NRA Blames Video Games For Violence

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It is disappointing to see the NRA go this route. The fact is, video games and guns aren't responsible for killings, the people that commit the crimes are. If anything, the NRA should have stood firm with the ESA.

“There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting industry that sells and sows violence against its own people, through vicious, violent video games with names like ‘Bulletstorm,’ ‘Grand Theft Auto,’ ‘Mortal Kombat’ and ‘Splatterhouse.’”
Click to expand...
 
Wow.

This is why I prefer orgs like Gun Owners of America. The NRA cares less about firearms rights than it does about making noise.
 
If that were truly the case, then why are they not attacking the movie industry? There are movies out there, many, MANY of them, that are FAR more violent than even the most twisted video games.

Oh, that's right. They are spineless and will not attack what will bite back.
 
Those chose video games becuase if they said Hollywood then the MPAA would be suing the shit out of them. Last time I looked at my pistol it was an inert object. It wasn't doing anything bad or good, it was just there. Put that in a responsible person's hands and it's fine. Put in an irresponsible person's hands and it becomes something else. This pussification of America and passing the blame to everyone else but the parties involved is mind boggling to me.
 
Eisenblut said:
If that were truly the case, then why are they not attacking the movie industry? There are movies out there, many, MANY of them, that are FAR more violent than even the most twisted video games.
Click to expand...

They did. It's not in the linked article, but I read it on another site:

Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like "American Psycho"
and "Natural Born Killers" that are aired like propaganda loops on
"Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that
portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have
the nerve to call it "entertainment."
Click to expand...

Fucking pathetic. Way to jump on the "find someone to blame for tragedies that are going to fucking happen regardless of gun ownership, video game playing, movie watching, music listening, etc" bandwagon.
 
I wonder if the NRA will chip in for jack boots to suit the armed presence it recommends for all schools. Wayne LaPierre is a total joke.

Just keep those kids away from the video game and it will all go away. :rolleyes:
 
I love how they quote an obscure Flash game from 2002 as some sort of proof that video games have culturally screwed us. Well played NRA :rolleyes:
 
Not a big fan of the NRA and their suggestion to install armed police at schools; I thought guns are supposed to protect us from armed government oppression; but the NRA wants armed government oppression in every school. (gah, I sound like a government conspiracy nut)

Revolution X and shooting CDs aside, video games and dvds don't kill people. (Although I guess if you dropped an arcade cabinet on someone you could do some damage).
 
It's amazing that people are so moronic as to blame others things for this shooting. They want to put restrictions and bans on weapons to keep them out of the hands of people like Lanza. You know, the kid who murdered his mother and stole HER weapons to carry out the shooting. By the standards of the numerous laws and restrictions in place, it wouldn't have prevented her from owning the weapons she owned, and owned responsibly, nor would it have kept them out of her sons hands, he just killed her and took em.

Now the NRA wants to blame video games when their gun lobby has been directly responsible for padding their bottom line by skirting, subverting, or bribing legislators to change any restrictions put in place by state or federal authorities for decades, resulting in the deaths of thousands of human beings, and millions of animals. How ironic indeed.

Just a side note, i own guns, ive played violent video games since the atari 2600, and i work in a maximum security prison. How can you restrict the weapons people are allowed to own, when you cannot even stop drugs, cellphones, weapons, or any type of contraband from entering a prison? Hell, you can't even prevent people from escaping prisons each year. Fuck the NRA, i used to support them, but they are deflecting the angst of a stupid populace with no common sense what so ever when they should be engaging them to prevent rushed legislation that will be so restrictive to millions. Remember the Patriot Act after 9/11? Thats what happens when you rush legislation, you utterly destroy the constitutional rights of the people.

This is going to end badly for all of us.
 
I've been trying to buy a hunting rifle at a local gun forum and all I heard was how all the "liberals who hate 'murica are blaming guns" for what happened and yet they were championing what the NRA said. So basically they were perfectly fine in passing the blame to something else so long as they were left be. What a bunch of crap.
 
When I was a kid I was shooting windows out, killing birds for kicks, shot targets long before I knew what a video game was. I played Splatterhouse, Resident Evil, Manhunt, etc and have never thought what I was seeing on screen in the game was real. When I went hunting later in life I thought about the immensity of holding a gun and taking a life and stopped going because it just wasn't me to kill another person or animal. To blame a video game for the ills of society is wrong and tragic. The NRA should have been telling me why killing all those birds as a child was wrong as I still feel bad about it as an adult.

So what's next? Blame my next speeding ticket on the latest NASCAR race I saw on TV?
 
Just the fact that the NRA thinks that teachers carrying guns is a viable solution proves how ridiculous they are. So a grade 1 teacher is supposed to have a shootout in the classroom if a gunman enters? They might as well start replacing teachers with Terminators à la Class of 1999, it would make them sound less crazy. Not to mention all the other shootings that occurred before video games in the kind of detail we have now even existed, mass media seems to enjoy sweeping that little detail under the rug though.
 
Troof.

I kicked 3 turtles on the way home while eating every mushroom I can find, just like my favorite video game character.
 
Emtu said:
Just the fact that the NRA thinks that teachers carrying guns is a viable solution proves how ridiculous they are. So a grade 1 teacher is supposed to have a shootout in the classroom if a gunman enters?
Click to expand...

If a gunman enters, and the teacher is unarmed, everything that happens is up to the gunman.

If a gunman enters, and the teacher is armed, the gunman will no longer have total control.

Choose.

Although, personally, I don't trust 90% of teachers to carry weapons, since the NEA is so crazily anti-gun. It would be better if the cops that currently serve in liaison positions in schools were allowed to be armed like every other cop. "Gun-free zones" fail the moment someone with a gun walks onto the property and doesn't give a fuck.
 
What about the 6 o'clock news showing shootings and wars....
What about all those CSI shows on TV these days with gory deaths and such on them
What about the movies portraying American Soldiers...
 
Stiletto said:
They did. It's not in the linked article, but I read it on another site:



Fucking pathetic. Way to jump on the "find someone to blame for tragedies that are going to fucking happen regardless of gun ownership, video game playing, movie watching, music listening, etc" bandwagon.
Click to expand...

I think some members of the NRA might be afraid of stringent additions to the background check process that involves a psych evaluation, and those members are afraid they might not pass such an evaluation.
 
SS_Wehrwolf said:
Fuck the NRA, i used to support them, but they are deflecting the angst of a stupid populace with no common sense what so ever when they should be engaging them to prevent rushed legislation that will be so restrictive to millions.
Click to expand...

Exactly what they're doing. They're afraid of the public outcry against guns so they put out this nonsense again... "It's not guns, it's the video games!"

Why can't anyone who has the ear of the media stand up and say, 'uh guys? it was the shooter who shot the people.'
 
ballistic90 said:
I think some members of the NRA might be afraid of stringent additions to the background check process that involves a psych evaluation, and those members are afraid they might not pass such an evaluation.
Click to expand...

Yes, lobbyists tend to suffer from mental illness. Not gun owners.
 
tin foil hat time!
paranoid-bart.jpg
 
I know a guy with over 10 assault rifles. I seriously doubt that anyone who thinks they need that many could ever pass a psychological background check.
 
tlkimball said:
I know a guy with over 10 assault rifles. I seriously doubt that anyone who thinks they need that many could ever pass a psychological background check.
Click to expand...

There are still some perfectly rational people that have multiple guns. There are people that love the engineering that goes into a weapon, but never consider firing it.

I don't know if that guy falls into that category though, since I don't know them.
 
toast0 said:
Not a big fan of the NRA and their suggestion to install armed police at schools; I thought guns are supposed to protect us from armed government oppression; but the NRA wants armed government oppression in every school. (gah, I sound like a government conspiracy nut)

Revolution X and shooting CDs aside, video games and dvds don't kill people. (Although I guess if you dropped an arcade cabinet on someone you could do some damage).
Click to expand...

Government oppression aside, do you not agree that having armed security of some sort at a school would give pause and/or thought to someone wanting to shoot the place up? How many people do you know that will walk into a police department and start shooting? Not many.... because they will be shot back at in short order. All we ever hear about is how guns cause problems, not how they can solve problems. A CCH owner stopped the Oregon Mall shooter. An off duty police office stopped a potential massacre in San Antonio too. You won't find the liberal media reporting on that though too much.

Guns Can Stop tragedies too
 
ballistic90 said:
Except Doomsday Preppers and people that buy guns to fantasize about shooting a criminal.
Click to expand...

I don't get why some people scoff at those who prepare for the future. Emergencies happen, bud. Someone with lots of non-perishable food, water, and a generator is not going to be called a "doomsday prepper" when hurricanes, floods, power outages, or other disasters hit.

And as for the second part, are you supposed to fantasize about shooting a non-criminal? I personally hope that if I ever shoot someone, it's a criminal. Otherwise, I'm going to be the criminal.
 
Throw anything you can under the bus to try and steer blame and responsibility away from yourself. Total desperation.
 
tlkimball said:
I know a guy with over 10 assault rifles. I seriously doubt that anyone who thinks they need that many could ever pass a psychological background check.
Click to expand...

I know a guy with over 10 cars. Just as deadly in the wrong hands. What's your professional medical opinion about his mental state?

Can you even define "assault rifle"? Hint: it's not the same thing as "assault weapon".
 
Stiletto said:
If a gunman enters, and the teacher is unarmed, everything that happens is up to the gunman.

If a gunman enters, and the teacher is armed, the gunman will no longer have total control.

Choose.
Click to expand...

I think this is is funny.

You think that the gunman will not get the surprise shot out? Not to mention, if it becomes a common occurrence(teachers wielding weapons, that is), the only thing that will change is that the gunman would immediately shoot upon entering to get rid of the threat.

Sure, other teachers might come in after the fact, but by then, I'm sure the same number of dead will have already happened. Not to mention I doubt anyone would rush in to have their life potentially taken away.

What next? 2 teachers so if one gets taken down, the other will have a chance to save the kids? 3? just to be sure?
 
ravx25 said:
Government oppression aside, do you not agree that having armed security of some sort at a school would give pause and/or thought to someone wanting to shoot the place up? How many people do you know that will walk into a police department and start shooting? Not many.... because they will be shot back at in short order. All we ever hear about is how guns cause problems, not how they can solve problems. A CCH owner stopped the Oregon Mall shooter. An off duty police office stopped a potential massacre in San Antonio too. You won't find the liberal media reporting on that though too much.

Guns Can Stop tragedies too
Click to expand...

Posting armed guards at schools will just cause shooters to target other areas. Playgrounds, pre-schools, parks, stuff like that. By following this logic, someone will shoot up something new every few months, then we'll station guards there too, and that will continue to happen until every location either has an armed guard, or everyone will carry a gun to shoot anyone else who has a gun.

The "armed guards" idea is about as reactionary of an idea as I've ever heard. It wouldn't even have prevented this shooting. The shooter was the son of a teacher at that school, and there's a fairly good chance that the guard would have let him in, and have been shot in the back first by the guy after her retrieved his gun from a hiding place or in a gym bag.
 
Stiletto said:
If a gunman enters, and the teacher is unarmed, everything that happens is up to the gunman.

If a gunman enters, and the teacher is armed, the gunman will no longer have total control.

Choose.

Although, personally, I don't trust 90% of teachers to carry weapons, since the NEA is so crazily anti-gun. It would be better if the cops that currently serve in liaison positions in schools were allowed to be armed like every other cop. "Gun-free zones" fail the moment someone with a gun walks onto the property and doesn't give a fuck.
Click to expand...

What about the scenario where the kid goes into the teacher's desk and retrieves their gun and shoots it off in the classroom. Teacher goes to the bathroom or is helping little Johnny and the next thing you know some kid is waving the toy he found. Little kids like to experiment with toys and are determined to mess with things no matter how many times you tell them.

Or maybe we should have gun training for 5 year old kids so they know not to mess with the teachers pistol. I guess that's a solution. The only person with a gun in school should be the police officer stationed at that particular school.

:)
 
Hey NRA, and the rest of America that BELIEVES video games contribute to gun violence...

Press start to FUCK OFF!
 
pothb said:
I think this is is funny.

You think that the gunman will not get the surprise shot out? Not to mention, if it becomes a common occurrence(teachers wielding weapons, that is), the only thing that will change is that the gunman would immediately shoot upon entering to get rid of the threat.

Sure, other teachers might come in after the fact, but by then, I'm sure the same number of dead will have already happened. Not to mention I doubt anyone would rush in to have their life potentially taken away.

What next? 2 teachers so if one gets taken down, the other will have a chance to save the kids? 3? just to be sure?
Click to expand...

It's like your saying the bad guy will automatically know where the good guy is. It's called concealed carry for a reason dude.
 
Stiletto said:
I know a guy with over 10 cars. Just as deadly in the wrong hands. What's your professional medical opinion about his mental state?

Can you even define "assault rifle"? Hint: it's not the same thing as "assault weapon".
Click to expand...

Cars actually have a purpose besides killing things. A gun is designed to expell a pellet or bullet at high speeds at its target. The purpose is to damage or kill that target.

Do you ever get tired of vomiting the same tired B.S. every argument? I've heard this from you so many times and it's never a good comparison. Grow up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top