Trump's Meeting With The Video Game Industry To Talk Gun Violence Could Get Ugly (washingtonpost.com) 498
Anonymous readers share a report: President Trump is set to pit the video game industry against some of its harshest critics at a White House meeting on Thursday that's designed to explore the link between violent games [Editor's note: the Washington Post article may be paywalled], guns and tragedies such as last month's shooting in Parkland, Fla. Following the attack at Marjory Stoneman High School, which left 17 students dead, Trump has said violent games are "shaping young people's thoughts." The president has proposed that "we have to do something about maybe what they're seeing and how they're seeing it." Trump has invited video game executives like Robert Altman, the CEO of ZeniMax, the parent company for games such as Fallout; Strauss Zelnick, the chief executive of Take Two Interactive, which is known for Grand Theft Auto, and Michael Gallagher, the leader of the Entertainment Software Association, a Washington-focused lobbying organization for the industry.
Three people familiar with the White House's planning, but not authorized to speak on the record, confirmed those invitees. A spokeswoman for the White House declined to share a full list of participants on Wednesday. ESA confirmed its attendance this week, but the others did not respond to questions. Opposite of them are expected to be some of the video-game industry's toughest critics, including Brent Bozell, the founder of the Parents Television Council, and Rep. Vicky Hartzler, a Republican from Missouri, the three people said. After another shooting -- the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. -- they each called on government to focus its attention on violent media rather than just pursuing new gun restrictions.
Three people familiar with the White House's planning, but not authorized to speak on the record, confirmed those invitees. A spokeswoman for the White House declined to share a full list of participants on Wednesday. ESA confirmed its attendance this week, but the others did not respond to questions. Opposite of them are expected to be some of the video-game industry's toughest critics, including Brent Bozell, the founder of the Parents Television Council, and Rep. Vicky Hartzler, a Republican from Missouri, the three people said. After another shooting -- the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. -- they each called on government to focus its attention on violent media rather than just pursuing new gun restrictions.
Unicode strikes again (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Âoe'll continue to do as âoe please.
Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring facts (Score:5, Informative)
The meeting shouldn't be any more interesting than the Take Two Interactive and the Entertainment Software Association showing the studies that violent video games do not increase violence, and then everyone else sticking their thumbs up their asses. Then again I doubt it will go that way.
Re:Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring facts (Score:5, Informative)
So the problem with hoping that people might be allowed to bring facts is Trump the Idiot doesn't believe in facts, he believes in alternative facts.
This is a man who loudly proclaims to be the best at everything, and have the biggest inauguration crowd, and all sorts of things .. often in direct opposition to real, actual facts.
Donald Trump doesn't operate on facts, and doesn't give a fuck about facts. America has a president who feels facts are whatever the fuck he says they are.
He was an asshole and a crook in private industry, and he's brought along his coterie of assholes and crooks (both his family and his cronies) to continue that in the White House.
Honestly, why the fuck would you think Trump would start operating on facts for this issue? He hasn't done so for any other issue. He's an ill informed buffoon, and always will be.
Re:Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring facts (Score:5, Insightful)
I am still astonished that people who refer to "Crooked Hillary" voted for Trump with a straight face.
People who say "Crooked Hillary" all the time might not have voted for Trump.
They might not even be eligible to vote in US elections.
Re: (Score:3)
Spain's economy is fairly small and is currently rough but it is still larger than Russia's. Even so, Russia is a major threat to everything right?
Are you really trying to argue that Spain is as much of a threat as Russia? Everyone, including Russia and Spain, would laugh at you for saying that.
Nobody wants to admit that his approval rating is better than Obama's was at this point in his presidency
Probably because it's not true. It is an objectively false statement.
The only way to stop a man without a gun.... (Score:2, Informative)
... is a school satchel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rVKknah1Ws
In holland, they don't let people have guns, so bad man only had knives and failed to kill anyone.
People in holland play the same video games. The difference is, they don't let ordinary people have guns without a damn good reason. Even IF IT DID cause violence, you'd have to remove every cause of anger and violence to fix the problem... video games, even if they do cause violence, are not the one and only cause.
The fix is to remove guns from
Re: (Score:2)
they don't let ordinary people have guns
This is the key difference. The American ideal is that we are all "ordinary" people, including those in government. Making rules that divide society into "ordinary people" and some sort of aristocracy is not the American way. You can bet that the 1% in Europe have these firearms, albeit though their private security services.
The gun crowd in America does not want to give this up any more that we would accept controls on our speech (which Europeans also have more limit
Re:The only way to stop a man without a gun.... (Score:5, Informative)
I bet you call up Switzerland every time a gun thing comes up without even realizing what their laws are.
Firstly, there have been two shootings: ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_murder_in_Switzerland ). Switzerland has 8 million citizens, not 300 million. Additionally, only 20-30% have guns in their home, not all. It's an option to keep the gun, not
Secondly, would you be okay with Switzerland style gun control? Here's their laws: ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Switzerland )
- You cannot carry guns outside, with exception to security personel and army transport.
- Gun registry
- The entire population is required to go through military training for 2-3 years.
- No fully automatic guns
- You must have a permit, which disqualifies people with violent histories and mental issues..
- You must show ID when buying ammo, and you can only buy ammo for which you personally own the gun.
Most calls from the center / left are pretty cool with these restrictions. Yes, there are some left wingers who want an outright ban, but that's not the majority.
The kicker in pointing out Switzerland? If any of the mass shootings (clubs and schools) occured in Switzerland, the result would have been identical -- if not worse by most right wing logic (no regular citizen can carry, let alone conceal carry whereas in the states there's a chance)
In this sense, I totally agree with you. People kill people with guns... it's just the USA is fucked up more than any other peacetime country. Hell, I've heard of military incursions and terrorist strikes with less fatalities.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a big difference between the rifle issued by the Swiss army and a privately owned gun. The rifle issued by the army belongs to the army: the soldier has no right to use it for anything not related to the service, including self defense when off duty.
It might look like a lot of Swiss citizens privately own guns, but most of them are actually Swiss soldiers off duty keeping their issued equipment at home, rifle included, but it's not a private gun and mostly a liability, since it cannot be legally u
Re: (Score:2)
Switzerland is also a damned tiny, dense (compared to the US) country with a much more homogeneous population. Those are all factors that would affect the success of copying Switzerland's gun control system.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude! These people look at video games all day! They'll be violent as fuck! The secret service will probably have to mow them down with the Presidential Gatling Gun [wired.com] to keep them off the POTUS!
Pfffft, facts are meaningless (Score:2)
Re: Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring facts (Score:5, Informative)
Hell, the Army uses video games extensively
No, they don't. They use them occasionally to supplement other types of training, mostly because they're logistically easier and significantly cheaper. A "small arms trainer" isn't a video game so much as real weapons outfitted with CO2 blowback mechanisms and the ability to practice scenarios without needing a large training area and blank or live ammunition.
in part, to break down the natural tendency not to shoot another human.
Again, no. Soldiers practice shooting at each other all the time, with blanks, MILES gear, and simunition. It's silly to suggest that shooting pixels on a screen is somehow instrumental to desensitising shooters.
USMC used doom (Score:2)
USMC used doom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: USMC used doom (Score:5, Informative)
USMC used doom
Yes, they did. And as the article you linked to states, it was developed:
to train U.S. Marines for "decision making skills, particularly when live training time and opportunities were limited."
Which is what I said. Video games and more complex simulators were developed and used for their logistical and fiscal advantages, rather than because they're a particularly good way to train. They don't replace actual training, they augment it.
Even when used in these ways, it's not like the USMC just had guys running around blindly mowing down whatever popped up; they trained as teams under the same command structure as they would in the field, and emphasised things like fire control, target identification, team movement, etc. The key point was to practice every skill other than actually putting the bullet onto the target; that was secondary.
When I was in we did dry-training for that kind of stuff. You could practice "house clearing" with just a team of guys with no ammo (and sometimes even no weapons), in a parking lot with a floor plan marked out with rope. I guarantee that training was more useful than "marine Doom", which is why we did that instead of playing video games.
Re: Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring fact (Score:3)
You cannot have a soldier freeze up in combat because of the sheer level of violence evolving around him.
We can have it, and we do have it. Nobody can predict how they will react in a real firefight. No amount of prep and training can ensure that you'll be able to function at all, or to what extent your normal behaviour will be degraded. True desensitisation only really happens after you've survived enough firefights to have real experience ... and even then, there have been plenty of combat veterans who lose it in later engagements.
Training does help, but it's not a panacea.
Thats why they train and train and train. So that muscle memory and detachment allow the combatant to remain engaged during the conflict.
That muscle memory and detachmen
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens [theonion.com] (2018-02-14)
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens [theonion.com] (2017-11-05)
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens [theonion.com] (2017-10-02)
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens [theonion.com] (2017-05-17)
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens [theonion.com] (2015-12-03)
‘No Way To Prevent This, [theonion.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Sub-saharan Africa, Brazil, and El Salvador are all wonderful and peaceful places to live?
There's not a quiet genocide currently taking place in South Africa?
I could go on, but I think most people get the point.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That fact is only true by cherry picking data. I believe you are referring to 2015 when a series of horrific terrorist attacks occured in France. All other years gundeaths in France are a fraction of the US.
It's also debatable if you should compare organized terrorism to lone gunman type shootings. One is warfare the other a symptom of poor mental health.
Re: (Score:3)
Now replace the guns with trucks and do Europe.
There will likely always be crazy people who do bad things. We should go after the people, not the tactics.
By that logic we should make dirty bombs available to all. I mean, if we go after the people, what does it matter if the tactics are freely available?
Re: (Score:2)
Dirty bombs aren't available to the general public because of restrictions on radio active material. Essentially the danger of accidents in allowing the general public to have ready access to the kind of radioactive material that would be useful for a dirty bomb probably outweighs the danger of anyone actually bothering to build such a bomb. The same isn't true for guns where accidents account for only a few percent of deaths.
I'm in favor of actually funding and enforcing the laws we already have. If that d
Re: (Score:2)
Now replace the guns with trucks and do Europe.
There will likely always be crazy people who do bad things. We should go after the people, not the tactics.
And what? It would look even worse for the US?
Re: (Score:3)
Lets try this logic in different scenarios.
"People are dying from opioid overdoses"
Well, opioids are all over the place, and if we take those away the same people will just kill themselves with heroin. So we won't bother.
"Crime rates are high"
Well, if we arrest the criminals, more will just show up. So we won't bother.
Interesting that crime overall and youth violence have been dropping for 50 years, regardless of the development of violent media of all sorts. In fact, I believe there are two countries wi
Re:Depends on if anyone is allowed to bring facts (Score:5, Insightful)
The studies are only "lacking" because they didn't come to the conclusion that the Family Research Council wanted to here.
Re: (Score:2)
Places with gun control have rampant knife violence, and people shrieking that 'knife control' is needed.
Oh no!! Oh noooo! Someone is running around with a knife! I couldn't possibly outrun him before he gets me. Why, he might even kill two or three people before people swarm-tackles him to the ground. It's so VERY comparable to these 20+ dead mass shootings.
Re: (Score:2)
except these same people claiming violent video games do not create violence go around and advocate against videos and images that suggest rape, simulated rape, and snuff. You cannot have it both ways.
Generally people who are against specifically rape and snuff in video games are the same ones who are against violence.
There are those who oppose the objectification of women in video games, and that is very different than advocating against either violence or rape in video games. In this case they aren't worried about how it affects the actions of video game players but instead the inclusiveness of the video game industry. I'm not saying I agree with that viewpoint, but it is a very different argument.
The link (Score:5, Funny)
that's designed to explore the link between violent games [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled],
The link between violent games may be paywalled?
Re:The link (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, that DLC is really, really expensive...
Re: (Score:2)
These loot boxes are getting ridiculous!
Why shouldn't Trump think that way? (Score:2, Insightful)
Thousands of game journalists have been proclaiming for years there is a link between sexism in games, and sexism in real life. They also constantly whined there were too many violent shooters and so on.
So why would you not expect any non-gamer to read what the game journalists wrote and take it to heart? Trump would seem to be well-aligned with what the press has been saying for years, that games are affecting behavior.
A little late to back out now fellows now that someone you hate has finally listened.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Thousands of game journalists have been proclaiming for years there is a link between sexism in games, and sexism in real life. They also constantly whined there were too many violent shooters and so on.
So why would you not expect any non-gamer to read what the game journalists wrote and take it to heart? Trump would seem to be well-aligned with what the press has been saying for years, that games are affecting behavior.
A little late to back out now fellows now that someone you hate has finally listened. Who did you think would listen to you, the game developers that actually have to make money from what they sell?
Tell me something. If you truly believe that there's somehow a link between make-believe warfare and those who actually go out and murder people in real life, what the hell kind of impact does actual warfare on society have?
The US sustains one of the largest Military armies in the world. We often represent ourselves as the Global Police force, engaging in conflicts that have little or no justification. The Military Industrial Complex was forewarned by a standing president in 1961 which prevented fucking
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think anyone (with a brain) disputes that war and the stresses caused by military conflict are psychologically damaging to the very large number of people who actively participate in warfighting and have jobs associated with it. Over the four terms of the last two presidents, we've also lost the ability to have effective public oversight of military action. Overall, this is a huge problem, but it's not actually a counterargument to the first post. Both game violence and military violence can be r
Read again (Score:2)
I don't believe it's a problem. I am saying, someone who is not a gamer could reasonably assume there was a link because that is what games journalism has been saying for years, by complaining about violent or sexist games.
They are only now reversing that stance since Trump agrees with what they have been saying. Too late, they already planted the seed and it is bearing fruit.
Re: (Score:2)
the guy who played temporary host in a brief foster-like capacity for that kid said in an interview that he'd see him playing violent FPS games for 15 or more hours a day, and that the kid was all about "kill, kill, kill, and blowing things up" and couldn't stop talking about doing so as he played those games
Let me guess: They tried to change or prevent this behaviour, thus removing a release for pent up stress and energy for which the kid couldn't find other outlets.
For kids who have trouble separating fantasy from reality, the games are a pure petri dish in which to stoke the urge and desensitize the eventual murderer.
As a child I was traumatised, autistic, violent and played violent computer games to an excessive degree.
It turned me into a traumatised, autistic, violent adult that plays violent computer games to an excessive degree.
Meanwhile hundreds of millions of children are playing violent computer games without then going outside and shooting 17 people.
May
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny...I don't run around diving down sewer pipes and jumping on turtles and mushrooms every chance I get.
Re: (Score:2)
So why would you not expect any non-gamer to read what the game journalists wrote and take it to heart?
It's one reason why I've said for years that gaming 'journalism' is absolute shit. Conservatives cry the mainstream media is corrupt? They should try looking at gaming journalism where the standards are ENTIRELY absent.
Re:Why shouldn't Trump think that way? (Score:5, Informative)
Any civilized country does not allow anyone to just walk in from the damn street and buy 6 fully automatic rifles along with a box of shie polish!
You can't do this in the US either. Not sure where you get your info from but maybe research a little before you spout next time.
Re:Why shouldn't Trump think that way? (Score:5, Informative)
The GP said "fully automatic rifles," which are highly regulated at both the federal and state levels. They may not be transferred without getting federal approval [wikipedia.org] (ATF Form 4) subject to fingerprinting and an extensive background check. Most states have additional regulation, if they allow transfer or possession at all. Only already registered firearms may be transferred, and none have been allowed to be registered since 1986. Buying 6 M-16s would set you back around $100,000.
Re: (Score:3)
To one person, a fully automatic rifle means what the dictionary says it means. To another, it means "oh, well, you know what I mean". This doesn't facilitate effective communication and often prevents meaningful discussion, as both participants end up arguing over definitions, as we just saw here.
In response to your amendment of the original point, you raise an i
Re:Why shouldn't Trump think that way? (Score:5, Informative)
You can't do this in the US either. Not sure where you get your info from but maybe research a little before you spout next time.
Sure you can so long as it is a private sale (except for a handful of states that regulate private sales). Typically only FFLs have to do background checks.
I'm not even American and I know this.
What you "know" is wrong. Fully automatic rifles (aka machine guns) are very tightly regulated, in three ways.
First, the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) requires that anyone attempting to purchase a fully automatic weapon must obtain a tax stamp from the federal government. The cost of the tax stamp isn't too bad, $200, since the price was set in the 1934 law and has never been increased, but the legal process to obtain one is long, and arduous, and definitely includes thorough background checks by both federal and local law enforcement. There are also stringent requirements on storage and movement... if you want to transport your machine gun across state lines you have to notify the federal government, for example.
Second, the Hughes amendment to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act bans the transfer of any machine gun to a civilian, unless it was already in civilian hands before the law was passed. This means there is a fixed -- and fairly small -- supply of fully automatic weapons in civilian hands. Fixed supply and growing demand means growing prices. The price of a fully automatic Colt AR-15, for example, is upwards of $25,000.
Third, eleven states simply ban them entirely, so it's impossible to legally own one if you live in one of those states.
The result of these restrictions is that fully-automatic weapons are owned only by wealthy collectors with spotless backgrounds.
Now, if you want to talk about semi-automatic rifles, the story is very different. You can pick up Ruger 10/22 [ruger.com] about $200 at any gun store, and at many department stores that sell guns, like Wal-mart. If you buy it from a store, of course you'll have to have an instant background check. If you buy one in a private sale, you won't.
So, what you said is accurate if you refer to semi-automatic, rather than fully automatic rifles. This terminology distinction isn't a nit. The legal and practical differences are enormous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The vast, vast majority of drunk drivers never kill anyone.
The vast, vast majority of wife and child beaters never kill anyone.
Et cetera...
Re: (Score:2)
So then, what is their purpose and why should anyone miss them?
Learn the answer to this, and you will begin to understand why a large percentage of Americans disagree with you on this issue. I'm not going to try to answer the question, though, because you'll ignore anything I say. Unless you make the effort to learn for yourself, you'll never get it.
Re: (Score:3)
True. Semi-automatic rifles can kill tons of school kids, whereas fully automatic rifles can kill shit tons of school kids.
And a guy strolling around a school with a classic pump-action goose hunting shotgun and a shoulder bag full of buck shot can do exactly the same thing. Your fetish for hair splitting over which tool a murderer decides to use while carefully avoiding the fact that they all require a murderer to actually cause any murder is kind of creepy, actually. You haven't even started talking, yet, about how many kids that person could kill with $40 worth of stuff from Home Depot if he wants to take the time to read a
Re: (Score:2)
I was exaggerating to underline my point
Don't. It never works. It always works against you.
At best, you're just preaching to your choir. More often, people just roll their eyes and move on.
Re:Why shouldn't Trump think that way? (Score:5, Informative)
Remember, kids--stepping outside the libtard echo chamber is "flamebait" around here. These days, Slashdot is like Fark with a slightly more technical slant.
When you start using 'libtard', and also say uber-cynical content-free nonsense like assault nails and how blue states will probably require background checks for them, yeah, that's -1, Flamebait. It's needlessly antagonistic and stupid to boot, so quit crying.
Not shaping thoughts - increasing accuracy (Score:2)
https://www.military.com/undertheradar/2016/05/6-military-video-games-used-to-train-troops-on-the-battlefield
Re:Not shaping thoughts - increasing accuracy (Score:4, Insightful)
But in a broader sense, video games are unrealistic. When you get shot in a game, it should cease to work. In fact, it should erase the entire contents of your computer. And delete your social media accounts. You are dead. No more fun stuff.
For some people shot in-game, the software should scramble all your data, making it unreadable. And the game controls should respond slowly, if at all. Just like suffering a traumatic brain injury.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least you didn't get addicted to that Pacman. Listening to repetitive music, munching pills, and running from ghosts.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm quite a good shot in video games, not nearly as good with real firearms. Turns out that shooting a firearm in a game doesn't really transfer to the real thing
Really? I'm a far better shot IRL than I am in games. With pistols, rifles and especially bows.
Admittedly that's only in games that properly model wind effects, or if I'm shooting indoors.
Maybe it's because nobody shoots back IRL.
Re: (Score:2)
Each shot costs real money!
Shh... don't give EA, Activision, or Ubisoft any new ideas.
Gun deaths in the home of Sony and Nintendo (Score:5, Informative)
It seems to me a significant portion of the video game industry is based in Japan, where guns kill between 10 and 20 people each year. Meanwhile in America, 500+ are killed by guns accidentally going off, 10000+ murdered with guns and 40000+ kill themselves with guns every year. Must be the video games they said. We need to do something about the video games to save our children.
Did anyone else see the news about the elephant in the classroom [themalaymailonline.com] last week? It doesn't seem to have gotten the attention it deserves.
Re: (Score:2)
Did anyone else see the news about the elephant in the classroom [themalaymailonline.com] last week? It doesn't seem to have gotten the attention it deserves.
Of course, that's how it works. Let's face it: everybody sees the elephant in the room, it's just that nobody wants to talk about it.
That argument won't fly (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Video games are just what the NRA told Trump to blame, to shift attention away from calls for gun control.
Video games are thought of as an ideal target by the old people running the NRA, because they associate them with youth. Young people keep shooting up schools, so find something young people do which seems on the face of it insanely violent and like a perfect gun training / murder practice simulator.
They didn't realize that games are fairly mainstream now and a lot of players are well into their 40s. Th
Re:Gun deaths in the home of Sony and Nintendo (Score:5, Funny)
To be fair, the average type of games created by the Japanese video game industry and the average type created by the American game industry are pretty different
So Japan sees fewer gun deaths than the US but has a far higher rate of tentacle rapes?
Re: (Score:3)
Metal Gear? Street Fighter? Resident Evil? Silent Hill?
All Japanese games and massive franchises.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Like someone else said on the internet:
Real guns = Good
Fake guns = Bad
Re:So... (Score:4, Funny)
Next on Trump's agenda... (Score:2)
Gotta go after that damn Dancing the kids like so much next....
Re: (Score:2)
Easy twofer. Ban DDR and the kids can't learn how to dance.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that the plan, to put an end to that Devil's Music, rock and roll? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Adam Lanza was reportedly obsessed with Dance Dance Revolution, so clearly that was what caused him to shoot up a school.
Trump thinks these sessions are good PR (Score:5, Insightful)
Please (Score:2)
Did "videogames and movies" -make- you guys all gun-nuts? strike-that, excuse me, weapon-enthusiasts?
A gamer from the EU
Misdirection (Score:5, Interesting)
The funny thing is IIRC these techniques were invented by the Soviets. To be fair though it was Karl Rove that popularized their use in the Republican party.
Dead unicorns (Score:2)
Does anyone know the best way to beat dead unicorns? Should I use a regular stick, something flexible like a flail, or resort to sharp implements?
Now, these discussions about violent video games ignore the one that's actually causing problems, known as "real life". In the current implementation, you force people to socialize with undesirable individuals, some of whom are violent, etc. It's almost as if they don't want to fix actual problems, and instead focus on virtual ones.
As for the games themselves...
Bullshit association, is bullshit. (Score:2)
Look at the number of people who purchase and play games like Call of Duty, Fallout, or any other FPS game vs. the number of people who actually go out and murder people in real life. It's a fraction of a percent. It should be pretty fucking obvious that the "association" that is trying to be portrayed here is utter bullshit.
Mental illness and the ability to murder people is not created by playing fucking video games. And we literally have decades of evidence to validate that fact. This meeting with Tru
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If those guys from the video game industry... (Score:5, Funny)
... don't knock Trump over and teabag him repeatedly, I am going to be very disappointed.
with nary a mention (Score:2)
The debate should focus on realism in games. (Score:2, Insightful)
As an Old Right conservative, I naturally oppose government regulation of video games of any kind.
However, we are a culture of sorts, and cultural changes influence what businesses are willing to offer. In that context only, it might be useful to discuss this issue.
To my mind, the angle of approach should be the combination of gun violence and realistic looking scenarios. All video games are violent and war-like, but those that look most like movies or memories could have a conditioning effect, which our Ar
Re:The debate should focus on realism in games. (Score:5, Funny)
Don't forget the breakdown of institutions like marriage.
We should expect social order to break down when Biblical marriage (which is defined as a marriage between a man, his third wife and a porn star with a non-disclosure agreement) is under attack.
Re: (Score:3)
No, the distinction is artificial when it comes to these two specific cases. As I've said. Marriage and homosexuality are both biological impulses and both have been integrated into societal structures, and have been since long before the bible was written.
JonKatz Called... (Score:2)
He wants his subject matter back...
Voices From the Hellmouth [slashdot.org]
The Price of Being Different [slashdot.org]
Eric, Dylan, and Mary of Doom [slashdot.org]
Columbine Student on VG Violence [slashdot.org]
Seriously, no one on Slashdot already posting these? Yikes.
It sure seems like we want to relive the 90s (Score:2)
I guess this generation needs to relearn these lessons.
Let me see if I understand (Score:2)
It's not the games, stupid, it's the GUNS!!! (Score:2)
Waste of time (Score:2)
Re:A few thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids have always played variations of cops and robbers, cowboys and indians etc.
The whole "I kill you so I win and you lose" game is as old as our species. We have adapted it into a new kind of entertainment with the same basic premise.
How often do you see kids playing at raping each other compared to shooting imaginary fingerpistols at each other? Yes, even in Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a difference in the experience of playing cops and robbers, and using an imaginary weapon to take down an opponent, compared to the experience of simulated violence that is highly realistic? Where you aim your weapon at the detailed representation of a human head and attacking results in that head exploding, with blood and brains painting the wall.
What variable is that conditioning effect of many hours experiencing this violent simulation, for an adolescent brain still in development. Does the re
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't saying that kids will be kids. I was responding to the GP's statement that soon we'd have rape games on our game consoles and PCs as a direct result of having violent games now.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a difference in the experience of playing cops and robbers, and using an imaginary weapon to take down an opponent, compared to the experience of simulated violence that is highly realistic? Where you aim your weapon at the detailed representation of a human head and attacking results in that head exploding, with blood and brains painting the wall.
Fantasy is fantasy, no matter how "realistic" you can portray it. And a sick mind is a sick mind, no matter how cartoonish murder may appear. When you look at the sheer number of kids who play violent video games vs. the number of kids who go out and murder people in real life, the end result is so obscenely minuscule that looking for correlation and/or causation is ridiculous at best.
What variable is that conditioning effect of many hours experiencing this violent simulation, for an adolescent brain still in development. Does the repetition of visually experiencing human opponents being eviscerated into piles of gore contribute to the lack of empathy required to actually fire a weapon into crowded hallways? If not, why not?
Again, one only has to look at statistics. I could say that drinking carbonated soft drinks or using a smartphone contrib
Re: (Score:2)
"It's apparently completely acceptable to a sizable chunk of society for kids to play video games where they kill people."
Before we had video games, it was acceptable to play a game called "smear the queer", which required only a nerf football.
Children are bloody minded little bastards. If you take the violent games away, they'll make their own.
the kind of morals (Score:2)
Re:A few thoughts (Score:5, Informative)
It's apparently completely acceptable to a sizable chunk of society for kids to play video games where they kill people
Before video games existed, kids played games like "Cowboys and Indians" where they pretended to kill each other. Somehow, they did not all turn into violent sociopaths.
Also, we're on our 3rd generation now where kids play video games where they kill people. So this isn't new. Also, crime and homicides have plummeted during this time.
What if someone made a video game that allowed you to simulate raping people?
Already exists.
Imagine if you could buy an artificial vagina or human head that integrates with your gaming console so that you could rape it.
Already exists.
Society is advancing in morals in some respects but declining in morals in others.
Since crime and homicides have massively fallen since the 1970s and 1980s, citation required.
I think firearms will always be necessary and dangerous. If we don't cull the deer population, they will cull us on the roads.
:facepalm:
You do realize deer exist in lots of countries with strict gun control, right? And that the roads in those countries are not deer-encrusted death traps?
Some people legitimately need firearms for self-defense. Therefore, people should be allowed to have the freedom to possess firearms, and the second amendment is a good thing.
You're missing a very large step in your logic. Specifically, why nearly unfettered access to firearms must be granted to untrained people in order to satisfy your self-defense issue.
If some people need guns for self-defense, they can get the training, licensing and insurance required to handle those guns properly.
To its credit, the NRA isn't defending bump stocks.
No, the NRA did not defend bump stocks in the immediate aftermath of the Las Vegas shooting. Now that there's legislation to actually ban bump stocks, and some time has passed, the NRA is defending bump stocks. See: NRA opposition to FL legislation.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if you could buy an artificial vagina or human head that integrates with your gaming console so that you could rape it. Perhaps this will happen in a few years. This sort of thing is fundamentally bad.
I'm not sure I even agree with this - there is a reasonable argument that darker side of the human psyche exists and will exist nomatter what you do, and that it is safer to exercise this harmlessly than suppress it. Violence worldwide has been on the decline for decades. It could be argued part of the reason why is mass media violence providing catharsis...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure I even agree with this - there is a reasonable argument that darker side of the human psyche exists and will exist nomatter what you do, and that it is safer to exercise this harmlessly than suppress it. Violence worldwide has been on the decline for decades. It could be argued part of the reason why is mass media violence providing catharsis...
I'm reminded of the argument that there should be no penalty for possessing child porn, because pedophiles being able to indulge in their fetish harmlessly reduces the possibility of actual child rape.
Even if there is no correlation between reduced violence and violent video games, adults should be able to choose their entertainment. If some want to turn their entertainment system into a rape simulator, well, fine, because as an adult I would not want to be subjected to the morality of the powers that be
Re: (Score:2)
We used to buy a crank mechanism with some gears and a cam that you installed over the trigger (similar to a gun lock) and all you had to do was turn the crank as fast as you could.
It wasn't fully automatic, but it was a blast for cutting down trees!
Re: (Score:2)
The irony is that his broader point is actually grounded in statistics.
It just happens that the really efficient shooters with a high KD are of European descent.
Just pointing it out..
Re: (Score:2)
That is not a question that will get any sort of useful answer in a town hall debate.
Nor even on /.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Research shows the driving games do not increase crazy driving on the streets
Anecdotally though if I play something like GTAV I do have to consciously remind myself that RL traffic laws should mostly be followed.