No Link Between Video Games And Murder

stealthy123 said:
dude, I do a ton of social research, I read a ton of criminology articles, there is nothing in your link to indicate that more guns is causal to a drop in crime.

more guns doesn't mean less crime, there is absolutely zero research to back up that assumption you made.

I am not going to argue with gun nuts, you guys will twist anything you can to justify the proliferation of guns. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

I don't need to justify anything. I'll just continue to buy any guns I may want or need. Why would I have to justify my rights to anyone? I wouldn't ask you to justify your right to free speech.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
I don't need to justify anything. I'll just continue to buy any guns I may want or need. Why would I have to justify my rights to anyone? I wouldn't ask you to justify your right to free speech.
Click to expand...

except that the 2nd amendment doesn't say a thing about the rights of individuals to own as many guns as they like.

Are you in a militia? is it well regulated? the answer to both those questions is no.

The constitution specifically promises me rights to free speech, it does not specifically promise me the right to own as many guns as I damn well please.

Not gonna argue this, I don't even know why I clicked on the thread again.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

you guys can argue amongst yourselves about any definition of the amendment that includes firearms as an inalienable right of all Americans. It's all self interested bullshit.

see ya around the forums. bye bye now.
 
stealthy123 said:
except that the 2nd amendment doesn't say a thing about the rights of individuals to own as many guns as they like.
Click to expand...

It says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It doesn't say "it can be infringed when they have too many". It says shall not be infringed, period. You have the right to say as much as you like without being silenced by the government, and you have the right to have any amount of guns from zero to infinity.

Are you in a militia? is it well regulated? the answer to both those questions is no.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. The Second Amendment doesn't say the right of militias to keep and bear arms. It says the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, because a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state. Few things I hate more than people who use the cliffs notes version of the Bill of Rights.

see ya around the forums. bye bye now.
Click to expand...

Another drive-by. How charming. :rolleyes:
 
stealthy123 said:
except that the 2nd amendment doesn't say a thing about the rights of individuals to own as many guns as they like.

Are you in a militia? is it well regulated? the answer to both those questions is no.

The constitution specifically promises me rights to free speech, it does not specifically promise me the right to own as many guns as I damn well please.

Not gonna argue this, I don't even know why I clicked on the thread again.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

you guys can argue amongst yourselves about any definition of the amendment that includes firearms as an inalienable right of all Americans. It's all self interested bullshit.

see ya around the forums. bye bye now.
Click to expand...

I have self interest. You should, too. It is healthy as long as you're not hurting anyone or taking away their rights. Collectivism ends up taking away rights.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
I have self interest. You should, too. It is healthy as long as you're not hurting anyone or taking away their rights. Collectivism ends up taking away rights.
Click to expand...

I actually kinda like you, so I am gonna respond.

Collectivism and social responsibility are not the same thing. There are aspects of collectivism that play into being a responsible member of society.

you have to balance self interest with the collective good, me first and my rights really don't matter, and never should have mattered nearly as much as they seem to now. We as people are socially driven, and socially successful, without the "evils" of collectivism we never would have dominated the planet.

Despite the ideas of individualism, and objective, even going back to social darwinism, the individual isn't nearly as important as the sum of individuals. Focusing solely on self will doom us all.

I don't intend to revisit this discussion. For whatever reason gun ownership is nearly as divisive as religion and I just don't enjoy these types of debates.
 
stealthy123 said:
I actually kinda like you, so I am gonna respond.

Collectivism and social responsibility are not the same thing. There are aspects of collectivism that play into being a responsible member of society.

you have to balance self interest with the collective good, me first and my rights really don't matter, and never should have mattered nearly as much as they seem to now. We as people are socially driven, and socially successful, without the "evils" of collectivism we never would have dominated the planet.

Despite the ideas of individualism, and objective, even going back to social darwinism, the individual isn't nearly as important as the sum of individuals. Focusing solely on self will doom us all.

I don't intend to revisit this discussion. For whatever reason gun ownership is nearly as divisive as religion and I just don't enjoy these types of debates.
Click to expand...

Which is why I give back to the community, why I vote to protect rights for all people and why I'm willing to take a stand against those who would harm or take the lives of others. Not because I'm forced to, because I want to and I'm able to.

I'd agree that objectivism is a rather warped ideology, but that's not really the angle I'm arguing. Individualism is not about being against the collective, but being able to chose your own path. I'd argue that individual rights have been the greatest catalyst for freedom and liberty that history has ever known. Individualism and secular humanism have never been at odds, despite the modern media's broad strokes of fail.
 
I don't think new gun or ammo laws will change a thing in preventing either petty crime or mass murders. The number of mass murders by gun (about 20 per year) has not changed in the last 30 years despite lots of changes to gun laws. Guns and ammo are already ubiquitous; there's no putting that genie back in the bottle. It's done. The gun nuts who think Obama's coming after their guns are just having fantasies about having a reason to use their guns to defend themselves; it's never going to happen. There are no even faintly credible means by which to make guns or ammo unavailable to anyone who wants them in the United States.

What does need to happen is a culture change about how mentally unstable people are cared for. I don't think I've heard of a mass murder that could have been prevented by more gun laws, and I think a lot of mass murders could have been prevented by better mental health care for the individuals who committed them.

To get back to the original subject of the thread, violent video games don't make mentally stable people unstable, and believing that they turn mentally unstable people into mass murderers is mistaking a symptom for a cause. Trying to put some sort of controls on video games isn't going to prevent mentally unstable people from becoming mass murderers; proper mental health care will.
 
1. No Link Between Video Games And ^ Gun-Related ^ Murder
2. Chart doesn't make distinction about what type of games are consumed or how many consumers. Japan could be spending $55 on Hello Kitty or DOA type games. Are those type of games going to lead to murder anyway?

Whatever your stance, this chart says nothing about nothing.
 
Anything and everything can lead to murder nowadays. Simply looking at someone wrong can lead to murder. Maybe someone stole someone else's chocolate cake in Hello Kitty Online or something, so they went to the other person's house and killed them.

All these "video games lead to murder" or "no link between video games and murder" studies leads to a whole lot of wasted money.
 
krotch said:
Anything and everything can lead to murder nowadays. Simply looking at someone wrong can lead to murder. Maybe someone stole someone else's chocolate cake in Hello Kitty Online or something, so they went to the other person's house and killed them.

All these "video games lead to murder" or "no link between video games and murder" studies leads to a whole lot of wasted money.
Click to expand...

How dare you accuse Hello Kitty Online of somehow being responsible for murder. Bad krotch! You get no clean underpants for the next two weeks. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top