Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
No, it just sounds like a regular teenager. It's nothing special to this generation either, teens have always been like this. The only difference is this one had access to a gun.
Argument over video game leads teenager to shoot and kill friend
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
No, it just sounds like a regular teenager. It's nothing special to this generation either, teens have always been like this. The only difference is this one had access to a gun.
Shear
Posts: 83 +110
This always seems to happen in the US but it doesn't happen in EU. People aren't desensitized to games they are desensitized to guns, you morons.
Burty117
Posts: 5,108 +3,687
I think something everyone seems to be missing, especially with the extremely weak argument of "he could have killed with a knife or his bare hands".
What other uses do knives have? Cutting food? What other uses do your bare hands have? A lot. What other uses do Cleaning agents have? That's right, they clean your toilet for example.
What other uses do guns have? The only people who need to effectively kill or wound people are the military and a plausible argument for police as well. I'm bored now of hearing the defense of guns, their only purpose is to kill and that's something the general public simply do not need access to, I would have thought these mass killings would be hammering home the idea of getting rid of guns (like most other countries) but instead, the idea gets floated around to add more guns?!
How can a country with so much power, had so much success in many industry's and military force as big as it is, not able to comprehend removing a device that's sole purpose is to kill people? Or is it simply Ego?
What other uses do knives have? Cutting food? What other uses do your bare hands have? A lot. What other uses do Cleaning agents have? That's right, they clean your toilet for example.
What other uses do guns have? The only people who need to effectively kill or wound people are the military and a plausible argument for police as well. I'm bored now of hearing the defense of guns, their only purpose is to kill and that's something the general public simply do not need access to, I would have thought these mass killings would be hammering home the idea of getting rid of guns (like most other countries) but instead, the idea gets floated around to add more guns?!
How can a country with so much power, had so much success in many industry's and military force as big as it is, not able to comprehend removing a device that's sole purpose is to kill people? Or is it simply Ego?
In my country we hear about cases where kids in USA, take a gun and go and shoot others at a school, but not cases like this and the others mentioned in the article. You really have a big problem with guns there. And modern movies and modern videogames probably do make killing look like a cool and justified solution, but I think the politicians and mentality of people are the biggest problem. Politician saying that maybe teachers should also carry guns, it's a much bigger problem than games and movies. I freaked out when reading that proposal from your Education minister. People feeling the need to have guns as much as they feel the need to wear clothes, is also a problem. I have never felt once in my life that I need a gun and I wonder if things in USA are so bad that most people feel that need.
As of Feb 16, the number of school shootings that have happened since the year 2000 around the world (derived from Wikipedia list: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting -
ENGLAND: 0
GREECE: 1
NETHERLANDS: 1
SPAIN: 1
INDIA: 1
ARGENTINA: 1
RUSSIA: 1
CHINA: 3
MEXICO: 4
AUSTRALIA: 5
CANADA: 5
GERMANY: 5
SOUTH AFRICA: 5
USA 212
As far as I'm aware, all the countries on that list have violent movies, games, art, literature. Many have a similar(ish) per capita figure for gun ownership. Something is going on in the US that just doesn't seem to happen elsewhere.
Pew research into Americans, gun ownership and attitudes to gun control is pretty fascinating to read, albeit slightly predictable: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/americas-complex-relationship-with-guns/
Ultimately I don't think anyone knows what it is that causes so many Americans to pull the trigger on their peers. But it's still really depressing to see children slaughtered year in, year out, and see exactly the same conversations happen every time.
ENGLAND: 0
GREECE: 1
NETHERLANDS: 1
SPAIN: 1
INDIA: 1
ARGENTINA: 1
RUSSIA: 1
CHINA: 3
MEXICO: 4
AUSTRALIA: 5
CANADA: 5
GERMANY: 5
SOUTH AFRICA: 5
USA 212
As far as I'm aware, all the countries on that list have violent movies, games, art, literature. Many have a similar(ish) per capita figure for gun ownership. Something is going on in the US that just doesn't seem to happen elsewhere.
Pew research into Americans, gun ownership and attitudes to gun control is pretty fascinating to read, albeit slightly predictable: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/americas-complex-relationship-with-guns/
Ultimately I don't think anyone knows what it is that causes so many Americans to pull the trigger on their peers. But it's still really depressing to see children slaughtered year in, year out, and see exactly the same conversations happen every time.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
There are no facts to support either of our stand points.
Send me a llittle bit of that crack you are smoking. How is that for making an assumption?
Similar(ish) per capita gun ownership? Seriously? None of these countries have anywhere near the gun ownership per capita that the USA has.
Maybe South Africa or Canada? Certainly none of the European countries you list, where close to zero percent of people own guns because it's illegal. In China gun ownership is illegal (well it's an authoritarian police state so they are certainly not going to have their citizens own guns
). India? Some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Here in the Netherlands owning weapons is a crime and as far as I know if you wanted to own a gun you have to be a member of shooting club or be a hunter, have a licence (for which you need official proof of good behaviour as well as references) and even then I think you can't normally take the weapon home with you, nor could you ever own ridiculous assault rifles legally. I'm sure the laws are similar in Germany, Spain, Greece, England. Australia had a massive drive to get people to give up their guns a while ago
The thing that is going on in the US that isn't going on elsewhere IS gun ownership and "gun normalisation". Of course other factors (mental health, poverty etc) play a big part in why people USE the guns but if the guns aren't there in the first place there wouldn't be so many "accidents" like this either.
S
senketsu
Guns per capita is actually a very poor way to measure. What type of firearm are we talking about here. Bolt-action rifle, rifles that shoot .22 short. Shotguns that take 2 shells? These are all in the count. By comparison in Switzerland every male of service age has a full on, current Swiss Army Assault rifle complete with multiple magazines and live rounds and are trained how to effectively use it (to kill). If they went on spree's like in the USA believe me, there would be many dead rather than the 'spray and pray' technique of the untrained.
There is definitely something going on in the USA that isn't in other First World countries.
There is definitely something going on in the USA that isn't in other First World countries.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
Give it time, this level of stupidity is highly contagious. Especially in a time when nearly everyone in the world now has access to social media.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Some crack as you suggested
https://www.thoughtco.com/us-gun-control-timeline-3963620
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html
If you can provide counter-points to the provided data I would be glad to discuss it.
No, every Male of service age in Switzerland does not have an Assault Rifle. Please read the link I provided in my last response to your comment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Switzerland
After their mandatory service, they are either required to get a license appropriate for their weapon class or give it up. In addition you failed to mention that even those in the military are given 50 rounds of ammunition in a sealed ammunition box that is regularly audited. If you are a civilian you have to buy ammunition with it's own set of additional regulations. It's a great thing that you brought up Switzerland, as much like the USA, guns are also part of their national identity. It's a great example that even in a country just like the US, gun and ammunition control laws work.
It's a shame that even the 1968 assault rile ban, that limited access to assault riles and high capacity magazines, was allowed to expire in America. Right now, we don't really have gun control. It's more like a system setup to incubate gun sales, when even a mentally troubled underage teen can get a weapon.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Similar(ish) per capita gun ownership? Seriously? None of these countries have anywhere near the gun ownership per capita that the USA has.
Maybe South Africa or Canada? Certainly none of the European countries you list, where close to zero percent of people own guns because it's illegal. In China gun ownership is illegal (well it's an authoritarian police state so they are certainly not going to have their citizens own guns
Here in the Netherlands owning weapons is a crime and as far as I know if you wanted to own a gun you have to be a member of shooting club or be a hunter, have a licence (for which you need official proof of good behaviour as well as references) and even then I think you can't normally take the weapon home with you, nor could you ever own ridiculous assault rifles legally. I'm sure the laws are similar in Germany, Spain, Greece, England. Australia had a massive drive to get people to give up their guns a while ago
The thing that is going on in the US that isn't going on elsewhere IS gun ownership and "gun normalisation". Of course other factors (mental health, poverty etc) play a big part in why people USE the guns but if the guns aren't there in the first place there wouldn't be so many "accidents" like this either.
Yep, Australia bought back any weapons banned by the National Firearms agreement from people who owned banned weapons. This article has links directly from the Australian government's data
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated/
In 2017, there is finally enough data to form a consensus on the effect of the law. That consensus was that the law had a significant impact on not just gun related deaths but overall homicide rates, falling to a 25 year low. That's pretty impressive given that Homicide includes any forms of death.
Lol and we care why?
This is why I would never live in Canada. It's filled with spineless pajama boys that are protected by their gun filled neighbor to the South.
You're trying to inject logic, facts, and critical thinking into an argument with people that base their existence on emotion. Look at how all of them immediately try to blame an inanimate object and nobody asks questions about the kid.
I applaud your effort but you can't fix stupid.
Burty117
Posts: 5,108 +3,687
Hahahaha! Now that my friend, is one hell of a comment!
Love it, how to defend guns? Just call them inanimate objects! Ignore all the statistics from other countries and just accept that a crazy guy, somehow, got hold of an inanimate object that, miraculously, had the ability to end people's lives.
Turns out said object was no good at changing the TV channel, or making phone calls, crazy guy tried his hardest but everytime he tried to show someone his inanimate object, they stopped breathing! These inanimate objects are real something you know?
Well, you've convinced me! I now completely understand why Americans insist on giving crazy people inanimate objects (y)
Oh totally! I'm sure that gun just jumped up on its own and fired itself! It didn't require any kind of crazy person behind it at all! Maybe we should just make murder illegal since making more laws is apparently the answer! That should stop these things from happening, right!?Hahahaha! Now that my friend, is one hell of a comment!
Love it, how to defend guns? Just call them inanimate objects! Ignore all the statistics from other countries and just accept that a crazy guy, somehow, got hold of an inanimate object that, miraculously, had the ability to end people's lives.
Turns out said object was no good at changing the TV channel, or making phone calls, crazy guy tried his hardest but everytime he tried to show someone his inanimate object, they stopped breathing! These inanimate objects are real something you know?
Well, you've convinced me! I now completely understand why Americans insist on giving crazy people inanimate objects (y)
Like I said, critical thinking isn't exactly the forte of you people.
Wow, talk about a text book description of projection!
I can't think of any other reason to own a gun except to kill people, therefore that's the only reason other people have a gun.
That says more about you and your disturbed psyche than anything and no, I wouldn't want someone like you to have access to a gun either!
I stopped reading right there as you have just proven that you have no idea what you're talking about (big surprise). If you can pull yourself away from hanging on the every word of CNN, you should educate yourself and take a look at 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1).
Or don't and keep spouting your nonsense.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Inanimate objects with the potential to kill a person with the pull of a trigger. Trying to boil them down to the equivalent of a banana or pen is disingenuous at best. That's a gross oversimplification. Atomic bombs are inanimate objects, should we give then to every 17 year old? This isn't some sudden pivot to blaming guns either, this has been an ongoing problem in the USA. If you have an argument for a better solution let's hear it.
Classic Ad Hominem attack. Please stop trying to substitute personal attacks for an actual argument.
"take a look at 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)"
When forming an argument, typically you want to quote the point you disagree with then make your case against it. Links are usually provided with a section you are referencing if there is more than one topic. The section of US law you said to lookup has many laws pertaining to guns, ammunition, ect. Right now you have done none of the three. You are expecting that people read your mind and/or assume your argument.
Also, admitting that you didn't read the comment right off the bat kind of invalidates any counter points you could have, as you couldn't possibly counter an argument you haven't read. I may not agree with everyone here but I'm not going to discount their argument before I've even read it, especially as far as you have gone as to insult.
captaincranky
Posts: 19,682 +8,814
It's comical that you should include stats on Russia. Joseph Stalin killed more Russians, than Hitler killed Jews. Yet everyone, "in the know" ignores that, and casts Hitler as history's sole true anti-Christ.
I really don't know how you can include violence statistics from a country which has no reservations about putting political opponents in jail, so that which is nothing more than a KBG holdover, can continue to rule as "president".
To be perfectly blunt, I can tell you exactly who and what are the causatives for the current state of affairs in American culture "culture", (or ostensibly lack thereof).
I won't do that, because those facts would be considered "bigoted", "racist", "uninformed", but most importantly, "politically incorrect" ,by the batch of candy a**ed uninformed SJWs fearfully cringing and biting their nails throughout this thread..
Last edited:
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
Well, Captain, you've well expressed yourself to me about what you think is wrong; however, my own opinion is still that the world has not yet outgrown feudalism.
I think if we looked at that kid's posts objectively, he felt that those he targeted had more than he had, and that he felt that he was one of the peasants. Some argue against his white supremacist leanings by saying he only shot white people, but at least one of those was Jewish, but do not white supremacists hate Jews?
In the current climate, as I see it anyway, choosing a scapegoat, which seems to be what he did, is the symptom of the underlying problem where we still live in what is essentially a feudal world.
There are more examples that I can provide like yet another school shooting in Florida.
Choose your poison!
Boilerhog146
Posts: 642 +223
Spineless Pajama boys .that fought and died in wars so that you could spout such nonsense and drivel . only a crazy person kills indiscriminately.with intent.
I agree with some ,not all ,posts.
interesting topic for a tech site..FWIW, Canada has what is called a PAL.. possession and acquisition licence. which is required to ,as the name implies,it must also be shown to purchase ammo.has to be renewed every 5 years,
that's just for hunting firearms such as those I own.restricted firearms require a different licence,and prohibited firearms are just that,
In Newfoundland. more firearms per capita then anywhere else in Canada,I bet. especially rural.everyone hunts game of one sort or another ,for food..be it moose,game birds or small game. on land and at sea.now coyote's,raccoon's,porcupine,are now on the small game licence ,though I've never seen a porcupine here.
only police and military have legal access to full automatic assault style .rifle, Prohibited !
but no matter what kind of firearm it is ,it needs someone to fire it..otherwise its just a TOOL like any other.
.the PAL requires references.and the hunter capability course,the crazies they attempt to sort out,by background checks.
very few are killed by firearms here . I would wager there are more people killed here by moose ,than firearms .Moose like to walk out on the road at night.I hit one in 1986.
I play video games, have done so for years .also a Vet ,and from a family that has hunted for generations.
so I find some of the anti gun post quite amusing,,
go live in a police state or a dictatorship for a while.then you will understand why Americans ,have a right to bare arms,,to fight all enemies either foreign or domestic!
feudalism and capitalism. has divided peoples everywhere.taking the guns away won't change a thing.
I agree with some ,not all ,posts.
interesting topic for a tech site..FWIW, Canada has what is called a PAL.. possession and acquisition licence. which is required to ,as the name implies,it must also be shown to purchase ammo.has to be renewed every 5 years,
that's just for hunting firearms such as those I own.restricted firearms require a different licence,and prohibited firearms are just that,
In Newfoundland. more firearms per capita then anywhere else in Canada,I bet. especially rural.everyone hunts game of one sort or another ,for food..be it moose,game birds or small game. on land and at sea.now coyote's,raccoon's,porcupine,are now on the small game licence ,though I've never seen a porcupine here.
only police and military have legal access to full automatic assault style .rifle, Prohibited !
but no matter what kind of firearm it is ,it needs someone to fire it..otherwise its just a TOOL like any other.
.the PAL requires references.and the hunter capability course,the crazies they attempt to sort out,by background checks.
very few are killed by firearms here . I would wager there are more people killed here by moose ,than firearms .Moose like to walk out on the road at night.I hit one in 1986.
I play video games, have done so for years .also a Vet ,and from a family that has hunted for generations.
so I find some of the anti gun post quite amusing,,
go live in a police state or a dictatorship for a while.then you will understand why Americans ,have a right to bare arms,,to fight all enemies either foreign or domestic!
feudalism and capitalism. has divided peoples everywhere.taking the guns away won't change a thing.
Last edited:
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
No one here was declaring that we should completely take guns away. As you mentioned, they should be available to hunters, military personnel, and those properly certified to use them (and with a reason to do so). The problem right now is that kids can easily get deadly weapons, even when mentally ill with a history of such. In addition, the lack of proper licensing, training, and proper background checks is an issue.
There will always be mentally ill people in every society, you aren't going to stop that. What you can stop, as proven by your post and my previous posts, is a vast majority of gun deaths through common sense gun regulation. If it works for every other 1st world nation, including one's with a similar national identity, it is at least worth pursuing. At the very least it would be wise to re-instate the 1968 assault rile ban, that expired recently, which limited sales of assault rifles. Ever since this expired we have see a surprising number of assault rifle use in school shootings.
captaincranky
Posts: 19,682 +8,814
The short answer is this, TV has been accused of desensitizing people to violence for decades. Yet the censorship standards have been relaxed over the years, as opposed to strengthened. FX have also advanced so the the killings look more real. Not to mention, the incredible suspension of disbelief which has occurred relating how much punishment the human body can absorb, without so much as a bruise or even a hangnail
Today's youth live online, in an atmosphere that they've come to accept as "reality".
So, in addition to being desensitized to violence in the physical world, now they can initiate the violence in the cyber world. So instead of watching people on TV kill one another, they can kill as many as they like, in any one of hundreds of "first person shooter" games. Isn't that why every needs a GTX-1080-ti, so they can kill faster, quicker, more effectively, and in a more realistic setting?
So, the cyber world and the real world were destined to collide in this context, the only surprise is that it hasn't happened sooner, and more often.
As far as my white supremacist views are concerned, they're fairly innocuous. For example, I can't abide the Summer Olympics. I am abundantly disinterested in watching a black man with a genetic disposition toward running fast in a straight line, win a gold medal in the Men's 100 meters. What I am intensely interested in, is seeing how far the male pairs figure skater can throw his partner, and if she can land a throw quadruple Salchow after he launches her.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
I really don't think content kids watch/play now is any more graphic than those in the past. In fact some of the most brutal video games predate the current generation of kids. The original mortal combat was especially bad, Duke nukem had guts and boobies, and the original fallout depicted prostitution, gore, rape, and extreme violence. That stuff hasn't been allowed in video games for some time. The closest you are going to get is the witcher 3 and that game doesn't even compare to some older titles. I'd rather argue the opposite, that video games have been censored more now. This is aside from the fact that hitting your child was much more common back then as well. If they weren't getting a dose of virtual desensitization, they were certainly getting it in reality.
Let's also not forget, people in the 60s didn't need games to desensitize them, they were growing up during the 50s where actual war was taking place. The daily news of allied casualties in real life is much more potent than any video game. If the logic that mental health is the issue then why wasn't it a factor then? There is no doubt in my mind that many returning soldiers also suffered from PTSD. With the mental health issues that post-war brings, why didn't we see more gun related killings than we do now?
The only thing challenging metal health for modern kids is social media, no longer having a full time parent (as both must now work in order to make ends meet), and these recent shootings (to a lesser extent). Mental health of kids isn't worse now, we've simply rotated issues.
Similar threads
