December 21, 2012
— DrewM They called it a “press conference” but NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre read a statement (pdf) and then left.
The big takeaway people are talking about is the NRAÂ’s call to have a cop in every school. IÂ’ll get to that in a moment but first I want to run through a couple of the statements that I found to be problematic.
And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting
shadow 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. And hereÂ’s one:
itÂ’s called Kindergarten Killers. ItÂ’s been online for 10 years. How come
my research department could find it and all of yours either couldnÂ’t or
didnÂ’t want anyone to know you had found it?Then thereÂ’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."But is that what it really is? Isn't fantasizing about killing people as a
way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?In a race to the bottom, media conglomerates compete with one
another to shock, violate and offend every standard of civilized
society by bringing an ever-more-toxic mix of reckless behavior and
criminal cruelty into our homes — every minute of every day of
every month of every year.
So guns donÂ’t kill people, video games and movies do?
The NRA has rightly fought back against the notion that guns and not people are the problem. To see them try and shift blame and undercut the logic of their own argument is disappointing and beneath them.
It’s always easy to say, “don’t take away my freedom, take away the other guy’s” but we shouldn’t even entertain ideas like that. It’s stupid when liberals set up a choice between 1st and 2nd Amendment rights and it’s not any better when the NRA does it.
A child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18.
Bull. Again heÂ’s talking about TV, movies and video games. Aside from the fact that not all fictional violence is equal (a slasher movie and say the deaths in Band of Brothers serve very different purposes), fictional violence isÂ…fictional.
Once again, the NRA is simply resorting to the same cheap, emotional tactics we loathe from the left (remember it was Tipper Gore who waged a campaign against the music industry).
Are imagines of violence prevalent in our society? Of course. But who is the proper guardian of what children see, the government or parents?
As parents, we do everything we can to keep our children safe. It is now time for us to assume responsibility for their safety at school.
The only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally
involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection.
There’s no such thing as “absolute protection”. Again, this is the kind of cheap, lazy argument we’d bash liberals for, it’s no more attractive coming from someone on “our” side.
I call on Congress today to act immediately, to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every school — and to do it now, to make sure that blanket of safety is in place when our children
return to school in January.
What could go wrong will urging the federal government to “act immediately” and to spend whatever is necessary on a project without any time to consider options or the ramifications? The last time we did something in such a knee jerk fashion we got the TSA. How’s that working out for you?
And why is this a federal responsibility or mandate? ShouldnÂ’t these kind of decisions be made at the local school board and community level? How is massive, thoughtless, rushed action a good idea?
There'll be time for talk and debate later. This is the time,
this is the day for decisive action.
Again, how is this a good way to make policy? Oh and you know who would agree with the sentiment if not the proposed policy? Gun grabbers. TheyÂ’d love to act first and debate later.
As for the NRAÂ’s main idea, cops in every school, itÂ’s an incredible waste of resources.
The Sandy Hook School in Newtown, CT was established in 1956. What would a cop have been doing for the last 56 years? Now multiply that by tens of thousands of schools that have not and will not experience a shooting incident.
One reason that the shootings in places like LA and Chicago donÂ’t make much news and Newtown does it what happened at Newtown is exceedingly rare.
Far more children die crossing the street than at the hand of a gunman in a school. Should we have crossing guards on every street in the nation?
And yes, we have armed guards at all sorts of places, the Capitol, Court Houses, the Holocaust Museum. But those places are all identifiable targets. The overwhelming majority of schools (the proverbial 99.99999%) simply aren't.
Should some schools have cops stationed at them? Absolutely and they do. School Resource Officers do amazing work but they simply arenÂ’t needed in every school house all the time. If a locality or a district wants to have cops in schools, nothing is stopping them from doing that. That doesn't translate into a national mandate to have them or change the cost/benefit analysis.
About all the NRA had going for it today is the idiocy of their opponents.
IÂ’m not sure why the NRA felt the need to talk about this at all. Yes, the media has been hitting them but the media always hits them. The important thing to remember is the media is full of idiots. You donÂ’t see AAA holding a press event when a car is used in a crime.
But if you are going to hold an event and make national news, you should make a strong case for yourself and your cause. I think the NRA has one, they just didnÂ’t make it today.
Posted by: DrewM at
10:45 AM
| Comments (364)
Post contains 1081 words, total size 7 kb.
Posted by: RWC at December 21, 2012 10:48 AM (fWAjv)
I can find absolutely nothing wrong with what Wayne Lapierre said. Nothing.
It made perfect common sense. And it's about godamm time someone said it.
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 10:49 AM (ptD6d)
Posted by: Jose/ningrim at December 21, 2012 10:49 AM (srIqv)
What is it with Republicans/Conservatives/Wingnuts these days? They just read statements and leave!
/Libtards
Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 10:50 AM (3ZtZW)
Bravo NRA - I think its fighting fire with fire.....! People will now say, we don't have a budget for that, why pay for cops when a few armed teachers could handle this.... voila! Now the "arming teachers" isn't such a bad idea...since we are talking about having armed cops anyway.
Posted by: Kevin C at December 21, 2012 10:51 AM (9kCiU)
Posted by: Zac at December 21, 2012 10:51 AM (F6KtL)
That's not the point.
Video games and movies are dehumanizing us, and glorifying death and destruction. They are creating the social norms that claim no moral virtue in restraint, control and respect.
What he said was reasonable.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 21, 2012 10:51 AM (GsoHv)
I agree that all schools are currently gun free hunting zones for the psycologically distured, something does need to be done about that and 'armed guards' is not it, maybe take away the 'gun free' zones that criminals so obviously ignore and perhaps permit either teachers or maintenence pernoell to carry concealed?
Hollywood does glorify the use of firearms illegally in almost all of their productions, there are a lot of laws on the books for gun ownership, perhaps there needs to be restrictions on the glorification of illegal firearms use as well.
Posted by: Gmac - Who wishes all a Merry Christmas, except for those retards that re-elected the SCOAMF at December 21, 2012 10:53 AM (IanLz)
It made perfect common sense. And it's about godamm time someone said it.
Are you serious? How in the hell did you come to that conclusion?
Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 10:54 AM (k9osu)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at December 21, 2012 10:54 AM (evdj2)
For the hard-of-understanding, here's what Mr LaPierre was saying:
You're barking up the wrong tree, you asshole-totalitarians. Citizens owning guns is not the problem.
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 10:54 AM (ptD6d)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 10:55 AM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Gmac - Who wishes all a Merry Christmas, except for those retards that re-elected the SCOAMF at December 21, 2012 10:55 AM (IanLz)
You don't?
They're changing the subject. Now the media and Hollywood will defend themselves against these "scurrilous" allegations by the "irresponsible" NRA.
This is how you work PR. We are too honest, stop reading the stage directions.
Nonetheless, it gets them off the front page and now the "conversation" switches to violent video games and video game-like movies.
And in defense of LaPierre, these movies and video games with their violent revenge fantasies are as much to blame as guns.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 10:57 AM (T0NGe)
maybe if you lived in a city like LA or Chicago you would realize that cities like those already have armed police on site ... so no, its not too expensive to have cops in schools ...
the Newtown police headquarters is 1.6 miles from the school ... 20 minutes ... let that sink in ... Did they walk ?
Posted by: JeffC at December 21, 2012 10:58 AM (A3tpD)
Posted by: yinzer at December 21, 2012 10:58 AM (/Mla1)
Get a grip, Drew. At this point I'm welcoming any discussion at all on the lack of moral guardrails in this country. Because if one is really honest with themselves, this is the base of the problem.
Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 10:58 AM (fQaiK)
It's not the violence per se, that I have a problem with...
It's the glorifying of Evil as something that is 'cool'.
Violence done in a fight against evil bad guys is sort of gratifying to watch.
Good triumphing over evil, in other words.
But violence done by bad guys that we are supposed to see as 'cool' and 'misunderstood'...so we're supposed to be sympathetic to them...is not good, imo.
If movies and tv don't have an effect on people...
Then I guess all that Leftist Propaganda that has been stuffed into movies and shows has had no effect either, right?
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 10:59 AM (K4wCe)
Video games and movies are dehumanizing us
Bullshit.
If they're dehumanizing you (and apparently the mouse in your pocket since we got that royal 'we' thing going) then you stop playing them.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 10:59 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: WVinMN at December 21, 2012 10:59 AM (4Pleu)
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 10:59 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 10:59 AM (6H6FZ)
Is that 20 minutes absolutely true and accurate, or just some rumor?
Because I find it very hard to believe.
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 11:00 AM (ptD6d)
It is good to finally see the connection between non stop violence on the screen of what ever media and the killing of innocent people.
It is the NRA which has preached and taught responsible gun handling for over 100 years - and it is the left which has glamorized gun violence from the beginnings of hollywood.
LaPierre hit it out of the park.
If you are going to go down the lame, goofy lane of how depictions of violence doesn't influence people - then those folks who spend millions for a few seconds of commercials to influence buyers sure are getting ripped off.
Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 11:00 AM (qBLA2)
maybe it took 20 minutes for their SWAT team to assemble and enter the premises, but there had to have been patrol cars sent their immediately...and then they just hung out outside and waited
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 11:01 AM (ptD6d)
You don't need cops in every school. All you need is someone who can shoot back. If you're not going to let teachers carry, a trained security guard would work. You don't need someone trained to respond to domestic violence, DUI, burglary, and every other offense under the sun. And you don't even need someone with arrest authority. Just somone who can shoot back if necessary, and mostly just be a presence.
Posted by: yinzer at December 21, 2012 11:01 AM (/Mla1)
However, your damned right high-profile people need to be calling attention to this crap.
Because we need to alienate everyone under 35 MOAR by not only talking up birth control bans, but also video games and movies?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:02 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:02 AM (Z9EHQ)
Posted by: LTMG at December 21, 2012 11:02 AM (egC7r)
Pointing out the hypocrisy in The Left's position on guns is a win.
The gun violence displayed in media of all kinds is shocking. Pointing out Kindergarten Killers needed to be done. It is not conservatives who make the decisions to produce these violent games, movies, tv shows, graphic novels, etc.
LaPierre had everybody's attention today, and what he said has to be covered because it's all he said, and the spotlight is on him.
Now let the people responsible for glorifying gun violence explain why it's such a good thing that they make billions a year glorifying gun violence.
Let's start with Jamie Foxx saying how great it was to kill all the white people in his movie, how much fun he had doing it.
Posted by: Boots at December 21, 2012 11:03 AM (neKzn)
Why do you deny what you see right in front of your face, entropy?
Kids today are exposed to so much poison and it's reflected in their shitty behavior.
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 11:04 AM (ptD6d)
Bravo, Wayne. Now keep saying it.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 11:04 AM (eHIJJ)
As an honest gun owning American, I am not going stand for being blamed for the actions of lunatics.
Is obama going to apologize for Stalin?
No, well, then fuck you.
Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 11:04 AM (qBLA2)
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 11:05 AM (ptD6d)
Wayne, IMO, just jumped the Shark...
This is EXACTLY like Bob Costas talking about Gun Control on a Sportscast...
The ONLY way Hollywood and Vidoe games will change is with Government intervention... ie.... limiting Freedom of Speech...
So Wayne, speaking for an organization which exists to defend the Second Amendment, puts forth a postion which will have to limit the First?
/Libertarian Facepalm
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:05 AM (lZBBB)
Video games do not cause school shootings.
If video games caused school shootings, we'd have 15 million school shootings.
We have about 15 total, not 15 million.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:05 AM (TULs6)
This.
The I suspect NRA doesn't give a shit about violence on TV and in video games. It does, however, understand how politics and the MFM work (unlike one particular political party). Obama is already giving campaign speeches about guns, and the NRA is pointing out that there's a root cause to gun violence that needs to be addressed. I don't know that it's entirely clear to anyone what that root is, but the media depictions of violence example at least provides a starting point for the conversation.
Posted by: Xander Crews at December 21, 2012 11:06 AM (24UOj)
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:04 PM (ptD6d)
Yet, by all Valid Measurments, Violence is actualy DOWN...
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:06 AM (lZBBB)
You know who kills people? Bangers defending their turf from other gangsters we're better off without - and unfortunately, the innocents who get in the way. If it weren't for the innocents, good riddance.
You know who kills people? The self murderers committing suicide.
First and third categories could be helped if we had fixed the shortcomings of the mental health institutions rather than spent three decades dismantling them.
LaPierre is right about one thing. Guns have been a constant from Revolutionary times, but the level of virtual violence has really spiked in the last couple of decades.
What the DC clown circus will accomplish? A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.....
Posted by: chuckR at December 21, 2012 11:06 AM (XLu7l)
The NRA can gore your ox, too, Statist, gun-grabbing f*ckers.
WTF are you talking about? That's not THEIR ox you're goring back it's mine you morons.
You think statists are pro-first ammendment?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:07 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 11:07 AM (dZ756)
Not lost in me is the media attacked him and his organization for a week solid as the "Real Problem" so he did a reverse trajectory return fire right back on them.
Should you be letting your 8yo watch ultra violent movies, and play ultra violent video games? I think the responsible answer to that is no. And that answer agrees with the premise layed down by La Pierre in a way even the squishy middle mouth breathers who decide their votes based off of recent weather can understand. Emotionally.
Because looking at America and telling them "THIS IS YOUR FAULT!" while true is a non starter. Perhaps if you can get them to examine the corrupting influences in their lives you might get someplace, but you can't do that by attacking them, to do it by attacking those influences.
Again in November, the people of this nation made it clear the content of debates and discussions they were willing to entertain, and that which they would ignore. La Pierre just gave them what they asked for.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at December 21, 2012 11:07 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:07 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Some feller from Arkansas at December 21, 2012 11:08 AM (V2UBn)
Posted by: Cogadh at December 21, 2012 11:08 AM (g1xkX)
Drew, it was brilliant to bring in video games, movies, and TV. Because lefties have been beating the 1A drum on those a loooong time now and have been making tons of arguments that a kid simply watching a TV show or playing Halo won't magically make him into a murdering lunatic.
And that just because an argument against banning guns. Owning a gun doesn't magically turn a person into a murdering lunatic either.
As for the rest, well, there's what's politically possible. LaPierre did a good job talking about how dumb gun-free zones are, but it's a tough argument to make to arm teachers since lefties are culturally opposed to that. But lefties can't credibly oppose police officers, since those are the guys they want us to call when we get into trouble. And in the wake of the anti-gun Left's newfound fiscal conservatism, if it's too expensive then the NRA will train any school administrator under their new program for free.
LaPierre turned the narrative around on its ear and put the ball squarely where it belongs.
Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 11:08 AM (eytER)
Enlist retired law enforcement officers of which there are over 500,000 in NY alone to draw from for example. You would draw from the retirees in other states.
Give them a $55.00 dollar per-diem to cover travel and lunch.
You would have 2 per school.
There are 180 days in a school year.
That comes to $20,000.00 for the two school protectors.
They have health insurance and main income from their pension.
The state and fed will pass a law to make the income from these school protector duties tax free below $25,0000.00
The average elementary school has 1,000 students that would amount at max to $25.00 per year per student or $0.14 cents per day.
Most parents shell out more than 20x that number per day to buy school lunches for their children.
That's just one real attempt to solve the problem that is workable and has a realistic shot at stopping these incidents.
The lefts solution is to ban "scary" guns and limit the number of rounds a clip can have and expnad "gun free zones" which would do absolutely nothing to prevent these incidents from occurring but would make you feel better because, "WE DID SOMETHING"
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 11:09 AM (RrD4h)
Yet, by all Valid Measurments, Violence is actualy DOWN...
Shhhhh.
You can't get pointless legislative action without fear mongering.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:09 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 03:08 PM (eytER)
Soon to be heard Lefty Headline... NRA supports Censorship!
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:10 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: zsasz at December 21, 2012 11:10 AM (CRLoc)
Because lefties have been beating the 1A drum on those a loooong time now and have been making tons of arguments that a kid simply watching a TV show or playing Halo won't magically make him into a murdering lunatic.
That's not lefties that's libertarians you morons.
I know you think it's the same thing but trust me, it's not.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:10 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: JimboHoffa at December 21, 2012 11:10 AM (qEZxt)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:12 AM (Z9EHQ)
"going after the culture is a distraction"
Exactly. And not as you think.
The hyperemotional rush to ban guns had to be short-circuited. All those presstitutes, soccer moms, and assorted examples of ignorance needed to be shown a shiny object. Distracted. Step One: Hold The Line.
In the coming days, WLP the NRA and everyone who supports the 2A will be ridiculed by the ususal suspects over this, but in doing so the conversation about its merits and alternatives *will* be had. Step Two: Turn their flank.
When the conversation is had, with time to think, time to come up with alternatives, time to get the ignorant somewhat educated. we can get something we want. Or we can simply maintain the status quo through gridlock. Step Three: Roll up resistance.
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 11:12 AM (4I3Uo)
It turns them into entertainment.
How can this be good?
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 21, 2012 11:13 AM (8sCoq)
38...The ONLY way Hollywood and Video games will change is with Government intervention... ie.... limiting Freedom of Speech...
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (lZBBB)
----------
Maybe it's not the only way.
All other industries have to be concerned with Liability for the products that they produce.
But the Entertainment Industry gets to hide behind the 1st Amendment.
Perhaps if they were worried about having to pay damages to victims, they might police themselves.
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 11:13 AM (K4wCe)
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 11:14 AM (MgGyQ)
59, disagree. Al and Tipper Gore were all about the music and game ratings system until they wanted to get into higher politics. The Hollywood masters of the Democrat Party told them to ease up on the talk, and ease up they did.
There may be common cause between the Left and the Libertarians on the issue, but it's a mistake to think the Left doesn't defend Hollywood violence under the 1A with the same zeal as Michael Moore chasing down a bagel.
Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 11:14 AM (eytER)
Posted by: WVinMN at December 21, 2012 11:14 AM (4Pleu)
It isn't good.
So leftists like Drew say our gun culture has made us violent, but our culture-culture has no bearing?
Right.
These guys are wicked smart!
Like Boehner!
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 11:16 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 11:16 AM (dZ756)
mustn't take away your precious HALO
YES YES "But I play HALO regularly and haven't shot up any schoolrooms!"
Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 21, 2012 11:17 AM (8sCoq)
I'm not down with moral relativism. Right and wrong need to be defined again. And there's text and practice that supports those ideas. The US used to hold those standards high.
Political correctness is also killing us. It's part of the moral relatavistic meme. It prevents anyone from being honest.
Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 11:17 AM (fQaiK)
"I'm not calling for a ban on pointlessly violent games, movies, etc.,"
There's no other reason to talk about it in a political context.
The fact that he didn't say that explicitly is meaningless, since when do they ever tell you what they're going to do explicitly? It's all misdirections and games anyway.
Trust me, start bitching about video games in a political context and people WILL think you want to ban video games. Whether it's warranted or not.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:17 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Minnfidel at December 21, 2012 11:18 AM (bXdYS)
Posted by: jwest at December 21, 2012 11:18 AM (ZDsRL)
I don't care if it's just a political maneuver. That's what everything is these days! This is not getting tough, this is pointing the finger at something else.
Now, do a Google news search for "Kindergarten Killer." The media is already publishing this headline:
NRA Blames 10-Year Old Game for Sandy Hook.
Fuck the media.
Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 11:19 AM (k9osu)
Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?
Yes.
We don't have 15 million school shootings. We have 15 million copies of HALO and 15 school shootings over a decade.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:19 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia, Pope Alexander VI at December 21, 2012 11:21 AM (w9BpZ)
He merely rubbed the media's nose in what they are purposefully ignoring.
Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 11:22 AM (qBLA2)
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (K4wCe)
Problem is that to be Liable, you have to proove Causation...
Ergo, its not just that someone played a game then shot up someplace, you have to proove it caused it...
Or, do you want to create a Legal Structure where you do NOT have to proove that? Where EVERYTHING is responsible for everything?
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:22 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: zsasz at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (CRLoc)
CNN is reporting that Jamie Foxx listened to Notorious BIG while getting into character for his race motivated murdering spree on film.
nope, there's NO racism or racist implications in the black community. Ever.
Posted by: © Sponge at December 21, 2012 11:22 AM (UK9cE)
The guy stepped in it. He has no clue how to handle the press in crisis scenarios. He was so anxious to punch back at the wind-bag politicians that he was tone deaf to what he himself was saying.
He should've not engaged the press at all for at least a few more weeks and addressed a well-prepared strategy to America's gun owners. These things will settle down over time. Instead, he fanned the flames. How stupid.
Posted by: Manolo at December 21, 2012 11:22 AM (aO1W9)
Posted by: Wooga at December 21, 2012 11:23 AM (DZ6fq)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:19 PM (TULs6)
Its the same arguement as Global Warming...
We have Warm Weather, and CO2 is up, so it must be CAUSED by the CO2! and the Science is SETTLED!
We have violent video games and movies NOW.... and although we have about the same amount of Mass events as before... it MUST be caused by video Games!
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:24 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:24 AM (Z9EHQ)
Let's just ban people.
Turn the whole country into a giant nature preserve.
Everyone has until next Thursday to find somewhere to scoot before we gas the place.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:25 AM (TULs6)
>>> Owning a gun doesn't magically turn a person into a murdering lunatic either.
I've found people that get into owning guns on their own later in life go through an interesting maturing process regarding their public behaviors.
Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 11:25 AM (3ZtZW)
you are making an unnecessary leap.
I'm making an unnecessary leap that will be made by 85% of low info voters regardless of whether it is necessary.
There's no political context in which video games need be discussed. It's the same thing with birth control. Rick Santorum doesn't want to ban it, he just wants to 'talk about it' is all. Just like with this.
Except everyone thinks he really wants to ban it, because why else talk about it?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:26 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Manolo at December 21, 2012 11:27 AM (aO1W9)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:27 AM (Z9EHQ)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:24 PM (Z9EHQ)
Once again... the ONLY way to reign in violent Video games and Movies, is with Government intervention.
So to even bring it UP, will allow the LEFT to make that connection.... JUST LIKE I AM...
Tomorows Lefty Headline... Even the NRA wants Censorship...
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:27 AM (lZBBB)
No the point is the left and the media claim Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment rights has led to a "gun culture" that creates the breading ground for violence.
It is completely decoupled from the wider culture of violence that video games, rap video and violent movies pump out to the masses.
What is more apt to warp someones mind and perceptions of the relative worth of a human being:
A) A young adult who goes with his father to a shooting range to practice shooting.
B) A young adult sitting in his room playing a violent video game wherein he shoots and kills as many humans as he possibly can in the most grotesque possible manner?
Buchanan was right, LaPierre is right.
Fuck Drew!
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 11:27 AM (RrD4h)
The left doesn't want to ban guns either.
They just want to talk about it. That's all. A discussion.
"This country needs to have an open discussion about violence in video games".
You just caused a run on Gamestop.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:28 AM (TULs6)
The difference is, I don't think the government should do anything about it. I really don't know how you regulate it, and conservatives being moral police is not going to sell to anyone, including most fellow conservatives. This is something engaged parents need to step up to the plate on, government bureaucrats aren't going to shield your kids from the toxic world.
We didn't have shootings like this 30 years ago because our culture and values were much stronger, despite the fact that gun laws were essentially non existant. Getting a gun was easier than buying a beer.
The NRA is smart to point the finger at both the media and our policies regarding the mentally unstable.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 11:28 AM (kQLBd)
That movie too was a waste of time, but Tarantino has a tremendous pension for VIOLENCE and soulless, emotionless, conscious free death and destruction.
Nah....no way that influences weak and feeble minds. Nope. Not possible.
Posted by: © Sponge at December 21, 2012 11:28 AM (UK9cE)
>>YES YES "But I play HALO regularly and haven't shot up any schoolrooms!"
This kinda reminds me of Chris Rock. "You're not *supposed* to! What, you want a cookie?"
Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 11:29 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:29 AM (Z9EHQ)
Something I say a lot: Government and society are not the same thing.
If Mr. LaPierre wants to say "we as a society have devalued life through a culture of violence, and need to take a good look at ourselves" he's certainly within his rights to do so. I might even agree with him.
Once he says "government needs to make society better by passing laws meant to change the culture" I have a problem. I didn't hear that today.
Not going to lie, I wanted to hear about how the NRA will resist any efforts by the gun-grabbers. Maybe attempting to change the narrative and make lefty heads explode is part of the strategy. (I said maybe, I don't know.)
That said... the feds have no business in providing school security. Do we really need a TSA for schools?
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 11:29 AM (WDCYi)
Why not? This is trench warfare. Those fucks want a scapegoat? Let see how it feels.
Fuck 'em.
Good on the NRA for taking zero shit from these gun grabbing ghouls. The best defense is a good offense.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:29 AM (HzhBE)
Yes and no, but the Statists most in question is the MFM punditocracy. They are Progressive to the core and presumably represent "free speech". Now we know it's a lie because their approved speech is selective, but that is their pose and most of the public accepts it (wrongfully). By attacking their position of free speech (that they must publicly advocate for appearance's sake), you can force them to defend "their" turf. They'll be outrageously outraged that someone pointed out that maybe their contributions have a more malevolent impact on society. The response is that they'll need to give ground to the NRA lest they appear even more hypocritical than they already are.
So they aren't pro-1st but they need to appear so. LaPierre just accuses them of equal or more complicity in contemporary violence to force them to rhetorically defend Rights.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 11:30 AM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 11:30 AM (YEim0)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:31 AM (Z9EHQ)
Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 11:31 AM (dZ756)
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:31 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 11:32 AM (Z9EHQ)
The media wanted to have a "national conversation" about gun violence, so let them have one--and their role in it.
Warden, they just want to talk about the role it plays in our society. They don't want to ban it.
Are you done laughing yet?
OK have you guessed what most people are going to think when you decide to have a "discussion" about the role violence in video games or birth control plays in 'society'?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:34 AM (TULs6)
<i>Also, the disgusting and violent video games are just that--disgusting and violent. Admit it!</i>
Sure, I admit it. They're also entertaining as all hell for some of us. I don't want to play freaking Pokeman. I don't even want to play sports games all the time. Gimme God of War, Fallout, Borderlands and Lollipop Chainsaw.
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 11:35 AM (WDCYi)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 11:36 AM (NIZHJ)
Why not? This is trench warfare. Those fucks want a scapegoat? Let see how it feels.
Fuck 'em.
Good on the NRA for taking zero shit from these gun grabbing ghouls. The best defense is a good offense.
Posted by: Warden
I completely agree.
Obviously the NRA is not going to push censorship, this is a media strategy, and it's damn effective because people are not focusing on the tool anymore. As the saying goes, if guns cause crimes, mine must all be defective.
A shooting like this SHOULD be no different than if some maniac drove his car down the sidewalk and hit a bunch of people. The car would be irrelevant to why it happened.
Some conservatives need to understand that getting what we want in terms of public policy means we have to "play the game" and this is an effective PR strategy.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 11:37 AM (kQLBd)
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 11:38 AM (m2CN7)
No one called for a ban on video games. All the NRA did was say, "Maybe you fuckos ought to take a good look at yourselves before trying to put this on us."
Plus the attacked Obama. They went after everyone that fucked with them.
100% win. All day long.
The GOP should take some lessons from it.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:38 AM (HzhBE)
79 Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (K4wCe)
Problem is that to be Liable, you have to proove Causation...
Ergo, its not just that someone played a game then shot up someplace, you have to proove it caused it...
Or, do you want to create a Legal Structure where you do NOT have to proove that? Where EVERYTHING is responsible for everything?
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (lZBBB)
-----------
Aren't we already there?
Lawyers sue for Liability...for everything...already.
Except for things that are labeled 'entertainment'.
When sociopathic behavior is featured and promoted as some sort of accomplishment...and then someone watches it and goes out and reinacts it in real life...
That seems like Causation to me.
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 11:39 AM (K4wCe)
No one called for a ban on video games.
I'm not calling for a ban on guns. I just want to talk about it, that's all. No ban - just discussion about roles in society.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:39 AM (TULs6)
*Isn't that their argument against your 2nd amendment right to own a semi automatic rifle?
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:41 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)
liability is usually based on what a reasonable person would be expected to do.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 11:41 AM (m2CN7)
You may not be, but Obama is.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (HzhBE)
Aren't we just desensitizing kids to the inherent power of fire arms?
I don't see this as a road the the NRA wants to go down.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (6cEN2)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (i3Zbv)
Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?
In fact, you could make the argument that HALO, etc. is exactly how kids like the Newtown shooter form their fantasies.
I've argued that the real problem is atheism. These kids don't believe in a "scorekeeper in the sky" so why not just blow people away? What negative consequence is there?
Of course, such kids are deranged and we don't organize our society around deranged people but so it is with guns.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (T0NGe)
Someone can admit to the effect violent entertainment has on immature or undeveloped psyches without calling for them to be banned.You just attempt to deal with the consequences that freedom sometimes brings.
Intellectually, sure.
In a political context, when you hear someone say they want to talk about the negative effects of guns in our society, what do you think they want?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (TULs6)
It's not video games and it's not guns. It's a country educated one way or the other that there's no real right and wrong.
BUT we have to start the conversation somehow. LaPierre was right in, at least, introducing another symptom in this nation's sickness.
Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 11:42 AM (fQaiK)
Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at December 21, 2012 11:43 AM (iAUf+)
You know why there is almost no smoking in movies these days?
There wasn't a law, Hollywood just decided what it didn't like.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:43 AM (T0NGe)
These kids don't believe in a "scorekeeper in the sky" so why not just blow people away?
Um, maybe they have empathy?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:43 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at December 21, 2012 11:43 AM (+lsX1)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 11:43 AM (6H6FZ)
It isn't something to dismiss out of hand.
Posted by: muzjik at December 21, 2012 11:44 AM (NA0Dq)
I don't see this as a road the the NRA wants to go down.
I disagree wholeheartedly. The NRA wants the correlation between guns and proper use to be as close as possible. Irresponsible gun use gives gun ownership a bad name.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:44 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 11:44 AM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:45 AM (TULs6)
Bingo.
He's just giving back what they're giving him.
It's simple game theory. An eye for an eye.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:45 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 11:45 AM (YEim0)
In December, a school is attacked and liberals vow to limit the 2nd Amendment.
2013 will be a bitch.
Sequestration. Got an extra bed in the house.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:45 AM (T0NGe)
Again you doofus clown, the left and the media claim Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment rights has led to a "gun culture" that creates the breading ground for violence.
It is completely decoupled from the wider culture of violence that video games, rap video and violent movies pump out to the masses.
What is more apt to warp someones mind and perceptions of the relative worth of a human being:
A) A young adult who goes with his father to a shooting range to practice shooting.
B) A young adult sitting in his room playing a violent video game wherein he shoots and kills as many humans as he possibly can in the most grotesque possible manner?
Buchanan was right, LaPierre is right.
WE WANT THE CONVERSATION, BRING IT ON!
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 11:45 AM (RrD4h)
Um, maybe they have empathy?
Why should they? They're sociopaths.
Besides, empathy isn't as ingrained as you might think. If it were, we couldn't have surgeons.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:46 AM (T0NGe)
Obama and others called for gun control. Period. Not just a "conversation." Actual gun control.
The NRA did not call for a ban on violent media.
What's your point?
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:46 AM (HzhBE)
what does unrestricted violent games and movies do to the brain of someone teetering on the edge of problems?
The same thing doorknobs do. Make them go crazy. (hence why we call them 'crazy').
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:46 AM (TULs6)
I'd have no problem with some sort of rule where certain violent games you have to be over 18 to purchase.
Considering we have the same rules if you want to buy say a Playboy magazine, I don't think it will kill us to have something like that. If anything, you could argue society would be safer letting 14 year old boys look at pictures of naked women than playing realistic shoot em ups all day.
I'm sure kids will still get their hands on violent video games, but at least parents would be a little more involved if they were forced to actually purchase the game for their kid.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 11:47 AM (kQLBd)
So seeing guns used in a fictional setting contributes to people acting in violent ways but maximizing access to real guns leads to responsible behavior?
This will be a hard sell to people who aren't already fully committed to agreeing with you.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 11:47 AM (6cEN2)
@124
Then quartering of soldiers is next up if they're going in order.
Can they quarter some of those hawt Israeli female soldiers at my place?
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 11:47 AM (WDCYi)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (TULs6)
Though both sides are guilty to varying degrees, I would say it depends who is saying it. Someone from the Right or from the Left ?
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 11:48 AM (m2CN7)
Warden,
My point is, when you hear people talk about 'just discussion', what do YOU generally think they're doing?
It's got shitall to do with Obama. When you hear this language employed toward other targets like guns, what do you figure the angle to be?
If someone wants to 'have an open discussion' about the 'negative effects' of guns/video games/birth control on 'society', half of everyone is going to assume the speaker actually wants to ban them and is trying to weasle his way toward it.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:48 AM (TULs6)
I'm fine with it. It's a shot across the bow.
I bet most parents would be good for restricting access to violent media for children under 18.
And that prospect is one that scares the shit out of Big Media.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:50 AM (HzhBE)
So there was this time when a bunch of high-profile NFL/NBA players were shooting guns outside of night clubs and I saw an ESPN "report" on guns and sports.
The feature of their article was a baseball player who had a shooting range on his property and it showed him using yellow goggles and protective earmuffs.
Yeah, 'cause when they come downtown at 1am with their earmuffs and yellow goggles, you know shit's gonna get real.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:50 AM (T0NGe)
So when the NRA says only criminals are responsible for their actions, not third parties like responsible gun owners or the NRA, what they mean is only some 3rd parties aren't to blame.
Why it's almost like that's a self-serving argument designed to deflect attention away from them an onto other people who aren't doing anything illegal.
How noble.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 11:50 AM (6cEN2)
Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (YEim0)
Get bent. I'm a taxpaying adult who works, reads a lot, plays hockey, and likes his video games.
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 11:50 AM (WDCYi)
This is literally the Rick Santorum Birth Control Argument with some window dressing.
Rick Santorum does not want to ban birth control. He just thinks it's very important we talk and talk about how horrible it is.
And you know damn well as I do, whether he actually wants to or not (maybe he doesn't) half the country thinks he wants to ban birth control.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:50 AM (TULs6)
It's a two-fer. Raise their taxes and take away their market.
Posted by: Marmo at December 21, 2012 11:51 AM (QW+AD)
How noble.
Posted by: DrewM.]
It's politics. Why are you being such a purist?
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:51 AM (HzhBE)
Sorry, but House of the Dead is a whole different animal to holding a real heavy gun in your hand.
This will be a hard sell to people who aren't already fully committed to agreeing with you
I'm used to it. People who disagree with me tend to be very stupid.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:52 AM (T0NGe)
No way this guy should be allowed to keep his job and there is no way in hell he speaks for me or most of his membership.
I understand he is hoping to turn the tables and change the optics and I get that it is a swipe at the left who dominates the media and culture. So what? It still violates all of our principles as a free people.
Dumbass!
Posted by: Voluble at December 21, 2012 11:52 AM (qYvEa)
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 11:52 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: gp at December 21, 2012 11:52 AM (mk9aG)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 11:53 AM (NIZHJ)
I get your libertarian concerns. I do.
I just don't give a shit anymore. I care more about my 2nd amendment right to own a high capacity magazine than the media's so-called right to market violent games and movies to kids.
If it works, I'll take the tradeoff.
I think this works.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:53 AM (HzhBE)
117Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)
liability is usually based on what a reasonable person would be expected to do.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:41 PM (m2CN7)
-----------------------
It depends on the product.
With Drugs, there are lawsuits over the 'side effects'.
Not everyone experiences those side effects...but some people do.
Drugs are pulled off the market for the side effects that happen to a few.
Why can't that happen with 'Entertainment Products' as well?
It's the messaging that I am talking about.
Glorifying sociopathic behavior...results in more of it.
We can still have lots of gratuitous violence...just show a good reason for it.
As in, showing it as a way to defeat bad guys and evil.
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 11:53 AM (K4wCe)
I bet most parents would be good for restricting access to violent media for children under 18.
And that prospect is one that scares the shit out of Big Media.
Um... yeah. Not just Big Media. Not just Libertarians and Big Media.
Libertarians, Big Media, 60% of independents and 80% of everyone under the age of 30 and 100% of everyone under the age of 18.
Why don't we just ban movies. That's gotta be a winner. You know Hollywood HATES it so it must be a good idea.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:53 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 11:54 AM (88Ldu)
Drugs are pulled off the market for the side effects that happen to a few.
Why can't that happen with 'Entertainment Products' as well?
Because some people can actually distinguish between correlation and causation.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:54 AM (TULs6)
Or is it just old people scared of young people and the moving picture box?
Now that's some winning optics, right there. 2014 here we come.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:55 AM (TULs6)
We treat kids differently than adults. That ship has sailed. You play with the rules in front of you, not fantasy ones.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:55 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 11:55 AM (UU0OF)
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)
Then you just put the liability on every History book that has any war in it... because teh winnahs got stuff...
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:56 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 11:56 AM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Socratease at December 21, 2012 11:56 AM (iVBDH)
If it works, I'll take the tradeoff.
That's not how it works.
You don't gain any security from trading liberty.
You will not get more secure second ammendment rights by compromising the first. You will end up with the worst of both.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:57 AM (TULs6)
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:51 PM (HzhBE)
I'm not being a purist. I'm not committed to the defense of the NRA. I'm not a member and I don't think they are anything but a bunch of shills.
It's like the Catholic Church and the contraception mandate. They don't mind ObamaCare, they just don't want to be impacted by it.
The NRA doesn't care about freedom per se, they care about pushing their agenda. Fine. That's what they get paid for. It's also why I'm comfortable for calling them out for being as hackish as their opponents are.
I'm not interested in protecting the 2nd Amendment that calls the 1st into question. That's what they are trying to do and it's bullshit.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 11:57 AM (6cEN2)
I don't own any guns. But I'm really glad that criminals think that I might.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:58 AM (T0NGe)
We treat kids differently than adults. That ship has sailed. You play with the rules in front of you, not fantasy ones.
So you're totally over that whole parental rights and parental responsibility thing?
The ship we're on now is regulating how you raise your kids?
And you figure you'll win that one???
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 11:58 AM (TULs6)
don't
It's all theoretical. You threaten my liberty? I'll threaten yours.
Video games aren't going to be banned.
But making some noise about media responsibility? That's a winner in my book. Shove that self righteous bullshit right back in their faces.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:58 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 11:58 AM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: gp at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (mk9aG)
uh.... TSA has not found a SINGLE bomb... yet they keep tightening restrictions.
"Those who choose saftey, over Freedom, will end with neither"
Benjamin Franklin
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 11:58 AM (lZBBB)
And that is why you lose.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 11:59 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Socratease at December 21, 2012 11:59 AM (iVBDH)
"It's politics. Why are you being such a purist?"
Drew obviously broke out the Jergens and rubbed the little "l" on his libertarian until it turned into a big "L". Then it splattered all over his post.
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 11:59 AM (4I3Uo)
You can't sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors. Has the world ended?
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 11:59 AM (HzhBE)
161 Wait a second:
Has it been proven that that Lanza fuck murdered a bunch of innocent people because of video games and movies?
Or is it just old people scared of young people and the moving picture box?
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 03:54 PM (88Ldu)
-------------
This guy lived in his mom's basement.
It has been confirmed, that he spent most of his time, playing violent video games.
It's kind of hard to not connect some dots there, in how this affected him.
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 11:59 AM (K4wCe)
You can't sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors. Has the world ended?
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (HzhBE)
Yet every teenager can get Cigarettes, and Liquor.... so your point?
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 12:00 PM (lZBBB)
"HowÂ’s that [TSA] working out for you?" I think it's working well. We haven't had another 9-11 scale attack, and I give the TSA part of the credit for that.
There is nothing to say, except I am the god of hellfire and I bring you to burn.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:00 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:01 PM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (HzhBE)
Fuck that Warden. This is my exact point. You're willing to trade the freedom of others (people who make the games and enjoy them) for your own.
I've never owned a gun but I'm wiling to respect, defend and advocate for your rights. You're not willing to do the same for mine.
Fuck it then. Let the liberals come grab your guns. Why should I or anyone else who doesn't own a gun give a shit?
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:01 PM (6cEN2)
Your irreducible imbecility knows no bounds.
Of course the criminal is solely to blame, but the leftists are attacking the 2nd Amendment and claim it's concomitant "gun culture" is responsible for the epidemic of violence, that is completley decoupled from the wider culture.
All LaPierre is saying, "FUCK YOU BUDDY GET YOUR OWN HOUSE IN ORDER BEFORE YOU COME AT US!"
Also, you happen to be dick!
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 12:01 PM (RrD4h)
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:02 PM (m2CN7)
What the discussion might to do is not allow a 12 year old to buy an ultra violent video game whenever they want, similar to how he can't go into an R-rated movie or a buy a Hustler magazine.
Now if you're 12, I can understand being really worried about LaPierre's speech, but otherwise, it's absurd to scream about censorship when it comes to children. Is there anyone that really believes a kid should be able to consume any sort of media they want without any laws? I don't even think an ACLU lawyer would try to argue that.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 12:02 PM (kQLBd)
You are conflating supporting constitutional rights with supporting a particular advocacy group. They aren't the same thing.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:02 PM (6cEN2)
It's all theoretical. You threaten my liberty? I'll threaten yours.
Problem here is they threatened your liberty, so you turned around started threatening mine to get back at them.
Unless your goal is to swell the ranks of 'them' by drawing in a bunch of non-combatants I think you may be doing it wrong.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:03 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:03 PM (TULs6)
It has been confirmed, that he spent most of his time, playing violent video games.
It's kind of hard to not connect some dots there, in how this affected him.
Now I will point out here that he was unhinged. Most people can tell the difference, even if they are dulled a little bit by the experience.
So he filled the void with something and his experience with video games probably was a huge factor in what he decided to do. Maybe if he'd seen cowboy movies, he'd've been stymied because his mom didn't own a horse, I don't know.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:03 PM (T0NGe)
Fuck that. You're willing to let someone else's taxes get jacked up to save your own ass.
This is a fun game.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:04 PM (HzhBE)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 21, 2012 12:04 PM (azHfB)
Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 12:04 PM (UU0OF)
That's more my point.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:05 PM (HzhBE)
As others have pointed out LaPierre is working to diffuse the messaging, not calling for a ban on video games nor will a ban be even remotely likely. Your copy of Halo and my copy of Fallout are safer than my magazines or semi autos my an order of magnitude. He knows that and we all know that. Let's see if it works and how it plays out. Just imagine how "effective" he would have been spending 20 minutes talking about the founders, BOR, meaning of militia in the 18th century vs 21st, definition of arms vs ordnance and full of references to Federalist 46...
He is correct however. These killing were rare before the mass media age. Even the first of note, the clock tower shooter Whitman had a big old brain tumor and himself, in moments of clarity, knew he was wrong. The VT shooter by comparison sent NBC a video News Release to run after the shooting -- which they did, of course. But freedom is not clean and neat and that goes for the 1st, 2nd or 4th. The good with the bad and occasional evil or live as a drone in a controlled society.
Myself, I like using the booze gambit as well. Point out to the facebook posting drone how his drinking puts more innocents in the ground each year though just DUI related deaths alone. "Why do you love children killed by guns more than those killed by a receptionist after a few too many jello shots at happy hour?" It even opens up the prohibition discussion where you can talk about how bans themselves simply don't work. I just completely shut down a big rolling rant with that one.
Now, I'll crack a Sierra Nevada "Torpedo" and start up a new game of Fallout (I know it's dated but not much else exciting em these days except for Skyrim) perhaps playing as a slave trader this time.
Posted by: Keith at December 21, 2012 12:05 PM (NYPPE)
Since you don't mind the violence in the video games I say they start putting in nudity and rape. That shouldn't effect anyone either. Where is the line some of you libertarians draw or is there one?
There isn't one.
Nudity is fine. Don't like it, don't buy it, don't let your kid play it.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:05 PM (TULs6)
LaPierre is using asymmetric warfare. It has been widely reported that the Newton shooter spent hours, many, many hours playing video games. One day we'll know the titles of the the games he played.
The MSM went ballistic (so to speak) as LaPierre was speaking. Hollywood is out front calling for gun bans because big money is on the line. Video game tie-ins with movies and TV are lucrative for the studios. Hollywood and the popular culture control the message, and the NRA is jamming the frequency (Kenneth).
Posted by: mrp at December 21, 2012 12:06 PM (HjPtV)
Oh, some journalist was mad on Twitter because LaPiere took no questions and just read a statement.
I like that.
Boehner did that too. Everyone should start doing that all the time.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:06 PM (TULs6)
This is a fun game.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (HzhBE)
It might be fun but you're not particularly good at it.
Where did I say I was willing to let someone else's taxes go up? And how would it save my own ass?
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:06 PM (6cEN2)
Oh, and anyone who thinks that violent media and video game immersion can't possibly result in a desensitization to violence and killing needs to read "On Combat" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.
The military has been using similar methods to create infantrymen for years. The difference there is that they can do it within a controlled structure - not an open society. No, I am not advocating a ban, Drew.
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 12:07 PM (4I3Uo)
No one is going to ban violent movies and games for adults.
It's a tactic.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:07 PM (HzhBE)
Nudity is fine. Don't like it, don't buy it, don't let your kid play it.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (TULs6)
What about simulated rape since simulated murder is cool?
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:08 PM (m2CN7)
You're filing their briefs for them. LaPierre didn't say anything about censorship, but you jumped to it.
Look how much pressure Hollywood gets now: smoking, "no animals were hurt" (it's more than just not hurting animals, its about calling in animal rights groups to monitor the set).
Sorry, I can't get worked up at a reducto ad absurdum argument.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:08 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Hank Johnson at December 21, 2012 12:09 PM (e8kgV)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:09 PM (NIZHJ)
Not to go all "Can't we all just get along?" but they threatened OUR liberty. All of ours.
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 12:09 PM (WDCYi)
I just don't see getting worked up over a little rhetoric about violent media.
No one is going to ban violent movies and games for adults.
It's a tactic.
And it's having it's desired effect. What else was it suppose to do, besides piss off gamers and gin up game-haters?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:10 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:10 PM (88Ldu)
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:06 PM (6cEN2)
Even my monkey knows he was talking about Plan B.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:10 PM (m2CN7)
What about simulated rape since simulated murder is cool?
Many Japanese games already do that.
I'm not really into it but no, I don't think it should be banned or stopped. If they want to make a rape game, they can make a rape game. I won't buy it.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:11 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:11 PM (HzhBE)
I thought you were on about the "purists" who won't compromise on tax increases.
If I have that one wrong, I apologize and withdraw said snark.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:12 PM (HzhBE)
194 So, the position of the leftist media is that media can be used to change social views of gay marriage by presenting positive images of gays, but realistic images of violence have no effect whatsoever?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (azHfB)
----------
This.
I have been trying to make the same point.
If the Media/Entertainment industry is not capable of influencing people...then they have been wasting their time stuffing all those Leftist themes into their work.
Right?
And they should refund all that money for Advertising...because people cannot be influenced by what they see on tv.
Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 12:12 PM (K4wCe)
So yeah, old people are scared of young people and the moving picture box. Got it.
Winning optics with the low info voters, right there.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:12 PM (TULs6)
You can't control violence in a soup of violence-soaked games, videos, and cable channels by blaming the gun. That's beyond stupid.
Posted by: Mr. Whipple at December 21, 2012 12:13 PM (fklmM)
Let's ban Dungeon and Dragons. That one hasn't been hit in a while, it might feel fresh again.
Wait, sorry... I mean I want to have a discussion about the effects of Dungeons and Dragons on society.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:13 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:15 PM (tw6Ar)
Gamers aren't the entire electorate.
Are you saying you think game-haters are a winning electoral coalition? Go for it, I guess.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:15 PM (TULs6)
Those pederast news readers in the tight dungarees are to blame for all of this.
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:15 PM (NIZHJ)
Really. Let's attack the one part of the culture complex we're winning.
Gun culture. We need to get these guns out of video games and off TV so that kids don't grow up thinking that owning a gun is cool.
That will help us protect 2nd ammendmen... WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE...
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:16 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: RondinellaMamma at December 21, 2012 12:16 PM (53riN)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:15 PM (TULs6)
too many stupid people who still seem to think gaming is for the young folk
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:16 PM (tw6Ar)
54% think video games create violence. 69% at least somewhat concerned about the level of violence in video games.
http://tinyurl.com/c4kejr3
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:17 PM (HzhBE)
Oh, we got those liberals good.
Now the liberals are scared because they know if they piss us off again, we'll stab ourselves in the eye. That'll learn em!
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:17 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:18 PM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: packsoldier at December 21, 2012 12:19 PM (cyCEf)
http://minx.cc/?post=335779
Yes, Plan B was a good idea from a GOP perspective but I don't care about that....
From a "Let It Burn" perspective, it's a terrible idea. Anything that plays into the myth that all we need is a little tweak in revenue and some relatively minor spending cuts to pull us out of our entitlement and spending death spiral, is simply a band aid that will only make the inevitable reckoning that much worse.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:19 PM (6cEN2)
No. McCain did know exactly what email is. He didn't use it because his shoulders don't work.
Yet another "I can see Russia from my house".
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:20 PM (T0NGe)
Negative. We spend money pulling out asbestos.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:21 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:21 PM (88Ldu)
Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 12:21 PM (UU0OF)
We need to get these guns out of video games and off TV so that kids don't grow up thinking that owning a gun is cool.
'Cuz 2nd ammendment.
(Brought to you by the people who think Plan B could have passed the senate if not for Justin Amash).
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:22 PM (TULs6)
So if gun ownership starts polling badly, we should let the gun grabbers win?
This is the problem with rights, you have to defend them even when you don't like them.
The Constitution says the same thing about video games as it does high capacity magazines....nothing. It's the principle of the rights that have to be defended.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:22 PM (6cEN2)
Yet another "I can see Russia from my house".
Heh! And they say the bullshit coming out of the movin' pitcher box has no effect on people's perceptions.
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 12:23 PM (4I3Uo)
[ here ---> http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf ]
This was a carefully worded pushback against a corrupt media, followed by a rational, powerful argument for guns, in general, and a call to have armed personnel in schools, just like we do surrounding the SCOAMF and Mrs. SCOAMF.
It was also a notice of action being taken.
So all in all, damn fine job.
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:24 PM (fklmM)
I didn't say I opposed cops in schools (quite the opposite in fact) I said I opposed a federal mandate and blank check to do it.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:24 PM (6cEN2)
Anyone who's concerned about REAL threats to our liberty understands that they really are coming for our guns. They're not going to take Halo away.
When you have actual Governor's like Cuomo talking about door to door roundups, that's where the focus of serious libertarians needs to be.
And if there was an actual bill to ban violent video games for adults? I'll be fighting alongside fellow libertarians for that as well.
But right now, the NRA is about the only hope we have, and I'm sick of this attitude of the "perfect being the enemy of the good".
And for what it's worth, I think anyone who says the media has zero effect on our children is being intellectually dishonest. Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 12:25 PM (kQLBd)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:25 PM (NIZHJ)
Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.
That's because you're immune to reason or evidence.
Sandy Hook was 27 dead? HALO totally caused the record school shooting of 28 people in like 1938 or something. If only Super Mario had been more popular before Lincoln came along...
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:27 PM (TULs6)
WLP and the NRA are framing the debate in a way that can be used against the Left. There are ratings on TV, movies and video games, but they are largely ignored by the public. Now the Right can point to these ratings and say "Why is a child of x years old (playing a game|watching a (movie|tv show)) that's rated ((T|M|AO)|(TV-MA)|(PG-13|R)) when the level of violence is something that they cannot process correctly in their developing minds?"
The NRA can also say "There are Fire Protection systems in place in schools that are there to limit the damage from fire, so why shouldn't we have a system in place to protect the students from something that acts and spreads far faster than fire does?" If the naysayers are against this, then the argument can be flipped into "You don't care about the safety of the children." like what the Left has been doing to the Right for years.
Posted by: Smokey Behr at December 21, 2012 12:28 PM (QyeW7)
>>Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.
Remember the wave of violence from Contra, Jackal, and Bionic Commando?
The horror.
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 12:28 PM (WDCYi)
...while saying, "My gun does my talking now. Free Speech!"
I denounce myself. Probably.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 12:29 PM (eHIJJ)
[So if gun ownership starts polling badly, we should let the gun grabbers win?]
No, I was responding to the claim that it was a bad POLITICAL argument.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 12:29 PM (HzhBE)
What we need is an end to gun-free zones. Teachers who carry concealed is a far better idea than relying on some nice old guy with a bullett in his shirt pocket (because you know they won't let him have a high-cap mag).
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:29 PM (fklmM)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:27 PM (TULs6)
Jeffery Miller was a Dennis the Menace fanboy
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:30 PM (tw6Ar)
Now the Right can point to these ratings and say "Why is a child of x years old (playing a game|watching a (movie|tv show)) that's rated ((T|M|AO)|(TV-MA)|(PG-13|R)) when the level of violence is something that they cannot process correctly in their developing minds?"
Um.... exactly?
Was the point to make me hate republicans more completely? It just might work.
You think this is winning, go for it. 2014: Revenge of the Geriatric.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:30 PM (TULs6)
He said media companies bring "criminal cruelty" into homes and that media companies "act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators."
People who are co-conspirators to a "criminal" act generally wind up in jail.
Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:30 PM (6cEN2)
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:32 PM (m2CN7)
maybe it took 20 minutes for their SWAT team to assemble and enter the premises, but there had to have been patrol cars sent their immediately...and then they just hung out outside and waited
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:01 PM (ptD6d)
http://tinyurl.com/bo34ona
-The recordings begin at 9:35 a.m. with a dispatcher calmly reporting a 911 call about “somebody shooting in the building...
-“I will need two ambulances,” one dispatcher says five minutes after the initial report.
-Three minutes later came the first hint of casualties, a person in Room 1 with a “wound to a foot.”
It sounds like they immediately made entry and began searching the building. After the initial gunfire (which, according to the article continued for at least 2 minutes after the 911 call) it appears that Lanza shot himself at 9:49 while police were in the building.
A small rural department may have only had a handful of cops on duty to search what appears to be a decent sized building.
This is something that concerns me. Back a few years ago, there were reports of "probes" of schools and school buses by unknown middle eastern males. Many of these occurred in rural areas where police response will be slower due to geography and numbers.
Posted by: elliot at December 21, 2012 12:32 PM (blkVM)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:32 PM (88Ldu)
Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear.
Sounds just like the "Big Gun" accusations I'm seeing from wannabe gun grabbers everywhere.
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at December 21, 2012 12:32 PM (xHaTb)
So no, it was not about the video games.
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:33 PM (fklmM)
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:33 PM (6cEN2)
Better, you don't even have to arm teachers. Just allow for the possibility. That's all. Johnny Antihero won't live out his little Matrix fantasy if it'll be over in 2 minutes.
And it is abundantly true that they seek out the vulnerable.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:34 PM (T0NGe)
>>Other than gun owners, is there a larger group of people in the U.S. more accustomed to concerned busy bodies constantly advocating an abridgment to their rights than gamers?
Fast food consumers?
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 12:34 PM (WDCYi)
(WDCYi)
don't forget smokers
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:35 PM (tw6Ar)
Entropy ... should be hated by Republicans not the otherway around
So totally winning my vote there.
I bet you still have the audacity to bitch if I don't vote for Jeb Bush in 4 years.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:35 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:36 PM (88Ldu)
People who are co-conspirators to a "criminal" act generally wind up in jail.
Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear."
Posted by: Drew M at December 21, 2012 04:30 PM (6cEN2)
Yes it was: it's the media who need to take a good hard look at themselves, and not law-abiding citizens. That's the implication.
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:36 PM (fklmM)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)
BUT HE'S MR ELECTABLE
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:37 PM (tw6Ar)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:38 PM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)
I will never try to win the vote for someone with that particular viewpoint. Talk about abandoning principle if I did.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:39 PM (m2CN7)
>>I can confirm there is some significant overlap here.
Hell, tomorrow for my friends and I is going to be gun shopping, a trip to Five Guys, a trip to the range (weather permitting) then some Borderlands 2.
Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 12:40 PM (WDCYi)
And they have 1/15th as much rape (per capita) as the U.S. does. Because...
The reason you'll get nowhere with this, Entropy--or any of you, with any of this--is because you're hitting one of the "reflex areas" of conservative anti-Americanism. Japanese rape games don't make Japanese rapists, e.g., but American shooting games do make American shooters, because the Japanese...aren't Americans. They're not so depraved, malleable, weak, etc., as "we" are, as "our culture" makes "us." Just like the Mexicans aren't as lazy, entitled, etc., as "we" are, as "our culture" makes "us."
Anti-Americanism is very big these days at the ol' HQ, especially since it got on the Romney train. But I'm sure that's a coincidence and has nothing to do with why Americans told him to STFU and GTFO.
Posted by: oblig. at December 21, 2012 12:40 PM (cePv8)
The horror. Posted by: LibertarianJim
Yea, and it was about as realistic as a kid playing with green plastic soldiers in the backyard.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying realistic games should be banned, but to say "they have no effect on impressionable minds" is dishonest.
They do, and in the same way we have rules that a young kid shouldn't have access to hard core pornography because it can warp them. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if certain young kids were exposed to porn for hours on end every day that they would later be involved in some sort of sexual crime later in life.
Do I think that means games or porn should be banned? No, but I do think it's fair to make sure only adults are consuming adult content. That's hardly a big change in public policy.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 12:40 PM (kQLBd)
NRA folks aren't exactly known for being major gamers, anyway. I'd wager the majority are over forty years of age, and hate most of what they see on TV. LaPierre can't be expected to try and woo the kids by playing cool. He's too damn old for that. So the gamers get lumped in with the porno and sicko stuff out there. And frankly, he's got a point (as some gamers have copped to).
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:40 PM (fklmM)
Not.
You can make it all day long, it's just not working.
LaPierre's now been Alinskied by ThinkProgress and that whole thing will not be pretty. He'll be lucky if he only gets swatted.
This changes the debate. Maybe in a bad way but the media doesn't want to talk about its own use of guns in the real world.
And here's the other thing: Wayne LaPierre is a private citizen (albeit a public figure). Andrew Cuomo is an elected official.
Again, I keep pointing out smoking in movies. I don't see anybody up in arms that Hollywood was pressured to take smoking out of the movies.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:41 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:37 PM (RrD4h)
I have some bad news for you....I don't give a shit what you think.
Have a nice weekend.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 12:41 PM (6cEN2)
I will never try to win the vote for someone withthat particular viewpoint. Talk about abandoning principleif I did.
So you want to ban any mention of it in books too, Mr. Holier?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:41 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Whatev at December 21, 2012 12:42 PM (2t6Gz)
Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 12:42 PM (snQ/r)
Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 12:42 PM (NIZHJ)
Video games are a medium for stories.
If you tried to ban depictions of rape in books or movies, it would be a clear 1st ammendment violation.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:42 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: oblig. at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (cePv
so you have no problem with simulated rape games either. Sad.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:43 PM (m2CN7)
Keep this in mind, the intended audience of this event just voted to re-elect Barack Obama to a second term...
Let that sink in for a moment.
Logically-sound, philosophically-solid, and time-tested arguments don't work with a population that is reacting emotionally to a tragic event. The heart is leading the debate about this whole situation, which is neither a surprise nor unprecedented. Let's face it, a lot of our fellow citizens are lazy idiots who can't think coherently. They understand emotion and simple statements so (alas) one has to address them at this level.
Its like talking to a an adolescent whose significant other just left him/her for someone else.
This is what the Progressive Era has let to, God help us!
Posted by: exurbanDoug at December 21, 2012 12:44 PM (TGQA1)
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 12:44 PM (MgGyQ)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (TULs6)
but videogames are icky and dem young whippersnappers need to be protected
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:45 PM (tw6Ar)
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:41 PM (TULs6)
Yeah relaying a descripiton as a literary function and playing a video game simulating rape over and over again are the same thing. Keep reaching spike.
Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 12:45 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:46 PM (88Ldu)
Interestingly, Japan complains about a major problem with train molesters (not nearly in the same category as rape, but it would tend to reinforce the idea that Japanese men are desensitized to women and their objectification).
but American shooting games do make American shooters, because the Japanese...aren't Americans.
I think you're engaging in projection.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:47 PM (T0NGe)
Everything isn't always about you.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:47 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:44 PM (MgGyQ)
Because Kindergarten Killer is a crappy freeware game in the sea of countless crappy freeware games. Horror movie marathons are a tradition
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 12:48 PM (tw6Ar)
Posted by: Rob McNeece at December 21, 2012 12:48 PM (YesJa)
Yeahrelaying a descripiton as a literary functionand playing a video game simulating rape over and over again are the same thing.
Yup, pretty much.
How do you know it serves a "literary function"? How do you know it's not a dime-store Harlequin novel for people who get off on rape fantasy to fap to?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:48 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 12:49 PM (e4tc1)
Posted by: Charlton Heston at December 21, 2012 12:49 PM (e8kgV)
Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 12:50 PM (e4tc1)
What law bans or curtails smoking in movies?
I'll wait.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:51 PM (T0NGe)
Here's the point.
Yesterday, I was bitching about gun control and defending the NRA.
Today, I am bitching about the NRA and defending video games.
So... You fucked up. Way to go.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:52 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:52 PM (88Ldu)
Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at December 21, 2012 12:53 PM (2VCZA)
I was asking a question about restricting access to adult content, maybe you have something to add in that regard?
Specifically, how society accomplish that? If not bans then how?
Society should accomplish it? Takes a village?
To be clear: You're not asking me how you can stop your children from playing the video games you don't like... you're asking how society can do it for you?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 12:54 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 12:54 PM (MgGyQ)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 12:55 PM (88Ldu)
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 12:56 PM (fklmM)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 12:58 PM (6H6FZ)
Again, LaPierre is a private citizen.
Shaming works. It works wonders. No law prevents a major studio from producing a porn movie yet none of them do.
There is virtually no smoking in movies and yet no law.
Spielberg himself took guns out of ET. People actually didn't want him to, but he felt his own obligations to do so.
I don't want to "do something". The only common sense thing to do is take down those ridiculous targets that say "Gun-free school zone".
Otherwise, this is a rhetoric game and puts the Left on the defensive. Because I think it is a perfect argument that somebody like the Newtown shooter, being very mentally disturbed, would be influenced by video games to the point that it would warp his reality. It's reducto ad absurdum.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 12:59 PM (T0NGe)
Do you think a minor (say 12 years old) should be able to purchase any and all video games than any game developer makes?
I mean, we don't do that with DVD's. A kid can't legally go into an adult store and buy a X-rated DVD. Should they be able to buy an X-Rated video game?
What's funny is, I'm not a SoCon in the least and I can't stand moralizing politicians, but I've never had a problem with regulating content with respect to children. I'm actually flabbergasted there's people out there like this. My guess is, they don't have children.
Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 01:00 PM (kQLBd)
No one has actually mentioned guns in many posts now and then only tangentially. That's how deflection works to derail the narrative.
Yeah, except it didn't deflect the liberals it was an own goal.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 01:00 PM (TULs6)
No, I got irritated at the fact that your entire argument was based on yourself.
It isn't all about you. You aren't an avatar for the rest of the world.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 01:00 PM (T0NGe)
And how'd that work out for them? How's it working now?
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 01:02 PM (T0NGe)
And how'd that work out for them? How's it working now?
Seriously? You have like a score card?
15 anti gun laws were passed yesterday, 12 today??
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 01:03 PM (TULs6)
I bet you still have the audacity to bitch if I don't vote for Jeb Bush in 4 years.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)
Are you saying that you're not aroused by the prospect of Jeb Bush for president? Clearly, you're a purist. A purging purist who purges.
Anyway, as a long-time gamer, NRA member, and scary black rifle owner, I've no problem with LaPierre's statements. It seemed clear to me that he was merely using the rules of leftists against them rather than seriously propose a banning of violent video games and movies.
Posted by: Sandra Fluke's solid gold diaphragm at December 21, 2012 01:03 PM (9SwFX)
It wasn't meant for them. It was meant for the media who are orchestrating the public discussion. This isn't a debate. This is theater. The media will now attack him for bringing up school security and media influence instead of what they want to talk about--evil guns.
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 01:04 PM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 01:04 PM (88Ldu)
Is this "crappy freeware game" an okay member "in the sea of countless crappy freeware games"?
Should it not at least be relegated to the restricted "porn" area?
See the point made at comment 194, by G of Y, and related points before and after.
Maybe this stuff really is protected speech, or somesuch, but is it really innocuous? Is it really okay for young children and teenagers, whose brains are not mature, and whose social skills and behavioral controls are still very impressionable?
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:54 PM (MgGyQ)
It's a crappy freeware game in a sea of over a million freeware games. Anyone can make one and anyone can make one of anything and have it hosted on a videogame portal site without much knowledge. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the NRA just did a simple google search on Kindergarten Killer game and found something.
Should it be in a restricted area? No as unless you're specifically looking for a said random title, you won't find it and any crappy age gate isn't going to stop you from playing it. As for games in general that are on consoles and shit, there are ratings for a reason and if you can't do your own duty to pay attention of what your kids are playing then that is totally on you for not paying enough attention to your own damn children
Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 01:04 PM (tw6Ar)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 01:08 PM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 01:08 PM (MgGyQ)
Exactly, it's the wider culture and not the 2nd Amendment.
Where did Adam Lanza get the notion to shoot up a school full of children?
It certainly was not from the NRA or from people he may have met at a shooting range.
It was the wider culture of filth and violence that is promulgated by Hollywood leftists.
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 01:08 PM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 01:10 PM (e4tc1)
"No one has actually mentioned guns in many posts now and then only tangentially. That's how deflection works to derail the narrative. " Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 04:58 PM (6H6FZ)
How about that, huh? Wayne may as well have stepped to the podium, opened his briefcase, and released a ....SQUIRREL!!!!
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 01:10 PM (4I3Uo)
There's also the Good Cop/Bad Cop routine. LaPierre is going off on video games. Then General Eric Republican comes out against bans.
Look, if this gets even to the Congressional hearings stage, I'll start to concern myself. As of now, it's LaPierre fighting back against a rather unfair onslaught by a very biased media.
This is what you do when you "fight" guys. Principled stands and $2 still won't get you coffee at Starbucks.
Also, keep in mind that a lot of Dems love them some NRA endorsements to give them cover for not seeming so liberal. This is a shot across the bow and they won't like it at all.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 01:14 PM (T0NGe)
"You yell "Kill" after just about every command and live a bleak existence constantly screamed at by drill instructors, but you don't get desensitized through video games. Just wanted to clear that up too"
You're right, of course. The .mil doesn't just use video games.
They're called - let me see if I have this spelled correctly - "simulators". Pretty pricey ones too, iirc.
Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 01:15 PM (4I3Uo)
And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.
Leave rap music out of this.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 21, 2012 01:16 PM (4u2LN)
It certainly was not from the NRA or from people he may have met at a shooting range.
It was the wider culture of filth and violence that is promulgated by Hollywood leftists.
I doubt it, actually. He could have developed that from his own head. His hate and sociopathology would lead to this regardless. The Hollywood influence is clearer in the Columbine and the Batman movie shootings.
Even then, crazy doesn't have to have a reason.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 01:17 PM (T0NGe)
How about that, huh? Wayne may as well have stepped to the podium, opened his briefcase, and released a ....SQUIRREL!!!!
I would find that far preferable.
In fact, he should have told reporters that he will only answer the questions of the first person to shoot the squirrel.
Also, it should be a rabid squirrel.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 01:18 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Jacob at December 21, 2012 01:19 PM (sQxhV)
i think bringing up movies, tv and video games was a good idea.it lets these liberal bastions know they might have some skin in this game too
Posted by: kj at December 21, 2012 01:21 PM (KpDjl)
i think bringing up movies, tv and video games was a good idea.it lets these liberal bastions know they might have some skin in this game too
We should also threaten to socialize their healthcare. That will put the fear of god in em.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 01:23 PM (TULs6)
Drew,
It's not often I disagree with you, but I think most of the contrarians here have a pretty good point. November showed us that this is the age of catering to the lowest common denominator (aka the low-infotard, aka SCOAMF voter but I repeat myself there). I think this is part and parcel of a media strategy and a fairly shrewd one at that. Why should the NRA spend time and resources when it can get clever and let Hollywood make many of the same liberty arguments for them while spending their own resources to do so? That's who most of the low-infotards listen to.
Posted by: I Aim to Misbehave at December 21, 2012 01:30 PM (ur55E)
Go to all of the news sites look at what they are doing, they are using media to shape opinions and minds.
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 01:30 PM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Max Entropy at December 21, 2012 01:36 PM (/s3MZ)
No. Even crazy has a reason. Sometimes figuring out the reason is the hard part.
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 01:48 PM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Six at December 21, 2012 01:50 PM (gW5fI)
Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 01:51 PM (YUttk)
Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 01:51 PM (YUttk)
8000+ new members a day for several days will do that.
I was a little concerned that he didn't take questions, but now that I think about it, the fact that they came at his call says more than anything he actually did at the podium.
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 01:51 PM (fklmM)
Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 01:55 PM (e4tc1)
318Amishdude,
Okay, I but that.
Course, we are talking about Hollywood, the media, and Obama voters/supporters. I'm not sure how effective a shame campaign will be.
I think that connecting video games to child murderers is going to drive gamers to support whoever promises them that their games aren't getting banned.
So maybe the NRA could emphasize the whole "not calling for bans" thing.
Yes. Games and movies are not the problem. Guns are not the problem. The problem is that every once in a while somebody goes batcrap crazy and instead of taking him/herself out quietly decides they want the attention they never got in life and they pick a nice safe gun free zone to shoot up.
Out of all the things mentioned I really think he should have brought up that how the media handles these things just encourages these psychos. I've been shooting guns, playing video games, and watching TV and movies my whole life and have yet to get the urge to go shoot up a bunch of kids. Maybe drop kick a few of the more obnoxious ones but that's another story.
Shooting up a mall is like Loser American Idol. (Not that American Idol isn't already for losers but again, that's another story).
Posted by: AdamPM at December 21, 2012 01:55 PM (x61Z7)
Low information folk want a solution, even if there isn't one. The media and the progressives (the same of course) want gun control. They have developed a narrative focused on that goal exclusively. Wayne's approach distracts from that and their ability to focus exclusively on guns. And, it gives those on the fence who want something to be done other things to ponder. In any case absolutely noting will be done relative to the 1st on this issue because the motivation is gun control not any kind of solution to the "problem." Shiny object, squirrel... let's see if it is shiny enough.
FWIW I was at a "game night" after the shooting with my wife's very liberal friends, mostly North Shore Chicago Reform Jewish school school teachers. I add the latter (my wife is Jewish btw) because as the JPFO would freely acknowledge you could hardly expect a more anti-gun demographic. But, the tide might actually have turned.
I was amazed. The tragedy was discussed on occasion through the night. Remarkably concealed carry was discussed neutrally to even favorably. There was no groundswell among these folks (admitedely a small focus group) toward more gun conrtrol. There was discussions of armed guards in schools. Discussions of mental health... Again, I was frankly amazed. but encouraged. But then the anecdotal stories about about Obama vs Romney signs I read here before the election were encouraging too.
Posted by: Keith at December 21, 2012 01:56 PM (NYPPE)
Posted by: SoCons at December 21, 2012 02:08 PM (fgbiK)
Most firearms enthusiasts are safety and education oriented. In general, they engage in constructive activities when they use their firearms and accidents are rare. They have a care of their targets and what lies beyond them and a hyper awareness of the location of potential "wild cards" on the range or hunting lease such as pets or other hunters.
On the other hand, the Hollywood types who would be the first to jump on a "for the children" gun ban, frequently make their living portraying the indiscriminate use of firearms without any acknowledgement of harm (or potential harm) to innocent bystanders. It's not unusual to see carelessness and mishandling of firearms in most Hollywood blockbusters. Some of the more violent movies, callously use innocents as hostages to hide behind. Even blowing up a Death Star, disregards the many people who were just maintenance guys that were probably impressed by the Evil Bad Dudes.
Posted by: 2nd Amendment Mother at December 21, 2012 02:14 PM (L4CWX)
Posted by: Warden Samuel Norton at December 21, 2012 02:18 PM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: SoCons at December 21, 2012 06:08 PM (fgbiK)
That sort of cluelessness is much more appreciated over at HuffPo.
Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 02:23 PM (fklmM)
Well, the nation of Japan has quite a few less Redguards than the United States. Could be related.
Posted by: Lemmenkainen, Freelance Warlord at December 21, 2012 02:25 PM (K1JW0)
Posted by: Sweep the leg at December 21, 2012 02:28 PM (W9qYB)
Posted by: jewells45 at December 21, 2012 02:35 PM (u25eL)
Posted by: William Eaton at December 21, 2012 02:54 PM (rwioF)
Posted by: TheMadItalian at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (77RW/)
"TV Eases Way for Gay Acceptance" published May 23, 2012 expresses how TV programming casting gay lifestyles in a positive light are steering the culture toward broader acceptance of homosexuality.
But when pressed as to whether violence on TV influences culture, the media and even others not in the media industry will cry foul.
My favorite rebuttal to the "media doesn't influence culture" position comes from Bill Whittle. To paraphrase: Well, it sure is too bad all those advertisers wasted their money, if the media has no influence after all.
Posted by: The Liberty Dude at December 21, 2012 03:11 PM (iAWQF)
I think the LaPierre statement hit all the right notes. The MSM is complicit in glorifiying evil, abberant behavior- and then trying to shift the blame onto our legal and moral obligations to arm and defend ourselves against it.
Posted by: HvyMtlHntr at December 21, 2012 03:12 PM (5CL9S)
Once the NRA announced that they would not take any questions, I got the distinct feeling that the reps from the NRA were going to unload most of what they had, holding back just a wee bit, to buy time to review/filter responses across the political spectrum to determine direction of their strongest path forward, and to avoid unforseen political quicksand.
Interestingly, based on the first half of the comments here, the violent gaming culture was most sensitive while my gut immediately churned when the NRA rep suggested a national registry of citizens individuals with a history of mental illness...which will not sit well with the left [see http://tinyurl.com/bpqmapc as well as
http://tinyurl.com/c8eyz95 ] as it interferes with their long term agenda.
Posted by: wtd at December 21, 2012 03:16 PM (y7c1A)
Posted by: Joe in MI at December 21, 2012 03:31 PM (3R8wQ)
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at December 21, 2012 03:56 PM (vUK/h)
Yeah, it's about time to point the finger at the "entertainment" biz. There's a few restrictions we can put on them, the same way they want to restrict access to guns and ammo. They can claim they are only serving up what the public wants, but the gun industry could say the same thing. I guarantee this is going to resonate with moms, and many have been concerned about what their children see on tv and in the movies. It's a good move by the NRA.
Posted by: notsothoreau at December 21, 2012 04:25 PM (5HBd1)
Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 05:04 PM (YUttk)
Posted by: The Chicken at December 21, 2012 05:39 PM (iroiJ)
Posted by: TexasJew at December 21, 2012 07:05 PM (lD8ju)
Posted by: DaveinNC at December 21, 2012 07:49 PM (/NgNT)
Posted by: torrance at December 22, 2012 12:54 PM (muo5M)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3697 seconds, 492 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








So guns donÂ’t kill people, video games and movies do?
Yes, that's exactly his point.
/rolls eyeballs
Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 10:46 AM (ptD6d)