators. The more we know about what motivates these things, the more we can do to prevent them.
Well, hm. You got a point. Still, how much research, and how biased those researchers are? It's going to take a long, long time. I better hope that this fad of school shootings goes away pretty soon...

Until then, let's throw money at the problem.

Quote:
OMG, it wasn't supposed to be taking seriously.
Ah, but the Problem of Evil is by far the problem that most people care about, and one of the main arguments against Religion here. If anyone deserves blame, it's God for creating us with the capcity to do evil in the first place.

For the most part, when people invoke the Problem of Evil, they usually do it seriously.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-03-2007, 01:40 AM   #28
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by montnoir
US citizens;
Having free access to automatic weapons then whining about mental illness leading to mass destruction is self-delusion on a grand scale.

By all means, keep selling your weapons in supermarkets it's a wonderful idea. When you're at it why not sell atomic bombs at K-Mart? Because after all "atomic bombs don't kill people, people kill people". Right?
Alright, time to clear up some ignorance...

First, there is no "Free Access" to automatic weapons in the USA if you are a law-abiding citizen. Sure, they are available on the black market, but access is only as easy as your skill in navigating the channels. Gun control only takes the weapons out of the hands of the good guys. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

Second, people do kill people. If it weren't so hard for law-abiding citizens to get and keep weapons on their person at all times, there would be less crime. Case in point is a city near Atlanta known as Kennesaw. In 1982, they passed an ordinance that required all heads of household to own a firearm and ammunition. Since its passage, Kennesaw has had virtually no crime while the rest of the townships in the Metro-Atlanta area have had high crime. They sent a clear message to criminals to stay out! Think about it, who would want to rob a convenience store in a town that is very pro-gun? A criminal would have to face the fact that someone in that store is likely packing heat and he would be lying in a pool of his own blood over a few hundred dollars.

The following is a letter to a local newspaper that sums it up nicely....

Quote:
It appears that mass killers on shooting sprees are perpetrated in gun free zones. Are they trying to avoid the chance of encountering armed citizens? Sometimes these killers misjudge their situation. A Pearl High School( Mississippi) student went on a shooting spree only to be stopped by the assistant principal, who retrieved a gun from his car.

At a 1998 school graduation dance at a restaurant in Edinboro, Penn., a student went on a shooting spree only to be captured by the restaurant owner, who had a shotgun.

In 2002 Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, Va., a suspended student went on a shooting spree only to be stopped by two students who went to their cars to retrieve their guns.

In 2007 at a Salt Lake City shopping mall (self-declared gun free zone) a man went on a shooting spree, but an armed citizen confronted the man. He pinned him down till police arrived.

What would have happened at Virginia Tech had just one of the students had a gun? Would this killing have happened at the University of Utah where the states allow concealed carry on state property and campus? Do you feel safer in a mall that states it is a gun free zone?

The bad guys don't obey the signs and the good guys are disarmed when they do. Do you feel safer already?

I don't feel safer in a gun free zone. It is in these places where the only folks armed are the criminals themselves.

Mark Berndt
Warner Robins

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-03-2007, 06:11 PM   #29
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
...Come on!

For the first situation, you can argue that people did not care because it was in Africa. For all intents and purpose, it was a war between Rwanda Hutus and Tustis.
My point exactly. You discounted a possibility you yourself admit could be the cause of people not caring for an act of violence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
For the second situtation, people enjoyed seeing two people gut each other. Culture said this was the right thing to do. There was violent works of arts too, you know. Violent poems, glorifying decapatication? Sort of the equivilant of our modern day violent TV shows and video games, no? Plus, what the point of violent video game domination when you can actually join the military and see actual violence?
So the question to ask ourselves is not so much does these depictions cause a love for violence or is it a natural tendency to love violence that leads to violent depictions. Chicken or the egg. Choose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
I was never arguing casualty, I am arguing however that exposure to violence makes people desentized. Video games are one way.
You do know what causality means right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Still, any sort of training is good, and it can help grant the shooter self-confidence that he can indeed shoot.
Yeah, I can pull a trigger too. So much training needed...and I don't see how that could give anyone self-confidence to shoot and kill. If someone is determine to kill, GTA won't make a difference.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
...Actually, I doubt it. I see blown up body parts and I shrug my shoulder. You may have a different reaction, but you do not speak for everyone, and neither do I. But, prehaps, in the hands of a person who like violence, violent video games could be the equilivant of "snuff" films.
Have you actually seen a decapitation? Most people who are capable of making the distinction between reality and fiction would also be bothered by seeing a real killing. That is why even psychologists make the subtle nuance that for most people, exposure to violent video games will not do anything. Why even bring up the argument that people desensitized if you are going to speak only of personal anecdotal evidence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Just because it's not a new trend doesn't mean we should go and shrug it off. It exist. It's real. And we should not discount it.
We should discount it because it's inherent human nature. Hell, all those pop-psychologists and good loving leftists extremists have managed to turn men into little sissy boys unable to unleash a controlled amount of aggression. I play soccer with a lot of strangers and kids here in Montreal and the younger generation is so scared of just a little push. Not even actually pushing someone, just physical contact. For them it's brutalizing...

Sorry for the rant.


Alright, time to clear up some ignorance...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
First, there is no "Free Access" to automatic weapons in the USA if you are a law-abiding citizen. Sure, they are available on the black market, but access is only as easy as your skill in navigating the channels. Gun control only takes the weapons out of the hands of the good guys. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
Hey, we got a brainwashed NRA member! Gun control is not about removing every single gun off the market, it's about putting more restrictions on who should have them and how to acquire them. Unfortunately, pro-gun activists are so crazy as to believe that gun control means ban on every firearm. Except for some of the more vocal leftists, this does not represent everyone's opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
Second, people do kill people. If it weren't so hard for law-abiding citizens to get and keep weapons on their person at all times, there would be less crime. Case in point is a city near Atlanta known as Kennesaw. In 1982, they passed an ordinance that required all heads of household to own a firearm and ammunition. Since its passage, Kennesaw has had virtually no crime while the rest of the townships in the Metro-Atlanta area have had high crime. They sent a clear message to criminals to stay out! Think about it, who would want to rob a convenience store in a town that is very pro-gun? A criminal would have to face the fact that someone in that store is likely packing heat and he would be lying in a pool of his own blood over a few hundred dollars.
Less crime? I am not certain about what the situation in Kennesaw looks like, but you oversimplify the matter. Now, assume that in America, everyone has a gun. No crime is committed right? Suddenly, poverty goes away no? The reason why it was so successful in this Kennesaw is, according to what little information I have, because every thief changed area to nearby places. Now, is it possible that when every single American has a gun, America is rid of crime? Every criminal left for Mexico and Canada? I'd love to see that.

Second about this, is how do you get rid of fear, when you replace fear of criminal by fear of neighbor. A fully armed America will have a balance of terror, every citizen fearing an angry neighbor pointing a gun at him. This is rather disturbing for me, as a Canadian and one living in a poor and supposedly dangerous neighborhood. I don't have this crazy fear of criminals some Americans seem to have. I believe there are better, more humane and durable solutions then arming every men, women and child to face criminals. I believe the last post summed up the paranoia Americans live in pretty well.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-03-2007, 07:04 PM   #30
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
My point exactly. You discounted a possibility you yourself admit could be the cause of people not caring for an act of violence.
No, someone else gave these people this impression. Who cause that argument to be accepted? And who cause that? I'd suggest it may be books I read, European Imperialism, and war games that I play.

Quote:
So the question to ask ourselves is not so much does these depictions cause a love for violence or is it a natural tendency to love violence that leads to violent depictions. Chicken or the egg. Choose.
Neither. Instead, I'll state the postive feedback loop. The egg causes the chicken be formed which casues an egg to be laid which causes the chicken to be formed.

A person who prefer violence play "VIOLENT VIDEO GAME MADNESS!" and he likes that game. While he plays the game, his love for violence increases, meaning that he love for VVGM also increases. For some (or maybe just a few) people, it could increase up to a boiling point when the person finally realizes that VVGM does not sastify his lust for violence. He'll either upgrade to VVGM II...but sooner or later, upgrades might not cut it, since his demand for violence may be high. Prehaps it could lead to doing it in real life, or not.

Quote:
You do know what causality means right?
You see one thing, and then you see something else occur, and then one assume that Thing A causes Thing B. I never say that because a person sees violent video games, he will become violent, using evidence. I'm merely saying that it makes sense that it is possible to logically deduce that violent video games can cause people to be desentizied.

Quote:
Yeah, I can pull a trigger too. So much training needed...and I don't see how that could give anyone self-confidence to shoot and kill. If someone is determine to kill, GTA won't make a difference.
Sure it could. A person who is determined to kill can play GTA because he wants to, and wants to use it as a way to express his violence. I could compare it to someone using a knife to skin animals. You do not need to do that, but this person does it anyway, because he can and he enjoy it. He could change from skinning animals to skinning people though.

Quote:
Have you actually seen a decapitation? Most people who are capable of making the distinction between reality and fiction would also be bothered by seeing a real killing. That is why even psychologists make the subtle nuance that for most people, exposure to violent video games will not do anything. Why even bring up the argument that people desensitized if you are going to speak only of personal anecdotal evidence.
I seen a RL dead body blown up into pieces. Does that count?

But isn't fiction a reflection of how people see reality? Or how people want reality to be? It is a way of communication of ideas that you personally believe in. For example, writing a story where a heroic person blows up the Twin Towers, and protraying the character truly heroically and not at all evil...is the same as saying, "Death to America" in a manner that would attempt to be more persuasive. If there was no Twin Towers, no America, and no such thing as heroism in this real life, then the story looks quite strange and may not even be written, if it is divorced from the context that created it.

You cannot say that this is all just a false story that means nothing or exist in a vaccum. GTA wouldn't have any meaning if, say, Rockstar did not know of America and did not have the great idea of satirizing it and its gun-crazy culture.

Neither are you showcasing anything but personal ancedontal evidence that fictional. All you are saying is "most" people, without providing proof. And listen, neither am I providing any proof.

I see a dead person in a game, I hear of a dead person in real life. I shrug my shoulder. You see a dead person in a game, you hear of a dead person in real life, and you shudder. Two different people, having two different reactions. Millions of people may be like you. Millions of people may be like me. I worried of the millions of people who are like me, who will not kill, but who merely shrug their shoulders and do not care of their fellow human beings.

Quote:
We should discount it because it's inherent human nature.
And that justifies it? Human nature is responsible for many things in life, so we should just let it be and ignore that aspect?

I'm looking for a cause to the problem, and to say we cannot blame it because it's just natural...is wrong. We, for example, cannot blame Hurricane Katrina for attacking New Orleans because it was natural. Katrina does not have the sentience needed to know that she was running into a landmass. But Katrina did cause it, and surely, it did kill lots of people. We should blame Katrina therefore, since it caused the whole mess to start off with, and if Katrina did not have the bright idea to plow through a landmass, lots of people would be better off.

We agree that nature is responsible. Can we control it? Should we control it? That leads to lots of ethical problems. I don't really care about the solutions.

The topic is "Virgina Tech blame game". We're here to blame people, we're not here to come up with solutions. Blaming something we cannot control is actually better than blaming something we can control, since if we then "fix" that, we'll only have the same problem...again, except now we got brand new problems from fixing the previous fault.

And I am against banning Video Games. But it is on a "freedom of speech" issue, and not on that it poses no harm to anyone...because it does. How much? That is up to debate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-03-2007, 07:49 PM   #31
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
No, someone else gave these people this impression. Who cause that argument to be accepted? And who cause that? I'd suggest it may be books I read, European Imperialism, and war games that I play.
I have no idea what the hell you're talking about.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Neither. Instead, I'll state the postive feedback loop. The egg causes the chicken be formed which casues an egg to be laid which causes the chicken to be formed.

A person who prefer violence play "VIOLENT VIDEO GAME MADNESS!" and he likes that game. While he plays the game, his love for violence increases, meaning that he love for VVGM also increases. For some (or maybe just a few) people, it could increase up to a boiling point when the person finally realizes that VVGM does not sastify his lust for violence. He'll either upgrade to VVGM II...but sooner or later, upgrades might not cut it, since his demand for violence may be high. Prehaps it could lead to doing it in real life, or not.
Snowball argument. In fact, it's full of what if. No causality, no argument.




Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
You see one thing, and then you see something else occur, and then one assume that Thing A causes Thing B. I never say that because a person sees violent video games, he will become violent, using evidence. I'm merely saying that it makes sense that it is possible to logically deduce that violent video games can cause people to be desentizied.
It's logical to deduce a lot of things. There's a lot of correlations that have no causation. I use this example in another thread about how two authors linked bras and breast cancer. Their numbers were indisputable. Women who wore bras had more chance of getting cancer then those who did not. Yet, the "study" was a load of crap since there is no link between bras and cancer besides a strange coincidental variation. No causation was ever established.




Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Sure it could. A person who is determined to kill can play GTA because he wants to, and wants to use it as a way to express his violence. I could compare it to someone using a knife to skin animals. You do not need to do that, but this person does it anyway, because he can and he enjoy it. He could change from skinning animals to skinning people though.
Ok, you do realize that you have to skin an animal in order to eat his flesh right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
I seen a RL dead body blown up into pieces. Does that count?

But isn't fiction a reflection of how people see reality? Or how people want reality to be? It is a way of communication of ideas that you personally believe in. For example, writing a story where a heroic person blows up the Twin Towers, and protraying the character truly heroically and not at all evil...is the same as saying, "Death to America" in a manner that would attempt to be more persuasive. If there was no Twin Towers, no America, and no such thing as heroism in this real life, then the story looks quite strange and may not even be written, if it is divorced from the context that created it.
I like Star Wars because I want to live in that fantasy world. This isn't about any link between media violence and violent acts, more of your pseudo-philosophical blabber. By the way, if you've actually seen someone blown up to pieces and just shrugged your shoulders, go see a shrink. Now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
You cannot say that this is all just a false story that means nothing or exist in a vaccum. GTA wouldn't have any meaning if, say, Rockstar did not know of America and did not have the great idea of satirizing it and its gun-crazy culture.
Obviously, you are unable to differenciate fiction and reality. Fiction is for enjoyment, reality is reality. There's a reason why I don't run around carjacking people and killing all on my path. It's not possible in real life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Neither are you showcasing anything but personal ancedontal evidence that fictional. All you are saying is "most" people, without providing proof. And listen, neither am I providing any proof.
Every study I've read about media violence was finding correlations and causations between it and aggression. That is indisputable that people get more aggressive after playing a violent video game. Does it mean that it leads to acts of violence? That was never proven and indeed, the commission after the Columbine events indeed mentioned how it was impossible to determine who would commit such acts because there was no archetype. As such, advocates against media violence only have ammo against aggression in general, not events like Virginia Tech.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
I see a dead person in a game, I hear of a dead person in real life. I shrug my shoulder. You see a dead person in a game, you hear of a dead person in real life, and you shudder. Two different people, having two different reactions. Millions of people may be like you. Millions of people may be like me. I worried of the millions of people who are like me, who will not kill, but who merely shrug their shoulders and do not care of their fellow human beings.
Then why even mention your personal experience, at first using it as an anecdote to forward your point, then retracting and trying to add some sort of nuance? I am pretty certain that most people do not react like you. There may be a desensitization in the way that most people, after being exposed to a lot of violence in the media, believe it to be more common. However, it does not bring conclusive answers to how they will react to actual violence.

In fact, statistically, there's more of these school shootings in the United States then in other parts of world where they play the same game. Surely, there must be another factor for such violence then simply video games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
And that justifies it? Human nature is responsible for many things in life, so we should just let it be and ignore that aspect?

I'm looking for a cause to the problem, and to say we cannot blame it because it's just natural...is wrong. We, for example, cannot blame Hurricane Katrina for attacking New Orleans because it was natural. Katrina does not have the sentience needed to know that she was running into a landmass. But Katrina did cause it, and surely, it did kill lots of people. We should blame Katrina therefore, since it caused the whole mess to start off with, and if Katrina did not have the bright idea to plow through a landmass, lots of people would be better off.

We agree that nature is responsible. Can we control it? Should we control it? That leads to lots of ethical problems. I don't really care about the solutions.

The topic is "Virgina Tech blame game". We're here to blame people, we're not here to come up with solutions. Blaming something we cannot control is actually better than blaming something we can control, since if we then "fix" that, we'll only have the same problem...again, except now we got brand new problems from fixing the previous fault.

And I am against banning Video Games. But it is on a "freedom of speech" issue, and not on that it poses no harm to anyone...because it does. How much? That is up to debate.
It's a question of ethics and morals. Some believe that eating animals is wrong, yet it's part of our inherent nature. Should it change? Does it have to change? No.

By the way, blaming nature? Who curses nature what it did? You're speaking of a situation where the cause and effect are clear versus a situation where it isn't.

Do video games cause more harm? Some psychologist claim that they're not policy makers (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bbushman/01ba.pdf) but they've significantly changed the way people think over the years. Especially pop-psychology.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-04-2007, 01:35 AM   #32
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
Hey, we got a brainwashed NRA member! Gun control is not about removing every single gun off the market, it's about putting more restrictions on who should have them and how to acquire them. Unfortunately, pro-gun activists are so crazy as to believe that gun control means ban on every firearm. Except for some of the more vocal leftists, this does not represent everyone's opinion.
FYI...I am not a member of the NRA. Nor do I own a firearm (unless you count my pellet gun). My home protection devices include a sword, a survival knife, and a dagger. And if you think that gun control isn't about removing every gun from the market, you're delusional. That is what they said when they started the campaign against smoking. At first, all they wanted to do was require restaurants to have separate sections for smokers and non-smokers. But it didn't stop there, did it? Because smokers were so accommodating, the leftist anti-smoking crowd upped the ante to where it is hard to find a place to smoke anywhere in public (also, FYI, I don't smoke). Now New York City has banned Trans-Fats. Next, they'll be limiting the portions at restaurants through passing laws to do so. It never stops! If we let the anti-gun activists rule the day, there will be no guns (except those the criminals have).


Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
Less crime? I am not certain about what the situation in Kennesaw looks like, but you oversimplify the matter. Now, assume that in America, everyone has a gun. No crime is committed right? Suddenly, poverty goes away no? The reason why it was so successful in this Kennesaw is, according to what little information I have, because every thief changed area to nearby places. Now, is it possible that when every single American has a gun, America is rid of crime? Every criminal left for Mexico and Canada? I'd love to see that.
I don't think I am oversimplifying anything. Sure crime still exists in some form, even in Kennesaw, but the rate of crime has sure been affected. The fact of the matter is that fear can be healthy, and when people fear retribution in the form of a 45 Magnum in the hands of a good citizen, there is less crime. And I don't buy into the idea that poverty is the cause of crime. Rich people have done their share of lawbreaking and many poor families are devoid of a criminal element.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
Second about this, is how do you get rid of fear, when you replace fear of criminal by fear of neighbor. A fully armed America will have a balance of terror, every citizen fearing an angry neighbor pointing a gun at him. This is rather disturbing for me, as a Canadian and one living in a poor and supposedly dangerous neighborhood. I don't have this crazy fear of criminals some Americans seem to have. I believe there are better, more humane and durable solutions then arming every men, women and child to face criminals. I believe the last post summed up the paranoia Americans live in pretty well.

I don't recall anyone from Kennesaw saying they lived in fear of criminals or neighbors (and I have known quite a few people from there). Kennesaw is a peaceful city. You can ask anyone who has been there. I don't expect that you, as a Canadian, would know exactly what it is like in the USA, but here are a few facts. The Constitution of the United States of America guarantees citizens the right to bear arms. It is one of the founding principles of our nation. Because of this, we will never be a completely gun-free society. That is, unless the leftists have their way and ban guns completely through a Constitutional Amendment. Problem with that is, criminals don't obey the law anyway, so how anyone can think that anti-gun legislation is going to disarm them is beyond me. One would think that we had learned our lesson when the 18th Amendment (Prohibition of Alcohol) proved to be counterproductive. All that did was create a black market for alcohol. Today, no such black market exists because it was repealed by the 21st Amendment. It is the same way with gun control. Today, an ordinary citizen cannot go into a gun shop and buy a fully automatic weapon. Yet, how do some bank robbers seem to get their hands on them....? Seems obvious to me.

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-04-2007, 02:23 AM   #33
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
FYI...I am not a member of the NRA. Nor do I own a firearm (unless you count my pellet gun). My home protection devices include a sword, a survival knife, and a dagger. And if you think that gun control isn't about removing every gun from the market, you're delusional. That is what they said when they started the campaign against smoking. At first, all they wanted to do was require restaurants to have separate sections for smokers and non-smokers. But it didn't stop there, did it? Because smokers were so accommodating, the leftist anti-smoking crowd upped the ante to where it is hard to find a place to smoke anywhere in public (also, FYI, I don't smoke). Now New York City has banned Trans-Fats. Next, they'll be limiting the portions at restaurants through passing laws to do so. It never stops! If we let the anti-gun activists rule the day, there will be no guns (except those the criminals have).
Except that it's currently impossible to ban every gun on the market and there's no reason to do so. You seem to equate anything "anti-" with leftist. This is wrong on so many levels. I am not a leftist, I can assure you that it certainly pisses me off to eat food and having to breathe someone's cigarette smoke at the same time. It is simply a question of not hampering my freedom of eating in a smoke-free environment. Also, you are clearly unable to distinguish the opinion of leftists with the opinion of a certain group of leftists that yells really loud. Obviously, those groups manage to get more attention even though they do not represent a good portion of a population. Does PETA represent every single vegetarian? I think not. True that they yell louder then everyone else, but they cannot do everything they wish to do. Political capital still exists. New York might have banned trans fats, but if the population did not agree, if they did not think it something important, no such law would have passed.




Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
I don't think I am oversimplifying anything. Sure crime still exists in some form, even in Kennesaw, but the rate of crime has sure been affected. The fact of the matter is that fear can be healthy, and when people fear retribution in the form of a 45 Magnum in the hands of a good citizen, there is less crime. And I don't buy into the idea that poverty is the cause of crime. Rich people have done their share of lawbreaking and many poor families are devoid of a criminal element.
You put too much trust into the citizens, assuming that every single one of them will have enough self-control to carry a firearm and not pull it out for a simple bar dispute.

Also, you cannot dispute, even for a second that there is a clear correlation between poverty and crime. After all, poor neighborhoods are safer then rich ones right? The crime rates in poorer areas, everywhere in the world, no matter which country you pick, is much higher then in the rich areas. Though it does not mean that every poor person is a criminal or every rich is an "innocent law-abiding" citizen, it is clear that a link exists between crime and poverty.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
I don't recall anyone from Kennesaw saying they lived in fear of criminals or neighbors (and I have known quite a few people from there). Kennesaw is a peaceful city. You can ask anyone who has been there.
Because there's nothing to fear anymore is there? Low crime rate and everything. It still does not mean that putting a gun in the hands of every "good" American will make the country safer. As I side, it just pushed the problem to other areas. Eventually, you can't push it out anymore. I also wonder what the average income is for the people of Kennesaw, if it's a tight-knit community, if it's a large place, does it suffer from urban decay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
I don't expect that you, as a Canadian, would know exactly what it is like in the USA, but here are a few facts. The Constitution of the United States of America guarantees citizens the right to bear arms. It is one of the founding principles of our nation. Because of this, we will never be a completely gun-free society. That is, unless the leftists have their way and ban guns completely through a Constitutional Amendment. Problem with that is, criminals don't obey the law anyway, so how anyone can think that anti-gun legislation is going to disarm them is beyond me. One would think that we had learned our lesson when the 18th Amendment (Prohibition of Alcohol) proved to be counterproductive. All that did was create a black market for alcohol. Today, no such black market exists because it was repealed by the 21st Amendment. It is the same way with gun control. Today, an ordinary citizen cannot go into a gun shop and buy a fully automatic weapon. Yet, how do some bank robbers seem to get their hands on them....? Seems obvious to me.
Oh? And I didn't know that? Please, I'm smarter then that.
In fact, if you want my opinion on everything here check out this thread:
http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=177706

Also, I don't understand what you're suggesting. Automatic weapons should be legal for everyone? In fact, let's eliminate the black market all together. Prostitution should be legal. Every drug, from Marijuana to Cocaine and passing by Crystal Meth, should be legal so to keep it out of the hands of criminal organizations.

You still consider the "leftists" (I don't know what you consider a leftist) as a huge force in this debate. The problem is that there's indeed a resistance to this movement, there's an almost inherent love for firearms in the United States, there will probably never be a complete ban on firearms. Rural regions especially need those to protect their cattle and such. In fact, I can safely say that a lot of people who are pro-gun control do not propose a complete ban on firearms. Here in Canada, the movement only managed to get a licensing system for every firearm. There are people out there who want a complete ban, but from what I can gather from the newspapers and other media, they don't get much air time and as such have little influence.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Ahto Spaceport Cantina > Virginia Tech blame game

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.