Sadly, this is getting to the point that people are becoming especially desensitized to mass shootings, especially in that area of Florida. The examples in that article didn't even account for some of the ones I heard about recently, namely one for a singer that was killed signing autographs. That one hit me hard despite not knowing her; I listened to some of her music after and it was difficult to think of that person being shot. Honestly, that's kind of where the Million is a Statistic trope is going to come into play. Sometimes the deaths of a few are easier to grasp and thus feel horror from rather than several at once. That, or maybe the mind shuts off part of itself to cope with trying to have grief for so many people.
What really gets me here is that it happened during a live tournament. There is something extremely disturbing to me about only having the audio of what happens, with that "Controller Disconnected" screen showing that someone who was just alive and having a great deal of fun playing is now dead and never going to reconnect that controller again. Maybe that sounds stupid, but it's extremely jarring to me.
This got me to wonder: I know there have been many mass shootings, but have there ever been any at a video game tournament that got caught on a livestream like this? Or is this the first time this particular recording of a shooting has occurred?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's an availability issue, new and pre-owned guns everywhere. If its so easy, why not. It's like coke or McD, if it's so easy to get its hard not to, especially for the weak-minded under a false "defense" claim.
Did you know people are not born mentally ill in many cases? They can become so after buying a gun, sometimes years later....
Comment has been collapsed.
More people die every year from being fat and drinking alcohol yet nobody's advocating for making sugary food and beer illegal. Just stop listening to cable news' fear campaign. Besides, murdering people is already illegal - why do people murder, then? Because making something illegal doesn't make people magically stop doing it. Porn is illegal in my country (Bulgaria), but everyone here watches porn. We have guns as well, btw, but we don't have mass shootings. Because the problem with mass shootings isn't guns in the USA - it's different and it has to do with really high divorce rates, broken families, single mother households and missing father figures from young men's lives. Something we don't have a problem with in Europe, but is a huge proven problem in the USA.
Comment has been collapsed.
How many people die when random strangers force them to eat junk food and drink beer until they die from it?
Comment has been collapsed.
More than you'd think. Mostly kids who get rewarded with candy for behaving and whose mothers cook them cheesy potatoes for dinner because they won't eat broccoli. I've also heard the argument that people are forced to eat unhealthy because unhealthy food is cheaper than healthy food. In any case, statistics show that every year hundreds of thousands of people die due to an unhealthy lifestyle while only a fraction of a % of that is people killed by mass shootings.
Also, guns aren't even in the top 10 weapons used in murders, both in the USA and around the world. Do you know which one is number 1? The hammer. Nobody's rushing to ban hammers, though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you know which one is number 1? The hammer. Nobody's rushing to ban hammers, though.
Bad argument. Hammers weren't designed with the sole intent of murdering another human being. Handguns were.
Comment has been collapsed.
That was my argument, though, that things can be used for good and bad, it's the person not the tool. People somehow understand that even though hammers are used to kill people constantly, they're also used to fix things and build houses. Yet people don't seem to care that guns can be used to protect one's family and community, not just kill innocents.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet people don't seem to care that guns can be used to protect one's family and community, not just kill innocents.
Use a hammer. And my point still stands.
Comment has been collapsed.
Use a hammer against a person with a gun? You're not even trying to address my arguments anymore.
If I handed you a gun right now, would you immediately use it to run outside and shoot random people? Serious question.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your argument is that guns can be used to "protect" people, right? That "protection" is merely a by-product of the handgun's primary purpose - to kill another human being. That's why they were designed, the only reason.
Now, since handguns were only designed with that one purpose in mind, it would be most logical to eliminate them (and NOT give handguns to everyone else to "protect" themselves.)
EDIT: I'll even provide an example -- Some kids outside your home are playing, and one of them has a baseball bat and starts swinging at the other kids in the group angrily. Do you take away the baseball bat, or do you give the other kids baseball bats to "protect themselves?"
Comment has been collapsed.
I would be very interested in what exactly made that kid have this erratic behavior that's causing it to hurt people, which is also the main reason for mass shootings - a deep disturbance, usually from childhood.
That said, depends on how many kids there are. I don't think a single kid, even with a bat, stands a chance against 3 or 4 kids without bats. In any case I wouldn't just take away the bat and leave them like nothing happened, because the kid seems deeply disturbed and will find another way to harm the other children. Just taking away the weapon and pretending it's all fine and dandy is very irresponsible. I would speak to him and try to get to the root of the problem - which is also how you stop mass shootings.
EDIT: Also, if the other kids have bats do you even see a kid trying to hit them? Even if the kid is crazy he'll know that he'd better behave when everyone has their own bat.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would be very interested in what exactly made that kid have this erratic behavior that's causing it to hurt people, which is also the main reason for mass shootings - a deep disturbance, usually from childhood.
I agree with that, but it's irrelevant when one kid is about to get his face bashed in by another with a baseball bat, isn't it? That's something to be dealt with, for certain, but at a later point in time.
Just taking away the weapon and pretending it's all fine and dandy is very irresponsible.
No one said taking away the bat is all that would or should be done. It is interesting, however, to see how much you've read into things to defend the "I should carry a baseball bat, just in case someone else takes a swing at me or my kid with a baseball bat" mentality, though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your solution to the problem is take away all guns and change human nature to be less flawed. Mine is to embrace the fact that while most people are kind and well meaning some aren't, so I am better off not living in denial and instead being ready to protect my family and community. I've never pointed a gun at a human being and I am proud of that, however nobody can say what will happen tomorrow and calling the cops is worthless when seconds matter to save yourself or your loved one.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you take away all the guns, there will be fewer gun deaths. Period. There will be far fewer opportunities for you to have to defend your family or your community. They might still have a hammer, though. ;)
You can stand on the argument that "hammers kill people, too" all day long, but I assure you -- it's the single worst possible argument you can make, because any one of us here on this forum can kill a lot more people a lot faster with a handgun or rifle than we can with a hammer or baseball bat, or even a gallon of bleach or potato chips.
Any.One.Of.Us.
Comment has been collapsed.
Anyone can also take his car and run through pedestrians on a crowded sidewalk. Ban cars? Ban cars.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can always stop them with your guns!
(Sorry, I've already addressed that, and circular arguments are annoying).
Comment has been collapsed.
Since terrorists can have nukes, everyone should be able to buy cheap nukes to defend themselves against terrorism. Arguing for any kind of nuke control is letting the terrorists win since they can always get some from black market.
Comment has been collapsed.
Since terrorists can have nukes, everyone should be able to buy cheap nukes to defend themselves against terrorism.
That's pretty much the logic being used here, except it would be a nuke full of potato chips and gummi bears.
Comment has been collapsed.
As has been stated multiple times... killing is not the primary function of cars though. It's of guns. They literally HAVE no other function. Can you say that of cars?
So why compare them?
Comment has been collapsed.
If I was handed a gun, I would call the cops to arrest the crazy person giving out guns because they have no place in civilized society outside hunting in forests.
Comment has been collapsed.
So random strangers reward kids with candy and assault them with hammers, no wonder the toddlers need their guns to defend.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not mocking anyone and am being very civil with my arguments.
Okay, two can play this game ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Ban Bleach
Comment has been collapsed.
How many people die when random strangers force them to eat junk food and drink beer until they die from it?
Which you answered with
More than you'd think.
Then you went on about hammers being the most common tool used in lethal violence. So what exactly am I mocking?
Comment has been collapsed.
After "More than you'd think." there's an entire paragraph which explains how unhealthy food can be forced upon children by their parents and ultimately lead to food addiction and lower life expectancy. You decided to glance over it and give me data on toddlers killed by adults who don't store their guns properly, therefore ban guns. I think the way you presented that data in a really absurd and mocking way.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, you decided to answer me and then go on about something totally different. I asked about random violence people die from like being robbed at gunpoint and you said the biggest problem is moms making kids eat broccoli and the kids having to own guns to defend against it.
Overeating or drinking YOURSELF to death is a suicide, we're talking about homicide here.
Comment has been collapsed.
"you said the biggest problem is moms making kids eat broccoli and the kids having to own guns to defend against it. "
That's not what I said and I have no idea how you interpreted my words in such a way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet you seem to interprete my question about lethal violence done by random strangers as a question about overfeeding kids by their moms and have no problems with it. So unless you actually want to answer the question I'll keep making fun of you for avoiding it.
How many people die anywhere in the world because a random stranger forced them to overeat or drink themselves to death? Is it still more than I think?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not avoiding the question, also thanks for finally admitting that you'd rather mock me than read my answers in good faith.
I said more than you'd think and then I explained how bad parenting can cause 100x more deaths than guns yet it's not something that is addressed. By the way, Switzerland is one of the countries with the highest gun ownership per capita yet there are no mass shootings there. Same with other european countries with legal gun ownership. It's purely a problem in the USA and the reason for that is high divorce rates, torn families, toxic parenting.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you're still avoiding to answer the question and go on ranting about something totally different. Why is it so hard to just answer the one simple question? I didn't ask about parenting or Swiss guns, I asked about lethal violence done by random strangers. If you still don't get this or even the difference between suicide and homicide, you really deserve all the mocking you are bound to get.
How many people die anywhere in the world because a random stranger forced them to overeat or drink themselves to death? Is it still more than I think?
Comment has been collapsed.
What I said before your question was related to parenting, though, so instead of answering you decided to make it ridiculous. No idea how many people die when a stranger forces them to overeat, probably zero, though one of the murders in the movie Seven was basically that.
Thing is, random violence in general is really rare and only a fraction of the causes of premature death. I am not sure why you're so hung over that when I presented both a better solution to prevent random violence and an issue that kills 100x more people.
Comment has been collapsed.
There you go, was that really so hard to say it's 0. Did you fear it would make you look foolish or why did it take this long to give the answer?
Very few people die from overeating as kids, they do it as adults when they have had plenty of time to fix any problems evil moms caused. Same thing with alcohol. So people killing themselves more with those is quite irrelevant to the homicide rates guns cause. It takes decades to suicide with food&drink and during this time it can be reversed. It takes less than a second to die from a bullet and you can't reverse this once it's fired.
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn, I should move to Bulgaria. I've been held at gunpoint before, but I never even knew it was possible to be held at candy-point. When you stroll through a bad neighbourhood do you get gang members lifting their jacket to show you the snickers in their waistband?
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, there's a lot of stuff to unpack here.
More people die every year from being fat and drinking alcohol yet nobody's advocating for making sugary food and beer illegal.
Unrelated. No need for this whataboutism here.
But just to humor you, people actually are advocating for healthier foods being available in every single country. It's just that the situation is even worse in America, so that's why it's so prevalent. Also, the prohibition happened. Also, check out any country that has restrictions on public alcohol consumption, buying alcohol, showing it on television and so on. The restrictions are hefty and they're everywhere. Just because you don't notice them, doesn't make them non-existent.
Just stop listening to cable news' fear campaign.
You don't know what cable news is, it seems. But whatever. To deny that America has a disproportionate amount of mass shooting in the country based on their population is like denying that the moon exists, it's just either complete ignorance or extreme case of being a devil's advocate.
Besides, murdering people is already illegal - why do people murder, then?
So much to explain here. First of all, morality. Most people don't murder due to their morality. Second of all, people murder way less if it's illegal. Banning things makes them less common. Estonia's rate of private firearm ownership is 5 guns for every 100 people. America's rate of private firearm ownership 120.5 guns per 100 people.
One has more strict laws for that stuff. I'll let you figure out which one yourself though.
We have multiple layers of deterrence. One being the warning, another being punishment, another being enforcement and the last one being moral restrictions. Those that don't find those layers to be enough, will be punished.
You ignore crimes that didn't happen as a result of the laws being implemented.
Your argument is essentially an argument for anarchism.
Porn is illegal in my country (Bulgaria), but everyone here watches porn.
Harmless crime that isn't enforced is the answer to this. No one will die because you watched porn. It doesn't harm anyone. Texting and driving however might harm people and you as well, so people are deterred from it more. Now, again, don't forget to think of the actions prevented due to the law. You only talk about those that watch porn, but not those who have stayed away from it because of the law. It'll be a very small number, but I already explained why it is so.
Equating watching porn illegally to murder is like comparing an apple to a Master Cock, The 16.25 Inch Colossus Dildo by Monster Cock.
We have guns as well, btw, but we don't have mass shootings.
Well damn. Your numbers are lower than Estonia's even. 8.4 guns per 100 people. Over 14 times less than in America
But yeah, you also have guns technically...
Because the problem with mass shootings isn't guns in the USA - it's different and it has to do with really high divorce rates, broken families, single mother households and missing father figures from young men's lives.
Agreed. The issue is complex and solving it will take time. But guess what? It's hard to have a mass shooting without a gun! Shocking, right? You want proof? I'll take your own provided examples then.
Let's take Bulgaria. And to make it easier, let's start not from this year, but 2013. 5 years should be enough. There were 2 mass shootings.
One of them was an old man getting into an argument, the other was a person threatening a headmaster and a school's pupils and he died in a shootout with the police.
Let's just plug all the holes possible, perhaps.
Something we don't have a problem with in Europe, but is a huge proven problem in the USA.
Well, that's wrong. Divorce rates aren't that high. 40-50% compared to 60+% for Spain, Portugal, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. 70% for Belgium. Yeah... that's not a thing then.
Broken families goes under that same umbrella enough to not make it worth it to dissect at this moment.
Single parent households are high in the US, but not the highest at all. They're beaten by Denmark, UK, Lithuania and very closely behind the US is Latvia, Estonia, and France.
Missing father figures. It's true that mothers are more likely to be the single parents. But that's like that literally everywhere. Actually, the US has a 2x greater likelihood for a single father than in the UK, Lithuania, Hungary, Germany, Czech Republic, Malta, Ireland and the OECD-26 lower average and a 4x greater likelihood than in Mexico.
So, overall, nothing here works in your favour. Everything you present is easily explainable by human nature, the basics of a government system, statistics and plain logic.
You're either making up your arguments as you go on or you've watched too many conservative Youtubers giving you the same shtick over and over again.
Also, check out the Australian gun laws and their results to figure out what happened with them and why so many people are arguing for what they're arguing for.
Comment has been collapsed.
No one will die because you watched porn
Just ask the Pope, watching porn is killing your unborn children by the millions every time! Sorry couldn't resist :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn, how could I have been so ignorant! :(
Eh, time to go kill a truckload of unborn children again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Great arguments all around, just a few corrections.
You don't know what cable news is, it seems
I was referring to CNN, the cable news network.
To deny that America has a disproportionate amount of mass shooting in the country based on their population is like denying that the moon exists, it's just either complete ignorance or extreme case of being a devil's advocate.
I didn't deny that gun deaths in America are disproportionately high, I admit it several times and then I make the argument that the guns are not the root of this problem.
Your numbers are lower than Estonia's even. 8.4 guns per 100 people.
That's not lower, that's higher.
Let's take Bulgaria. One of them was an old man getting into an argument, the other was a person threatening a headmaster and a school's pupils and he died in a shootout with the police.
Do these qualify as a 'mass shooting'? I think that term is pretty vague, I guess I should have gone with gun death in general, but in any case as I have presented in other comments, there are countries like Switzerland which have extremely high gun ownership per capita and hardly have any mass shootings or gun murder.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I make the argument that the guns are not the root of this problem."
Except all factors given are the EXACT same in ANY other country in the world. What's the difference between the USA and most other countries. Well, the guns.
It's easy to make the connection... it's also apparently very easy for Americans to somehow not make the connection, and throw everything under the sun, videogames, music etc. as explenation instead of simpyl staring at the facts beating them in the eyes.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't deny that gun deaths in America are disproportionately high, I admit it several times and then I make the argument that the guns are not the root of this problem.
Yes, and I also say why guns are the root of the problem because if you look at almost any statistic out there, the US is the same as any other country. It's not a microcosm of weird irregularities. It's a country with humans in it. It's hard to be as different as this argument needs them to be.
Everything you brought up when it came to other reasons was easily disprovable and that's what I did.
No one's denying that America also has a mental health problem, but it does exist everywhere else as well. The main difference is that those distressed people don't get guns and shoot up different areas. At worst, they get a weapon like a knife or a bat or whatever else. Dangerous, sure. But it's 90% less dangerous than the least dangerous gun. Plus, having little access to traditional weapons doesn't even make people think about it.
I admit it several times
You did not. At best, you did it once, where you said "Because the problem with mass shootings isn't guns in the USA", which has you say that there's a problem with mass shootings, but nothing about disproportionate gun violence. Mass shootings are only a small part of gun violence.
That's not lower, that's higher.
Yup, it was a typo there, sorry.
Do these qualify as a 'mass shooting'? I think that term is pretty vague.
A mass shooting is qualified usually in one of two ways: one way is 4 kills or more in a small amount of time or in a small geographical vicinity or more than 1 kill in a small amount of time or in a small geographical vicinity.
First one is used in more of a professional sense, the other mostly for media.
I took the second one because otherwise there would've only been a single mass shooting to back up your claims that it's not mainly because of the guns. Looking at the stats it was obvious that Bulgaria isn't that much different from the US and the only main differences were the gun laws. If you want to cherrypick throughout Europe, feel free, the result is nearly the same.
there are countries like Switzerland which have extremely high gun ownership per capita and hardly have any mass shootings or gun murder.
Well, that's because it's Switzerland...
Perhaps that's not enough though.
Switzerland is: politically stable, has more equity, is richer, is smaller with its population, has stricter gun laws, a country with a lower gun ownership proportion, a different gun culture and so on.
Guns are tools for foreign invaders and nothing else really. Kids are taught to shoot, gun ownership is all about patriotism (not like in America, where it's for self-defense and for whatever other non-sense), adults constantly learn how to shoot since it's mandatory with their mandatory military service unlike the US where the vast majority is untrained and not intelligent enough to use it without training.
Around 25% of the privately owned guns are used purely for the purposes of the military and police. Their gun ownership has gone down massively over the years.
Gun licensing is way more strict: "People who've been convicted of a crime or have an alcohol or drug addiction aren't allowed to buy guns in Switzerland. The law also states that anyone who "expresses a violent or dangerous attitude" won't be permitted to own a gun. Gun owners who want to carry their weapon for "defensive purposes" also have to prove they can properly load, unload, and shoot their weapon and must pass a test to get a license."
Their citizens are healthier
They're happier overall
And still after all of that, guess what? Switzerland was pretty bad with their gun related deaths. Over time, as they've toughened up their gun laws, Switzerland has also seen a decrease in gun violence with every new restriction.
Comment has been collapsed.
America is a broken country when it comes to its laws. And you'll see it in almost every area.
I'm sorry that the victims of the shooting had to pay for just the simple fact that they live in that country.
Comment has been collapsed.
Imagine if the Liberals covered blue city Chicago with as much fervor instead of ignoring it. All lives matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I do appreciate the heads up, and the giveaways to go with it, I must say that you could probably have picked more suitable games to give away than those two.
Look at the titles: Layers of Fear and How To Survive, it's almost like you went out of your way to take the piss, which I don't think you did.
Comment has been collapsed.
No. I didn't intend it like that. I got the $1 tier of the horror HB to get my friend a game. I already had the others so I just added them as an afterthought.
Comment has been collapsed.
If stricter gun control was really the answer then you'd expect cities like NY, LA, and Chicago that either have very strict gun laws or have outlawed firearms completely to have a very low rate of violent crimes committed with a firearm, but the opposite is true.
A big step in the right direction would be to have the required background checks also go into people's medical history to find out whether they are suffering from a mental illness. Someone working in a gun shop has no way of finding out whether the person who just walked in to buy a gun has schizophrenia, is sociopathic, suffers from depression, or has any other dangerous mental illness as the background checks only look at criminal history.
Comment has been collapsed.
Cause going a state further, getting an arm, then return with zero controls inbetween is so difficult...
If strict gun control wasn't the sollution, explain our lack of mass-shootings in Europe? Can't just hop to another country to get a gun, you need to go illegal shopping in the Ex-USSR for that. And only criminals do that. Criminals also don't do random civilian shootings.
Comment has been collapsed.
You nailed it. Chicago, the only of those three cities to once prohibit having firearms within city limits (it's since been made legal again), borders directly on Wisconsin and Indiana, two states with some of the most lax gun control laws in the USA.
All three of those cities are in the top 5 most traveled US cities, all three serve as transportation hubs, and all three have extremely high population concentration. Just poor examples all around, in my opinion.
If stricter gun control laws are ineffective, it's simply because they're not stricter everywhere (although, oddly, Talien's second point seems to support stricter gun control, so I'm a bit confused).
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not against gun control itself, as there are cases where it's warranted such as people with criminal backgrounds and the mentally ill, but too many people take the knee jerk reaction of "ban guns and you stop gun violence".
Comment has been collapsed.
No guns would, by its very definition, lead to less gun violence, though. That's not knee-jerk, it's logic. These mentally ill people of which you speak would have a much more difficult time getting hold of one if there weren't as many around, dontcha think?
Stricter gun control is simply a half-measure in the same direction. It puts fewer guns out there to help prevent gun violence.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really, because people who want a gun for the purpose of using it to do harm to others will be able to get them illegally anyway. Banning guns completely will mostly harm the people who are responsible gun owners and use them for things like hunting and recreational shooting. You know, the people you never hear about or even know have a gun because they don't go around using them to shoot up schools, churches, movie theaters, malls, etc.
The other thing that would be a big deterrent to gun violence is education and training. If everyone who wanted to buy a gun was required to pass a gun safety class as well as every member of their immediate family there would be a VERY sharp reduction in accidental injuries and deaths due to improper use of a gun.
But that being said, personally I'm not a big fan of using a gun for home protection. To do that you either need to keep it loaded and within easy reach (which is a bad thing for obvious reasons like if an intruder gets to it first, or a child decides it'd be a fun thing to play with) or you keep it unloaded and within easy reach and hope you can bluff an intruder which usually doesn't end well. I prefer a baseball bat and the fact that I know my house better than someone who breaks in.
Comment has been collapsed.
No guns would, by its very definition, lead to less gun violence, though.
Is that what you're saying "not really" to? In not so many words, you yourself have stated that one of the problems is how easy it is to get a firearm in the US. Banning handguns in the USA would make that more difficult.
And surely, if training and education would cause a sharp decline in gun-related violence, then most certainly a ban on handguns would do the same. That you can claim one will cause a decline and the other won't is ... odd, to say the least.
EDIT: Now you've got me curious how many gun deaths were perpetrated with "illegal" firearms - meaning those with no record of ownership -- versus the number of deaths caused by those purchased legally (as well as the age and financial demographics of those involved, amongst other details). I have an appointment I have to make, but you've piqued my interest, and I plan on researching it some when I return home later. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not that it's too easy to get a gun, it's that there is nothing in the background checks for mental illness when someone applies to get one. If the background checks were allowed to go into medical history as well as criminal records then the existing laws and regulatoins would be working as they were intended to, but background checks are hamstrung by bleeding heart tools who cry and whine about how we can't discriminate against the mentally ill and pushed to have their records made private so employers can't use them as part of the hiring process, because somehow not wanting someone working for you who could snap and turn violent if they go off their meds is discriminatory.
This has the side effect that nobody else has access to medical records either, so for example a sociopath or schizophrenic can get a gun just as easily as anyone else even though they should never be allowed to have one under any circumstance.
And yes, I think it will be informative to look into violent crimes committed with legal vs. illegal firearms.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll forego making my other points to say this --
Your initial comment is still baffling. First you imply that stricter gun control doesn't work ("If stricter gun control was really the answer"), and then you go on to say that stricter gun control measures are needed (medical history included in background checks, for example.)
And I still say that stricter gun control is only a half measure. I've yet to see a single valid argument from anyone for necessitating owning a handgun (please note the distinction between handguns and rifles). Too often that reason ends up being "but I need to defend myself and my family!" - but then you have to ask yourself - "where are the 'bad guys' getting their guns?" That kid doing a drive-by shooting didn't import his gun illegally, and that guy that broke into that old couple's home to steal their valuables after shooting and killing them didn't sneak his gun into the country, and that guy that robbed the liquor store and shot the clerk down the block from you last week didn't contact some back-alley foreign arms dealer to get his. The wife or son or daughter that shot their husband/father/uncle didn't go online and have a gun secretly shipped to their home in a plain brown unlabeled box from overseas. The child playing in his father's closet didn't accidentally shoot himself or herself after a shady deal with a man dressed in black.
They got them because people like you and I, good law-abiding citizens, are able to walk into a gun shop and purchase one, legally. They were able to get them because guns are acceptable to own in the USA, and because too many people are trying to make it "normal" and believe you have the "right" to own a gun (don't even get me started on the 2nd Amendment nonsense I read ...), and worst of all -- people mistake the privilege of being allowed to own a handgun as a right to begin with.
And just to address the whole "mental health thing" -- can you assure me (or anyone) with any amount of certainty that someone mentally stable enough to buy a handgun today will be just as mentally stable tomorrow? The next day? Next month? Next year?
I would bet my kidneys (yes, both of them) on the following statement - you ban handguns nationwide in the USA, and you'll see far fewer gun-related deaths, far fewer than any amount of gun control measures will ever accomplish. That it's a "right" to own a handgun at all in the USA is not only baffling to people from other countries, but it's also baffling to me, a lifelong US citizen.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's a difference between stricter gun control laws and actually enforcing (or allowing to be enforced) what already exists. Doing away with the idiotic blocks put in place to prevent medical records from being used as part of background checks will allow what already exists to work as intended.
Mandatory education and training will also do away with many of those gun related deaths. Yes, you are correct that many of the handguns used in violent crimes are stolen from people who legally bought them. Education and training will see a very sharp decline in gun thefts because people will know how and why they need to be securely stored instead of being stuck in the nightstand next to their bed or in a shoebox in a closet, often with ammo in the same place.
To be honest I agree with you that handguns are a pointless thing for much of the general populace to have, but there are a lot of people with legitimate uses for them like competitive target shooting, and yes, Police. Because if handguns are banned the next step will most certainly be an outcry from fringe groups demanding that law enforcement give them up, and I'd really rather not see my local Police reduced to using tazers and batons. But hey, maybe I'm just biased in that respect since I grew up near Detroit and know full well how vital Police are and the consequences when they are absent or improperly equipped.
No, nothing to do with us humans can ever be guaranteed aside from that at some point we all will die. Mandatory mental health checks as part of regular medical checkups would go a long way, but that will most likely never happen due to the same bleeding heart tools that got the blocks on medical records being used for background checks put into place.
Sure, a ban on handguns probably would greatly reduce the amount of gun related deaths, but again, so would mandatory education and training. Someone who has to pass a gun safety and training course is going to know how to properly handle, use, maintain, and store their firearm. They'll know how and why to do simple things like removing the firing pin or disassembling their handguns before storing them, because most people looking for a gun for nefarious purposes don't even know how to properly aim and fire one, let alone assemble one so it will function.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll pose you the same question I posted in another thread, about a similar topic, many months ago.
The question was as follows (or as similar as I remember):
You put 20 people in an empty room.
You put 20 people in an empty room with a gun.
In which room is someone more likely to be killed?
Don't add details to the question, don't ask any questions about any of what I've said, and don't make any assumptions about the people, the rooms, or the gun. Don't post your answer here - just answer that question quietly to yourself, please. After you've done so, please read the spoiler text below.
If you leaned even slightly toward the second room, then you know banning guns would greatly reduce the number of gun-related deaths. Only you'll know know your answer, though. I don't need your answer. I already know my own, and my reasons for answering the way I did. Worth noting: Strangely (in my opinion, at least), every single person who was in support of gun ownership - without exception - added extra details, asked questions or wanted additional information, or made assumptions about the question I'd asked. I found that rather odd, given it was such a simple question. It's my personal opinion that they did so to try and justify choosing the first option given.
At any rate, given what you've said - it appears we are on the same page, just reading different paragraphs. You simply support the same thing to a different degree than I do, and I'm okay with that. I'm not here to change minds - just perhaps provide more perspective to a delicate topic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your question is missing the American way, put 20 people in with 24 guns. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I say the words "delicate topic", and you bring a BFG to the bar. xD
Comment has been collapsed.
That question is flawed because you could say just about anything other than gun and expect to get door #2 as an answer from any reasonably intelligent person.
20 people in an empty room
20 people in an empty room with a rock
What room is someone more likely to be killed in?
Repeat the same question with a knife, hammer, axe, screwdriver, bathtub full of water, pillow, length of rope, tree branch, cigarette lighter, bag of day old white castles, etc.
But yes I think it's fair to say that we're reading different parts of the same page, and I'm also fine with that.
Comment has been collapsed.
20 people in an empty room
20 people in an empty room with a rock
What room is someone more likely to be killed in?
You're right, I'd choose #2 for that one as well, and for the same reason as the gun scenario.
That was in fact my point, though -- no gun, rock, hammer, axe, screwdriver, or whatever else, less chance of death. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
You were right too, they are never able to just answer the question.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, I get you, so it was more of a human nature scenario rather than specifically about guns.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really related to the discussion, but I felt it worth saying - despite our differences of opinion, I must admit this was a really great discussion between us, and provided me with more perspective. Additional perspective and information about anything is always welcome.
So yes, thank you for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, same here. A good discussion with people who have differing opinions helps everyone involved in it grow, especially when it doesn't devolve into insults and namecalling.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe because it worked for other countries?
Gun violence existed in some other western countries too and all managed to fix it, with one exception, where it gets worse year by year. Surprisingly it's that one country that with a gun fetish, where people make up plenty of bogus reasons why gun restrictions wouldn't be a solution.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I can give an example of the mentally ill here.
One went up a schoolyard with a knife in my home town. The students threw their backpacks at him, and the flew the scene.
Now... try that with guns. Yeah, the result wont be as pretty, would it?
You seem to think you need guns to protect from the ill, but you don't seem to realise the only reason the ill GOT guns is because of the lax stance on gun ownership. Take that out, and your defensive needs goes "poof" along with it.
Comment has been collapsed.
You misunderstand my post, I'm not suggesting guns to protect against the mentally ill, I'm saying we need to stop sabotaging our own laws with things like exemptions for the mentally ill or blocking background checks from looking at medical records to find a history of mental illness. If the mentally ill were prevented from buying guns like people with criminal records are there would be a lot less gun related violence.
Comment has been collapsed.
The mentally ill are generally not going to go to those lengths to procure a gun aside from maybe those with sociopathic tendencies, where here in the US they can walk into pretty much any store that sells guns and buy one as long as they don't have a criminal record. We don't need stricter gun control, we just need to make what's already on the books work as intended and stop pandering to the bleeding hearts who cry and whine about how we can't discriminate against the mentally ill and get them made exempt. It's like the people who keep calling for tougher gun control and the banning of this type of gun here and that type of gun there don't even realize that the laws we already have are hamstrung by other bills, provisions, and clauses that prevent them from affecting certain groups of people.
But a big part of it is europe is a totally different culture. Here in cities like Detroit much of the violence is gang related, where most european nations don't have cities that are so bad the police won't even go into certain areas for fear of their own lives. Gangs don't give a shit about gun control laws because they get their guns illegally anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Gangs, like criminals, generally don't go random shooting civilians though, the very definition of the mass murder syndrome.
And yes, Europe does have areas like that, especially in France.
Comment has been collapsed.
They don't need to actively shoot people at random, there is plenty enough "collateral damage" when gangs go to war with each other.
That's true, France has some problems with gangs as do some areas of England and Ireland, but speaking in terms of Europe as a whole there is far less gang related issues than in the US.
Comment has been collapsed.
But... all these mass-shootings are not that. Unless you argument all these shooters got guns to protect themselves from gangs and just "happen" to use them to shoot a lot of people at hoc random?
Are Madden tournaments common areas for Gang violence that defensive weaponry is required to be carried?
Thanks god for that I say. We got enough issues with terrorists to add gangs to the list :/
Comment has been collapsed.
You are correct, mass shootings are usually not gang related. Mass shooters are almost without fail found to be suffering from some form of mental illness, this is common knowledge, yet instead of taking steps to prevent the mentally ill from buying guns the exact opposite is done. This is what needs to change.
Not sure where you're getting the bit about people carrying guns for self defense, as I've never argued for that. Someone with a CCW, sure, because in order to get a CCW permit you are required to take and pass a gun safety and training course and will know how to properly handle your firearm. But everyday people with no training? No. That is how accidents happen and tragedies get made worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretending those cities are a counter-example when guns are available nationwide and easily transported across borders is idiotic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Tons of shooting, sometimes there is videogames, sometimes not. But each and everytime, there is some, and only, americans ... So... videogames is the thing?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's three people dead - two men playing and the shooter.
One was a young father, and the other was a young man. I haven't watched the video of their match before the shooting starts - I don't think I can stomach it.
The midterms are coming up - get the fuck out and vote for people who aren't in the NRA's pockets who will actually put legislation forward to bring America up to the same level as literally every other first world country, where shit like this DOESN'T happen as often as the weather changes.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're right, the victims were Eli Clayton (21) and Taylor Robertson (27); and then was the f***ing murderer David Katz (24, suicide).
Comment has been collapsed.
Ive seen more then once poping up again and again
'the problem isn't gun control - its the mental health system'.
BS.
Im from Brazil. Our mental health system SUCKS - its worse then other areas of our health system, look up where Brazil is in the global ranking on health.
Also on that: we have gun control... and one of the worse scenarios of criminal activity and gun smuggling, meaning that despite the gun control the gangs get to then illegally.
Compare the number of shootings... we had like one(2) like the ones in US in like 20 years or something. We had '3' if you count a crazy guy who tried to set a nursery ablaze, you know, with like fire... because he couldn't get ahold of a freaking gun easily you know? Oh btw the firestarter failed- some people got mildly intoxicated but they had time to flee, stop the fire, etc... unlike guns.
Another of the shooting was from a kid- who used his mother's gun, who was police. So it doesn't count on those arguments either.
1) Gun Control/Ban (yes, ban is good) = way harder to get ahold of guns.
Not only that it makes owning guns imediatly suspicious- from neighbours to family, it increases the chances of people finding a gun and acting on it. Even in regards to smugled weapons they aren't easy to find- way harder then drugs, believe me. Theres 2 scenarios in these kinds of violence- outbursts (short notice) and the 'cooking pot' (people that thinks and dream about doing it for months, years, etc). Outbursts come from things like reactions, and theres a window of time until someone cools down and think better about doing something stupid - namely gun control makes the process of getting a gun too long for 'outbursts', wich btw are the most common cases.
It also makes the 'cooking pot' scenarios harder- it makes it much harder and longer to get ahold of a single gun, much more getting many and ammunition to go. They also become expensive- lots of robber around here use knives, the majority the cheapest revolvers, because generally only the drug 'cartels' have the means to get any proper hardware. Needless to say the damage of shootings with handguns is way way lower.
Oh and training. Most training ranges here require one level of paperwork. Im not tottally sure but its like a permit to handle guns alone (its another to own then). Unless you live in the country side here where you could go shoot far from view theres literally nowhere to shoot without drawing attention. If anyone starts shooting at cans in their backyard a police visit is in short notice.
2) The problem isn't mental health: its CULTURE
We have lots of homicides with guns in my country; Many are cases of jealous husbands and such. Even with our gun control and 'ban' our shootings would be higher IF we were more like the use in some sense- and as i said before, our mental health care is worse. Our shootings would be lower by gun control alone, but not that lower given how we underperform in controlling smugling.
Mental ilness isn't different by country, and we don't see anything near half of what happens in the US in this regard.
What changes by country is culture, enviroment.
It creates situations like the high rate of suicides in Japan that outshines any country, or how many poor countries have low rates (people who should be sad and miserable with unenployment and hunger for example). Its never just a one factor thing and culture plays the biggest role.
I can't tell for sure what are the causes and enviroments that lead to this in the US, but some suspects come up: The culture of wining, that view that rich=success=deserving ('everybody can win if you work hard for it'), the bullying (i was bullied hard when young, but what the accounts ive seen online about bullying over there its like another level), the many cultural divides (religious, ethnical, immigrants)...
Add to that gun availability and its a formula for disaster.
Mental ilness is serious but how it manifest changes by enviroment. In my family i have 2 professionals who work in this field and ive heard many cases, not mentioning the ones ive met. The scrizophenics for example ive met or heard accounts of had the most varied delusions but... they were often things like thinking the neighbours spy on then.
Thing is, those delusions are shaped- the most hardcore case ive met i can easily see how he could become a shooter given a different enviroment; You know, things like being fed crazy conspiracy theories (by god, those are way rarer here) or being surrounded by speechs against immigrants or muslins or what have you.
......and on that regard im sad to say this but... gaming probably helped in this particular story.
Not gaming by itself, but toxicity? Yeah. Toxicity alone doesn't provoke that i mean fgs the toxicity around fps games here is terrible if not worse then in the US. But then you add the other ingredients- like the culture of wining/worht i mentioned, the delusions that are tied to development (the better off in life someone is the worse a failure looks, thus developed countries have higher depression for example), the freaking ease of access to guns... add to that toxicity and the epitome of competitive enviroment...
Not saying the other participants were toxic- but toxicity in games heighten the competitivity, because they feed the push of 'needing to win/be better' and tie that strongly to things like sense of worth. Toxicity makes things personal and passional. Even if everyone was polite in the tournament that player(the shooter) had years drowning in this kind of enviroment, taking thins way waaaay too much personaly.
Just compare loosers rage on games and tournaments to loosers rage on typical sports. In sports violence is mostly tied to 'reasons' that makes one player believe things were unfair like a bump (or direct offenses) - in gaming the loosers that rage frequently doesn't need any such scenarios to rage, it comes entirely from loosing, meaning the personal stakes (unlike actual stakes, money, job) are higher as well as the impact of loosing having a more personal meaning. Thats the culture brewed in competitive games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I always enjoy your thoughtful posts.
I agree, it does feel to me that there are quite a few problems with US culture, and that some of them get more exacerbated with time. You talk about the 'culture of winning', for example, that but now goes hand in hand with mediocracy, where a lot of attention is given to making stragglers succeed or at least feel good with themselves, at the expense of excellence. It feels to me like there are a lot of contradicting forces, trying to push this way and that, which ends up causing stress and mental breakdown. That stress is further built by the tendency to melodramatise everything, to the point of not being able to distinguish between shades of grey.
I think that a good example of that was something I saw in an excerpt of 8 Out of 10 Cats on YouTube. Don't remember exactly, but it went something like this: One of the guests (American, I'd guess) said that she thinks comedians are brave, and told the audience to 'give them a hand' (applaud). Then the host, Jimmy Carr, said (more or less): at this point those in the crowd who aren't American must be a little baffled, thinking: 'Comedians are brave? Soldiers are brave, firefighters are brave...'
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks :)
Makes sense, things are ofte multi-layered. Contradictions seen right on point- I can't speak much from my pov but even from an outsiders view the contradictions show, like the us championing freedom and libertarian views while at the same time having such strong right-wing views.Here is also full of contradctions but something on brazilian culture is highly passive and things tend to get mixed up like our religious syncretism - while in the US they clash. Im not sure things clash more over there, probably just like in most countries, but unlike most contries the US is too diverse. I find the contrast interesting- both Brazil and US are big countries that rose from colonies, built on immigrants and mixing- many of the same ingredients but one became more like a muddled soup while the other the ingredients kept separate... funny thing is im not sure wich is wich; for instance you guys have a tremendously strong national identity across the country (with the excpetion of the native americans i guess), but probably built on such contradctions.
The 8 out of 10 Cats example i believe isn't specifically a american thing- i see the same views elsewhere, that kind of view is more common amongst middle-class/upper class in highly urban regions, and even more so amongst the genterarion y(milennials), across the globe. Maybe its more pronounced there but the trend of the current generation is seeing things like that
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm reading Rutger Bregman's Utopia for Realists (interesting though somewhat repetitive book), and he says that statistics show that the higher the inequality is in society, the more social ills there are, including mental health. The US is very high on the inequality list, and also very high on the mental health problems list. He goes on to say that if there's one country where the American Dream (that hard work etc. can make you successful) is the furthest from the truth it's the US.
It's of course his opinion (backed by some figures), but figured I'd throw it out there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because games have been the cause of several deaths and this event was the last straw, I hereby declare my abandonment of games. No more will I support an industry that has killed men, women, and children and if anyone continues playing games then you're directly responsible for all future deaths caused by them and the blood of the innocent is on your hands. You all need to seriously rethink your lives and values. #clearconscience #gamecontrol #bangames #shutdownsteamgifts #endsteam #endorigin #endubisoft #endgog
Comment has been collapsed.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Problem isn't gun control, it's an identity crisis in America.
Comment has been collapsed.
That identity being gun culture, and the problem being the lack of gun regulation and security in these public venues.
Comment has been collapsed.
Government culture impeding regulation, certainly.
More guns don't make people safer, that's how you ended up in the current debacle, any thorough study of both the US and nations that chose to act points to that fact.
Not to mention how guns only escalate situations rather than de-escalate them (often leading to single deaths, not killing sprees, where you could argue someone would have time to intercede), and there is no evidence that the growing number of guns has increased the number of events stopped by armed bystanders.
The evidence is completely against your position and the number of sprees stopped by bystanders is well below the margin of error.
Comment has been collapsed.
it's an identity crisis in America.
*check violent crime demographic statistics by race
yes, definitelly.
Comment has been collapsed.
luckily it was madden and not a cs:go / pubg tournament
Comment has been collapsed.
Great, another load of 'thoughts and prayers' followed by 'It's too hard to do anything about it, lets just blame it on any random excuse'.
Comment has been collapsed.
US need to learn from the rest of the world. Yes there are gun incidents outside the US but not as often as the US does. It's great to have liberty but at what cost? The lives of innocent victims? How many more until the US government make a move? 100 or 1000 killings in a day?
Comment has been collapsed.
I wasn't going to make a comment this time but after coming across a video on youtube talking about the media already having jumped into the "blame games" mindset I think it can't really hurt to say this again.
(not aimed at any particual person but rather to whoever oposses strict gun regulations, you know, a rant of sorts)
Yes, the problem runs deeper than gun control, the US isn't the only country that suffers from this kind of violence, and there's no easy fix. But to use a simple analogy, if something catches on fire all the time maybe try to avoid having gasoline near it. Limiting civilian access to guns won't stop the problem but it'll certainly reduce it's frequency. If you make it as hard as possible for mentally ill individuals to get a firegun you'll limit their ability to cause large scale damage in closed spaces, they'll still be able to ram their cars into groups of people on the street, they'll still be able to stab people, they'll still be able to make home-made explosives, etc. But getting rid of one of the easiest ways to kill people seems like a reasonable option.
Now, about the "freedom" argument and the whole idea of using guns for self-defence: firstly, you're not free to murder, that's not a right anywhere in modern society. And do you seriously think that the average citizen needs a gun? If you pull out a gun during a robery all you get most of the time is shot, this might be new information to some but most people in this world are not capable nor trained to handle that type of situations and the criminals probably have more experience killing than you do. So unless you have a solid reason like being part of some security group, a cop or military, or being under some pretty specific risk of being attacked you're probably better off with something like a taser. If someone wants to rob you just give then your damn wallet, it's not worth it.
Also, people needs to stop watching this obsesive coverage that the media does of this tragedies, they're literally monetizing death and giving some psycho out there the push they need to go out on a killing spree by telling them "go out with style and a high enough kill count and we'll make you famous". Fuck those guys, they'll should be doing some real journalism instead of glorifying murderers.
And to wrap this up. This shit does happen in other countries, but guess what? Here in the rest of the world it doesn't happen every god damn month, get your shit together and ban guns to make the problem a tad more manageable, and then look into how to actually fix it instead of throwing blame around the place.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you are proud to be on par with poor South American and African countries while still believing to be a civilized country?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not to mention those stats usually come from actual WAR... or drug-related violence (which generally involves dead gangs, cops or military, not civilians like in the USA).
Also I really want to know how exactly Americans think we live in Europe here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Only people with mental problems see benefits in killing other people with their guns. But thanks for admitting USA is a 3rd world country so it doesn't need to be treated on par with civilized countries.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, cause every other Western civilisation has the same numbers as a war-torn countries.
Oh wait... no, nobody has.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate and order by homicide. Then tell us which of those countries with more gun violence than USA are you proud to be better than?
Comment has been collapsed.
"Its like expecting there to be no heart related deaths after the first heart transplant and then wanting to burn down the hospitals if anyone ever dies in the attempt to save people with heart problems"
Sorry, im confused, so whole comment was a joke ? If you are serious, this has to be my second favorite comparison. First being, of course, when somebody said punishing guy who was selling illegally ammunition to the guy who shot 59 people is same exact thing as if somebody punished guy who helps old lady fix her car.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet in all the seriousness you ignore all the statistics from other countries where stricter gun laws have been a direct cause for less gun related violence and deaths?
Comment has been collapsed.
Isn't there an article posted right there in this topic that states about 0,3% of mass murders gets stopped by other civs with guns.
0.3% is quite the stretch from 300%.
Also, look up Australia.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like the solution to all problems alcohol causes is giving everyone more alcohol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUVwR0rw5fk
Comment has been collapsed.
The fuck I'm reading?
Also... if the sollution to mass shootings is "more guns" explain, once again (read; for the first time) why we don't have this issue in Europe then. Since we don't have this problem that apparently is only fixable with more guns...
Comment has been collapsed.
Question, do you believe people are born as law abiding citizens and some are born as criminals? I think arming "citizens" is indirectly meaning, arming also those who might break law in future. I dont know about you, but i see issue with that, counting on everyones honesty once they get their guns seems really dangerous (and for apparent reasons). Majority of these mass shooters were not criminals, they were law abiding citizens, like you want to arm, until the point that made them go crazy and take many innocent lives.
Comment has been collapsed.
Look at my post above. Im brazilian and here homicide is terrible due to the drug wars- but this kind of violence? Random shootings, personal/passional, etc? Its lower. Heck i had a terrible experience that i don't like to recall where if any of the involved had a gun (not even on their person, like back at their house even) would had led to tragedy. Thankfully the violence stopped at fistfight levels and later on things could be sorted out for the misunderstandin it was. I shiver to imagine what could have happened to people i love and even myself if we lived in a culture where backyard shooting and gun collections were a common thing.
Btw people here can warn the police when they spot anyone with a gun - 9 out of 10 they'd be spot on on pointing out a criminal. What sucks here is the police doing something about it, one of the many problems in living in a underdeveloped country. Imagine the US where the police is quick to answer and people aren't shy on calling authorities right away...
Also, since its less common here (common people carrying guns) every time someone reacts to robbery with a gun of their own it get in the knews. Its something like 3 out of 10 the times where the criminals are stopped or get shot without any inocents caught in the crossfire. More often the victins pulling the gun die, or they don't but someone other inocent does. One instance comes to my mind, a police officer dining with his family and a armed robbery- one of the robbers got multiple shots(and survived), he was shot like in the leg or something- another person got shot badly and his wife died.
Safety?
Comment has been collapsed.
sport gaming contests should be banned in USA, and high schools as well. both should be substituted by CoD contests with RL gear. please someone forward the proposal to the fat blonde man in charge. /sarcasm
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah...videogames cause violence..riight...
somehow all the shootings always occur only in USA.. where any psycho or ragekid can get a gun as easy as getting an ice cream...
other countries mostly dont have this...and ppl play games there too...and everybody lives
maybe the games dont cause violence, but the "not having proper psychological examination to get a gun license" problem???
Comment has been collapsed.
First it was shooters, now it's madden, next will have match-3 games as a reason for shooting.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing new, this is now a routine. And it will remain that way until the gun-nuts in America realize that guns need to be regulated.
Comment has been collapsed.
In case some of you haven't heard, or cared. there was another shooting in Jacksonville Florida. This time during a Madden tournament. 11 wounded and 2 dead. One of them the shooter.
Great. Just what we need. Another shooting. And this time at a video game tournament. You just KNOW the advocates will just come out of the woodwork with their evangelistic cries about banning video games because they make people violent.
How about, instead of advocating that, jump on the backs of your local leaders and senators to enforce REAL gun control?
I swear, for the next 6 months we are going to be bombarded with news articles by advocates that claim video games make people violent. What? Did mankind live in peace and harmony before the invention of the video game? Be fore the invention of the movie or television set? Or the invention of the gun? As George Carlin once said- I bet the Spanish Inquisition must have come up as a bad episode of Gilligan's Island.
Don't get me wrong. I do feel bad for the innocent guy that got killed and the others that got wounded, but this has GOT to come to an end somewhere.
Edit- Added a couple of small GA's for you all for reading this.
Comment has been collapsed.