NRA condemns games in wake of Connecticut shooting

[QUOTE="kuu2"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"] Why are you so worried about something so incredibly unlikely? Newhopes

Again why are you against freedom?

Here's some interesting facts about your freedom.

On average 1 mass shooting every 5 days in the US.

In the US in 2011 they was 12664 murders of which 8583 where gun related compare that to the UK for example they was 550 murders only 52 involved guns so that 68% vs 9%.

I wouldn't bother. This guy thinks that one day his government will turn evil, come to get him (without military backing, as they will side with the people) and that his gun will protect him. So as far as I can see he thinks he will be protecting himself from a bunch of angry politicians turning up at his door, in person as they won't have an army, complete with guns, to do 'evil' things to him and he'll 'protect' himself by shooting them all in the face.

Sounds totally logical to me.

[spoiler] CUCKOO CUCKOO! [/spoiler]

Let me lay out an inconvenient truth, its true(to some degree)

As a student of media I can tell you media has always had a tremendous effect on our culture; whether that be news papers, tv, movies, games, ect ect.

Our current media trends towards violence, sex, and individualisim(be famous or die) has a affect on our society.

While the effect on the individual can be minimal to none, it can have a huge, direct effect on those with mental illness.

Want proof of this? Look upJohn Hinckley.

Should we ban/restct freedom of speech & expression then to prevent these disasters?

***** NO!

The cost of true free speech is responsibility for it repercussions. A cost we all should be willing to pay.

Lastly I don't live in the UK and really don't care how they govern their country.

kuu2

Of course you don't, you're too worried about people shooting you to concern yourself with anything else ;).

Let me lay out an inconvenient truth, its true(to some degree)

As a student of media I can tell you media has always had a tremendous effect on our culture; whether that be news papers, tv, movies, games, ect ect.

Our current media trends towards violence, sex, and individualisim(be famous or die) has a affect on our society.

While the effect on the individual can be minimal to none, it can have a huge, direct effect on those with mental illness.

Want proof of this? Look upJohn Hinckley.

Should we ban/restct freedom of speech & expression then to prevent these disasters?

***** NO!

The cost of true free speech is responsibility for it repercussions. A cost we all should be willing to pay.

dercoo

As a student of media you will also know how the media of the past presented violence, sex and individualism and the huge damage it caused us all, not just those with 'mental illness'. I'm also a believer that modern society is far more mature, caring, respectful and peacful than society from any other point in history, and statistics back this up.

Regardless, this is about the individuals need to own and use firearms in daily life. I've yet to see a single convincing argument to support the view that this is needed.

The last refuse for someone who has no argument. Personal attacks. Are you going to call me names like poopy head next?

kuu2

It's refuge.

There's no point to argue with you. You ignore anything in my posts that is inconvenient to you, then you set up straw-mans to try and prove a point that doesn't exist. All you spout is 'FREEDOM!' but you don't even seem to understand what freedom is.

Answer this; Who are you protecting yourself from?

1. Other people with guns

2. The military controlled by an evil government

3. Invasion by a foreign force

4. An evil government not backed by the military

5. The zombie apocalypse

Then answer this: How will your gun protect you?

1. Killing all the other people with guns that don't agree with you

2. Killing the military single handed

3. Killing all politicians

4. Killing all of the invaders

5. Stopping the infected from biting you

[QUOTE="dercoo"]

Let me lay out an inconvenient truth, its true(to some degree)

As a student of media I can tell you media has always had a tremendous effect on our culture; whether that be news papers, tv, movies, games, ect ect.

Our current media trends towards violence, sex, and individualisim(be famous or die) has a affect on our society.

While the effect on the individual can be minimal to none, it can have a huge, direct effect on those with mental illness.

Want proof of this? Look upJohn Hinckley.

Should we ban/restct freedom of speech & expression then to prevent these disasters?

***** NO!

The cost of true free speech is responsibility for it repercussions. A cost we all should be willing to pay.

1080pOnly

As a student of media you will also know how the media of the past presented violence, sex and individualism and the huge damage it caused us all, not just those with 'mental illness'. I'm also a believer that modern society is far more mature, caring, respectful and peacful than society from any other point in history, and statistics back this up.

Regardless, this is about the individuals need to own and use firearms in daily life. I've yet to see a single convincing argument to support the view that this is needed.

Past media had a stronger conservative nature that included allot more collectivism(us vs them).

Not to mention in the past it was acceptable to lock up the mentally ill & treat them as subhumans. Barbaric as hell, but it kept the more unstable isolated. Now the mentally ill are treated as the humans they are(about ******* time), but unfortunately there is no sufficient health care in place for them; often leaving it fully in the hands of the parents.

And the need for fire arms is for self defense. The lives saved by citizens defending themselves with fire arms is several times fold the number of those killed in these abnormalities that are mass shootings.

Let me lay out an inconvenient truth, its true(to some degree)

As a student of media I can tell you media has always had a tremendous effect on our culture; whether that be news papers, tv, movies, games, ect ect.

Our current media trends towards violence, sex, and individualisim(be famous or die) has a affect on our society.

While the effect on the individual can be minimal to none, it can have a huge, direct effect on those with mental illness.

Want proof of this? Look upJohn Hinckley.

Should we ban/restct freedom of speech & expression then to prevent these disasters?

***** NO!

The cost of true free speech is responsibility for it repercussions. A cost we all should be willing to pay.

dercoo

Current or past media (TV shows,games,movies,books) doesn't make people want to go out and mass murder people, you can live a sheltered life and still be that psycho. Some media affects us like music and some culture, within the last decade or so nerds/geeks went from probably the most mocked social group to one of the most talked about, hell it's now cool/sexy to be a geek or nerd.

Of course political/religion media can "brainwash" people in the mass cause in some countries if you don't believe in a certain way you can be put to death or put in prison.

If someone would ever commit a crime and say "Mortal Kombat made me do it" that is plain BS, I want proof that a MK game tells a person to go out and rip some random persons heart out with their bare fists.

Maybe the right to bear arms is there solely for protection against the government. Imagine if the government would be the only ones with weapons, and the ones with the power to change the law, and with all the populations necessary information and not vice versa, you would get a great imbalance in power. A government should be afraid of its people, and individuals/small groups should be able to be kept in check by the government. So there is a balance of power. And lately that balance of power has shifted ever so much, ever so greatly to the government. You wouldn't have to fear school shootings, but you would have to fear an involuntary grab for power. Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture due to some bad things that happen. Or what was the right to bear arms for? I seem to find many contradictory answers but no convincing ones.

We should also ban cars since they kill way more people than guns ever could in the US. The right to own a gun in the US protects every other amendment we have. Without the right to own a gun the government in essence could do away with the rest of your rights. Without the publics ability to arm themselves how do you prevent a government from taking away your right to free speech, assembly, or prevent them from searching or siezing your property. The 2nd amendment is not just to protect you from criminals it is to protect you from a government that also can become criminal.

See the disconnect here is the idea that banning guns will result in less crime. Just as prohibition was greatly successful in curbing alcohol-related crimes and culture.

There's also great lack of understanding of the US and Mexican border, and the drug, gun, and people trade that exists. Estimates put the US illegal alien population at 9 million with some studies showing up to 20 million. Why our government so vigorously defends the Middle East, yet allows milllions of people to cross the border and dwell within the system is a huge discussion not meant for here. However, anybody can get whatever they want across the border.

What's important is that the US has around 300 million guns, huge problems with border control, and rampant drug problems. Banning guns won't stop anything. That's the sensationalist media using shock to push an agenda. Look at the big picture. Tobacco kills 500k/yr. in the US, with nearly 50,000 of those being 2nd hand smoke-related. There are things bigger than random mass school killings.

This system can't be fixed by voting the lesser of two evils, blaming guns, violent games and healthcare. It all starts and ends with the family. You can't legislate "moral" behavior. That's something your parents impart to you. There's a family crisis in the US. That's what needs to be addressed.

I generally thought humanity had evolved beyond this **** of blaming forms of entertainment for loss of life aka scapegoating. But I guess there are more Jack Thompsons out there than I initially thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9752141/Connecticut-school-massacre-Adam-Lanza-spent-hours-playing-Call-Of-Duty.html

Im not blaming the games for what happened. But they see a picture of a historical gun and say 'Ive used that on Call Of Duty.

Guess what a$$hole i shot and had m1 carbine ww2 gun in my bedroom before call of duty 1# was released in 2003 and i laughed seeing the gun modeled in the game.

call of duty 1# demo on pc played that before the game released had m1 carbine in it and i remember laughing being like this sh1ts nothing like the real thing.

Typo my friend not a spelling/comprehension, error there is a difference.

Why do you have a spare tire?

Why do you have an extra set of keys?

Why do you have an umbrella?

Why do you have insurance?

Why do lock your doors?

Why are you concerned with how I protect my family?

kuu2

I see you dodge the questions yet again but to answer yours; I'm not, enjoy your guns and dead children. I've got a poker game to play, ciao!

call of duty isnt realistic at all.

shooting the m1 carbine in real life and shooting it in call of duty was a joke.

m1 in real life if u shot the ground it'd blow a giant goddamn hole in it and grass by flying up like 8 ft high.

WAS NOT IN THE SAME.

couldnt pull the trigger as fast as you wanted like real life.

if the m1 carbine blew holes in the ground in real life it'd be blowing peoples goddamn arms and legs and heads off and giant holes in people.

call of duty doesnt let you blow peoples arms and legs and heads off and giant holes in people it's not realistic.

It's just damage control and misdirection.

i didnt even buy call of duty after playing 2003 demo.

i always liked faked weapons in games better because it's something nobody will ever get to shoot in real life period.

Maybe if call of duty had soldier of fortune dismemberment people wouldnt be thinking they're laser tag rifles be alittle more weary about shooting someone with one.

All the NRA had to do was say something along the lines of

"We understand the emotional distraught this recent shooting has instilled in all Americans, and we wish to look deeper into the issue without knee-jerk reactions or vague and useless legislation."

But no. Hurr Durr games. Hurr Durr Police at schools. Hurr Durr f*ck you NRA.

All the NRA had to do was say something along the lines of

"We understand the emotional distraught this recent shooting has instilled in all Americans, and we wish to look deeper into the issue without knee-jerk reactions or vague and useless legislation."

But no. Hurr Durr games. Hurr Durr Police at schools. Hurr Durr f*ck you NRA.

Slashless

This.

Call of duty needs to show these dumbass kids what these guns would really do to someone in real life.

Then they would be alittle more reluctant see thegruesome gory results these guns would really do then they'd be like i dont want someone to do that **** to me.

Mostly=Some were armed

The US can't change?

kuu2

Yes. Some were, but there were no real fighting between armed forces. Calling them well armed is misleading, because couple guns they had didn't matter. Revolution was achieved by different means.

The USA has a really long history of democracy and freedom, hell, the whole country was built on those principles, and seeing the USA change is really far fetched. Whole country would lose it's indentity if that would happen.

It is not videogames or guns to blame. STFU.

[QUOTE="Icarian"]

[QUOTE="kuu2"]

Mostly=Some were armed

The US can't change?

kuu2

Yes. Some were, but there were no real fighting between armed forces. Calling them well armed is misleading, because couple guns they had didn't matter. Revolution was achieved by different means.

The USA has a really long history of democracy and freedom, hell, the whole country was built on those principles, and seeing the USA change is really far fetched. Whole country would lose it's indentity if that would happen.

Long history???

The US is just a babe when it comes to most countries.

If he was purely talking about a history of freedom and democracy he is actually correct. Only France in modern terms has a history as long and Greece and Rome in ancient times as well as a few smaller provinces at various times who had something similar to the Republic or democratic systems. Though you could also argue the pinnacle of freedom was before the nation state existed at all but in terms of what I believe he was talking about I believe his statement is correct.

Long history???

The US is just a babe when it comes to most countries.

kuu2

The USA doesn't have any other history as an independent nation than that of democracy and freedom. Two of their founding principles. I never claimed that the US is the oldest democracy or oldest country. Because it's not, not even close.

If he was purely talking about a history of freedom and democracy he is actually correct. Only France in modern terms has a history as long and Greece and Rome in ancient times as well as a few smaller provinces at various times who had something similar to the Republic or democratic systems. Though you could also argue the pinnacle of freedom was before the nation state existed at all but in terms of what I believe he was talking about I believe his statement is correct.

Strakha

Oldest parliamentary democracy is Iceland. They elected their first parliament in 930 AD.

Humans are social animals. Even before modern nations we had tribes that offered us the company and protection of other humans.

They are trying to blame video games when it has been confrimed that the only game this guy played was DDR :|

They did the same thing years ago with the virgina tech shooting...and that guy's favorite game was sonic

I do not think games are the only problem but I do think games are part of the problem. If all media has no moral balance what do you expect? Music, movies, TV, news, comic books, novels, and yes games are filled with violence, sex, cursing,ect. Children are only exposed to the worst in all of media. I will give a example when I was growing up Facts of Life had a episode that was about premarital sex. The episode was about Natalie and she was with her boyfriend for at least a year. It was a major episode where the two sat down to talk about it and it was not a easy choice. Can you name any show now that would have a show about premarital sex be a big deal? Hell MTV which aims towards a younger audience and it shows sex left and right. Violence is just as bad if not worse. GTA is not even extreme anymore and that says a lot. When GTA first came out just being able to carjack anyone or beat up anyone was just insane but now it is nothing.

If anytime a person read a book, watches a movie, plays a game, watches the news, ect and that is the norm for them what do you expect. We live in a culture that caters to the worst.

CanYouDiglt