U.S. Lawmakers are Not Interested in Facts About Video Games

I think this is the game we are gonna be playing for awhile now, every-time there's some shooting, or murder that captures the nations attention, we are now gonna have to hear all sorts or grandstanding and discussion of which one of our god given rights was responsible for the deaths, and therefor has to be "rolled back" also known as violated.

Is it the first amendments fault? the second? Only thing most people in Washington and the talking heads gleefully capitalizing on the deaths of murdered school children, seem to agree on is we just have to much freedom here and we have to be stopped for our own good.

This isn't about Facts, This isn't about the bill of rights, this is about alot of dead children and the sweet sweet political capital it provides for new legislation and the political power of career politicians, and the sweet sweet ratings that can be sucked out of the situation by media figures grandstanding on the graves of those killed.

So we ban semi-automatic weapons and extended magazines, what do we ban after the NEXT school shooting?

Violent video games? violent movies? oh hey what about Right wing talk radio?

You think its gonna end with assault weapons your kidding yourself, this is the same administration that made it their #1 priority to see the maker of a YOUTUBE VIDEO captured and thrown in jail after a bunch of our embassy's are attacked during protest in the middle east.

The father of Tyrone Woods, one of the US navy seals killed in the benghazi attack, told reporters that when at the ceremony where is sons flag draped coffin was being brought back to this country, he was greeted by SOS Hillary Clinton, and Clinton looked in his eyes, and promised to bring......... the maker of the youtube video to justice. Not the monsters who murdered his son, but a man within our own country that it has been decided shall have his SPEECH blamed for the deaths and violence.

And now ofcourse, it can't be the Monster who shot up an elementary school who's responsible, nooo he must have been INSPIRED by someones speech, so now that's gotta be stopped to.

The fact that these people even call themselves "Liberal" is a god damned joke.

God help us


Edit:: BTW This is exactly how things operate when you live in a collective.
 
Last edited:
I would also just like to say before people try to turn this into a right v left thing,

It doesn't matter.(both sides are fucked if you ask me)

If your on the right and your arguing against violent media and video games, or if you're on the left arguing against semi automatic's, the same argument you're using to "roll back" or Violate a freedom you don't care much about, is the exact same argument that will be used to "roll back" or Violate a right that you DO care very much about.

Our founding fathers surely never could have envisioned X, so therefor they couldn't possibly have meant out bill of rights to protect X
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
what corporate ends are they serving going after video games? or guns for that matter, gun makers are HUGE corporate lobby's.

Its not corporations it's soulless politicians, they will latch themselves to corporations or their goals as long as it serves them politically, they'd also drag any corporation to the public alter for slaughter the second it suits them politically as well.

I just don't see what corporate end would be served here.

It's not about corporations its about this



I guess what i mean is even when they aren't selling out to corporations they are a bunch of corrupt shameless zealots who often advocate and even legislate things that are utterly insane.
 
Last edited:
I did a blog piece on gun control a week or so ago, lol.

A Question of Control.

Now that I don't have to repeat myself in that regard, on to the discussion of government.

Thelona is right, it's actually not so much a matter of politicians whoring themselves out to corporations (though they certainly do), it's a matter of politicians doing a few specific things.

First, whoring themselves out to anyone who will help them get reelected. You wanna know why the Republican Party has become infested by this god-mongering idiots who spout off bullshit about things like "legitimate rape"? It's because a while back they figured out how to mobilize the religious right to vote for them, and now they have to keep pandering to a specific fringe group. Similarly, why are Democrats so incredibly against the idea of any cuts to entitlement spending? Same deal, they cozy'd up to the people dependent on those services and are now beholden to them.

Secondly, and this is the really important part for the House of Representatives, it's the perpetual election cycle. Everyone except the President can basically run as many times as they like, so long as they keep getting reelected. Members of the House in particular are perpetually locked in the reelection process; while in theory it's supposed to make them responsive to the needs of their constituents, when we bring in the next factor you'll understand why it complicates the matter.

Thirdly, the use of private money for elections: Politicians now have a significant amount of leeway in how well they serve their constituencies so long as they serve the specific portion that they're beholden to well enough. In effect, they can buy the necessary votes from an apathetic public. This is part of the corporate whoring, obviously, but specifically on the financial side.

Fourth, the abuse of the election process by the two major political parties. Between the extensive gerrymandering of districts, total control of the debates, and the primary system, the big two can effectively shout down attempts by anyone else to enter the race unless it's under their own power. There are rare exceptions, third-party candidates who capture a few percent of the vote, but the big two basically have the whole system locked up and they prefer it that way. While there is something to be said for the simplicity of a two party system, it brings us to our final point...

Fifth, the existence of political parties in the first place. It's a bad idea, Washington said it was a bad idea, and the logic behind it hasn't changed in almost 250 years. Parties control politicians, they control the election process and dictate who gets to run and what chances they have. In theory they're supposed to be a group of politicians with similar ideas, but ultimately they winds up being just another example of corporate branding.

If we want to move away from the ridiculous polarization of Washington, of the perpetual divisiveness of our political process, to a system where politicians serve the people who voted for them, while keeping in mind the best interests of the nation as a whole, we need to take serious steps to change the election process as it currently exists.

And given that the election process is controlled by people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, you might expect that I'm a little frustrated when I think about the situation.

And you'd be right.
 
Thelona said:
what corporate ends are they serving going after video games? or guns for that matter, gun makers are HUGE corporate lobby's.

Its not corporations it's soulless politicians, they will latch themselves to corporations or their goals as long as it serves them politically, they'd also drag any corporation to the public alter for slaughter the second it suits them politically as well.

I just don't see what corporate end would be served here.

It's not about corporations its about this



I guess what i mean is even when they aren't selling out to corporations they are a bunch of corrupt shameless zealots who often advocate and even legislate things that are utterly insane.
Click to expand...

I'd see them as trying to push the blame off themselves, that's the corporate end here. Specifically the other media forms. A lot of corporations own both TV Networks, Movie producers, and music, but not necessarily games. So they want to take the blame off of them. And let's be honest, TV and movies and such are competing with games in some ways. Not necessarily directly, but they do compete for people's money since they are all forms of entertainment. And I'd say 99% of our corporations ARE selling out to politicians. Just follow their campaign contributors, their bills they propose and vote on while in office, and then where they go after they are done (if ever) in politics. It's a huge problem right now. Hell, it's what the occupy movement was specifically about and vehemently against.

But ya, this is why I support the campaign cost reforms (one of which I posted a bit ago which is entirely legal to do right now, because we the people own the airwaves) and why I vastly support actual electoral process overhaul. I hate this first past the post system. It's terrible. I very much would prefer an instant run off system. Basically instead of one vote, you get to vote for everyone you want, but you rank them. Or, there's the other option of getting two votes, one for the candidate you like and the other for the party you like. And then you double the senate/congress' size and you let the candidate who won get the seat, then you fill seats to proportionally represent based on parties. I don't really care to make parties officially part of the process though :\

Anyways, interesting interview from, of all places, Fox News

 
Last edited:
Don't get me started on this gun control bs.

Your founding fathers could not have imagined the weaponry available to average citizens today. I said on FB believe, it's like the bloody bible. Written for an age that has changed in more ways than we can count, at least for more civilized countries.

You, nor your neighbors require access to heavy gun power to protect your four walls. You want to brandish a gun IF you ever happen to have an intruder, a hunting rifle or shotgun will suffice.

Politics be damned, agendas be damned. This to me is quite black and white. The less amount of legal (and illegal) guns with the ability to mow down a crowd in under a minute, the better.

Those that spout some paranoia about Hilters methods and having the authorities someday rally everyone up to some massive civil war is beyond paranoia. And I personally think those that worry about that happening are the last whom should ever own such weapons.

Those guns were built/designed for one thing and one thing only... as well they were only manufactured to be supplied to militants. Your military, those overseas, cause we all know how huge a corporate monster the manufacturing of these arms is.

That being said..., if there were less, then there would still be less chance that the next (many times) perfectly sane, god fearing person to snap won't have such an impressive arsenal to dip into he already legally owns, or his son/brother/sister or anyone.

Sorry. But I do not think any of you should have the right to own THAT kind of weaponry.

Your amendment wasn't written with AK's and Carbines in mind. You're not a cowboy nation. Oh and I'm using 'you' in general, I suppose to the mentality anyone has that their toes and god given rights are being trampled on.

Sorry I went to one side completely and didn't touch video games. I don't think there's a need to venture into video gaming 'facts'. There are ratings for a reason.

FB Status/Rant if anyone is interested in how flippin crazy I is =p (I think I offend people...)

Spoiler:
Why do you have the need for a semi or fully automated weapon? Why do you have the need for clips that hold a mass amount of ammo? What is the purpose of these weapons? Personal defense? Do you plan on carrying your carbine around with you as you walk the streets? Do you plan on showing your 17 yr old son/daughter where you keep the weapon, keys and ammo for said weapon should a home invasion ever happen while you're not home?

If you cannot come up with a practical and reasonable answer to those questions than your fight for your 'right' is selfish.

Just like the 'laws' in the bible written hundreds of years ago, times have changed, drastically, immeasurably by those who fought to put in place that right for you.

You want to protect your family from home invasion, I believe a shotgun would suffice. If you believe you 'need' a semi auto to protect your home, you're more paranoid than you are willing to believe/see. No one 'needs' weapons with the ability to mow down a large room of people in under a minute.

discussion
Its so they can defend themselves from the King of England... So says the constitution :s
Click to expand...
Why does anyone need a fast car when we have speed limits? Why do girls need shoes or makeup? Why do people need more money?

Its not about need. Its about want. I wanted a fast car, i wanted a fast computer. I dont need them, i want them because they are what I want.

Is a fully automatic 400 round assault rifle needed to defend my house? Probably not, unless theres a zombie invasion.

When you give the ability to do something and then take it away people will fight. Look at China with its internet policy or the Pirate bay.

There isnt a real answer to the problem because the technology already exists and has existed for so long you can only hope to curb further growth.

If people are truly determined to shoot up something or blow up something they will get the materials required regardless. Look at the war against drugs as a prime example of this.

Tons of people smoke pot even though its illegal and they act like they need it. When in fact its more like a want.
Click to expand...

my response
want a fast car with 200+ horse power, awesome! It's a privilege, not a right that you acquire a drivers license. You need proper licensing to enjoy that luxury, insurance and if you want to 'play' you need to rent or pay into drag time. As you should. There is practically a free for all as far as gun ownership in your country dude. Private sales where there are no background checks, irresponsible mass sales. Online purchasing with no restrictions, no red flags. People have massed 'toys' and volumes of toys that put local PD's arsenals to shame! That's a big fucking problem in my opinion.

You cannot back pedal, but you CAN apply some breaks. There's nothing wrong with saying 'we made a mistake and should have done X so many years ago'. Problem is a large amount of cowboys can't seem to admit to that same mistake because they enjoy their toys far too much.

I say too bad so fucking sad. So a few rotten apples ruined it for the whole bunch, such is life. Suck it up princess. Your arguments that there is a 'need' is moot. Here are your options and here are the steps required in order to exercise those 'rights'.

Rights btw that should be looked at as 'privileges' rather than rights.

Btw, I think vehicles, more specifically licensing is an issue as well, albeit a separate one, but both touch on weapons that are far reaching. One being 3000K + moving weapons of steel capable of causing major piles ups resulting in multiple deaths put in the hands of irresponsible inexperienced and cocky drivers.

Not all that different than weapons with 200-400+ clips capable of mowing through a crowd of hundreds in a matter of a minute, put in the hands of irresponsible, inexperienced and cocky owners. The mentality to me is par. To own such a weapon, so easily to boot, is unnecessary. Where-as a vehicle in NA more times than not is often quite necessary otherwise you're looking at limited opportunity.
Click to expand...

continued
People are selfish.. selfish and blind and just as brainwashed by the extreme propaganda suggesting the governments move to 'one world order' or a Hilter socialist police state etc. Two sides of the same coin if you ask me.
Click to expand...

The average shot gun holds how many slugs? How quickly can you reload, and are you not vulnerable while reloading? You play enough games lol, I know reloading a bold action weapon takes a shit tonne more time than an auto. By the time 1 sicko has killed 2-3 people with a shotty that same person could have plowed through 20 + with an auto without the need to reload.

It's not news, this issue has been something I've been discussing with my OH for over a decade. And it's only been in the last decade that the number of crimes, especially in the media have sky rocketed. I know what the medias all about. Lets not make this about sensationalism. That's not what it's about, and people keep bringing it there to white wash the issues at hand.
Click to expand...

If the general public want to argue that there is a 'need', and that is what I'm mainly seeing. "Criminals already own these weapons so we need them too, to protect our families" the most common argument I see, well if you (generalized, not you personally) think 5 armed people are going to break into your home with AK's, you're more paranoid than you admit. The average home invasion can be 'protected' against with the average run of the mill hunting rifle or shotgun.
Click to expand...

There's a LOT more... but ultimately my stance is no one has any decent argument to support the 'need' for this 'right'. Therefore, there is no logic, just selfishness and refusal to even -consider- a need for change.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't trying to talk about gun control here :( more the stupidity of our law makers in regards to games.

Though in regards to Hitler analogies I always see from Gun Nuts, he didn't make guns harder to get. That was administrations before him, in fact, he made guns easier to get. And then the other things people use (Switzerland and Israel) are also completely wrong cause Switzerland also isn't so easy to get a gun, you don't get a rifle at all unless you serve in the military. And Israel it's also harder and also a much different situation than the US. So ya... there are many fallacies on their end with those arguments. Still, I don't care about gun laws with regards to this topic, just how stupid our politicians are in regards to games :|
 
Last edited:
Cheebs you know fully automatic weapons are already completely illegal in the US right? Infact Connecticut, the state in which the shooting happened, already has a standing "assault rifle ban" on the books, and the rifle used was LEGAL under that assault weapon ban.

I know the guns sold in the US they are waving around on TV talk shows look JUST like the guns used in warfare and what you see in CoD, but they aren't. They are modified however they need to be to comply with stricter state laws, the entire term "Assault Rifle" has been stretched and politicized to the point its losing its meaning.

Besides handguns and shotguns are used to kill far more people in this country every year then assault style rifles. the 1.5 second it takes a practiced gun user to change out a clip is not gonna be a game changer when someones trying to go on a rampage.

Gun control laws do not stop lone shooter incidents, we have had people go on shooting sprees with Assault rifles when assault rifles were illegal, and had shooters kill just as many people with handguns. the laws didn't stop those people from acquiring the guns.

Oh and just because someones defensive about "Infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms" doesn't make someone a "Gun-nut" Just because you care nothing for the 2nd amendment or guns, doesn't mean everyone who actually thinks its important is some kind of nut.

and I could easily make the argument that our founding fathers did not write the 1st amendment with violent video games/movies and the internet in mind.

But yeah. sorry. wasn't really wanting to start the gun control thing either, cause really, the chances of real gun control laws passing on the federal level right now is slim to none, and legislation against violent video games or internet gaming stand a much better chance of getting traction right now.
 
Last edited:
Video games, movies and the internet can in some cases be the fuel in some mentally ill persons mind that drives them further towards cracking completing and causing mass carnage. However, if they already own weapons capable of causing mass carnage it's that much easier for them.

Also, if a perfectly responsible, otherwise mentally healthy person snaps and owns those same weapons having never had an issue previously, they too now have the means on hand to cause mass carnage.

I have a buddy in TX that owns a few assault rifles legally, as well as a buddy in TN with a couple and a friend in Baltimore (I believe) who owns at least 1 carbine which he decked out to the 9s. I don't think these guys are necessarily a threat, they just like their toys. But regardless of that fact, if they were to ever snap under everyday life stresses they have the means to create a mess. Not a good thing, no matter what way you want to look at it. There is no way to completely rid the populace of what arms are on the streets, but those who legally own them, well if each state passes a bill issuing specific arms illegal and gave citizens 6mo-1yr to hand them in otherwise if they were caught they'd be prosecuted to the full extent, I'd say that would be fair.

People are afraid because of criminals who don't care about the laws in place, well okay, but if you can't CARRY your weapon, wtf good is it to you anyway? Why fight soo hard to keep something that will only maybe come into play should someone break into your house or store. That's why I keep saying a played down hunting rifle or shotgun would suffice. No one should own handguns either...

I carry a baton, I have a wicked switch blade too but I won't carry that. If someone were to sneak up on me at night and hold a gun to me, even if I owned a gun and knew how to use it, what are the chances I'm going to be able to get to it before that person blew a hole in me? Not much chance.... if I have to physically attack that person to give myself enough time to get my gun out (which I in would have illegally in most cases) then I can just as easily do the same and either book it or bash his/her head in with my baton then run. There are few states were you can carry a concealed weapon, so again I think most arguments are kinda lame.

I keep saying, if a family grows up proud to exercise their rights, teaches their children at a young age how to properly use, store their weapons and the parents decide by 14-17 they're responsible and knowledgeable enough to entrust access should they ever need them and the parents not be home, who's to say one of their kids doesn't use these weapons some day to commit a crime like any one of the school shootings in the last 12 years..?

The less available to the general public, the better, period. There is no other way to look at it. You can't carry these around with you in case you get robbed or held up while out running errands. You can't carry them to the theatre, you can't send your kids to school with them or even keep them in your vehicle. Correct me if I'm wrong but there are very few states that allow anyone to carry a weapon on their person.

Again, I believe, the less in circulation the better.

Video games/media, movies and internet may have some issues with the content which is available to the masses, sure. I can't argue that, but with the video games/media, movies and internet alone, no harm can be done (physically). Someone needs 'tools' in order to harm another. Whether they use their fists, or any other body part, a knife, rope, whips & chains or guns... they need tools aside from what they've seen.

If media these days *is* to blame for children growing up disturbed... we're all capable of different things. There are those who no matter what they experienced or were exposed to, would look to harm others. There are many (and I hope most) others that can't even fathom harming someone in the same way.

Video games have ratings, it's both the parents as well as the vendors responsibility to ensure games are not being sold to children who do not meet that criteria. Parents need to monitor what their kids are seeing on the net. Parents need to ensure the movies their kids watch do not leave the wrong impressions. It's up to us to teach empathy, otherwise it's not just 'learned'.

Without knowing the 'facts' or any numbers on the issue at hand, I tend to think the pros far outweigh the cons on video games.

I cannot stand behind those who argue the second amendment is a right their were given and can never be amended itself. I'm sorry, but times they are a changing, and perhaps these things will need revision every few decades considering how drastically things have changed in the last 100 years alone. Our Charter of Rights will likely need to be revisited.. when/if that time comes, I'll take my time and consider what's most important for my families future and those to come.
 
Last edited:
You know, I wonder, if the NRA is all about gun rights and the right to carry a gun, where's the people advocating the right to bear a sword? Be it something like a short sword or a freaking claymore? Wonder why that's ok to be illegal to carry around in public, but concealed guns are ok hmm. I just don't get people.

But ya, should focus on game aspect here :P
 
hey I'm all for the legalization of swords Not sure what the law is on carrying swords in public, I know there's different state laws against "fixed blades" past a certain length. but I don't know of any federal law.

But yeah, the entire argument on games just shows how little sanity there is in Washington, There's already a rating system, yet we have to have a whole fucking congressional investigation and are threatening to force a rating system on game manufacturer's ....... That they've already imposed on themselves years ago. Its all about image and grandstanding and LOOKING like you're taking a stand on something, even if its completely pointless and asinine.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Totalbiscuit when he talks about it. That a great many are focusing on games cause they don't have investments in it. Most of the media networks are owned by those who also have a great deal amount invested in the music and movie industry, but they don't quite have so much of an investment in games. I mean, they can't actually go after other aspects (gun manufacturers are even more powerful and 2nd amendment does protect gun ownership on some level), can't go after mental health (because then we'd have to properly attack all the politicians, including Ronald Reagan, for screwing over our mental health care in the country over the decades), so ya. Scapegoat falls to games :|

Edit: www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-february-7-2013-neil-barofsky The interview makes my stomach turn and enraged -_- Just figured post it to give an example of the corporate whoring. Dood talks about how these idiots protecting the banks during 2008 cause they came from the banks and ya... bah.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top