We're smarter than this situation that we're reacting to.
This is a discussion on We're smarter than this situation that we're reacting to. within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Yes, we are, but intelligence is wasted on idiots. The other side has to be at least smart enough to understand what you say, and ...
January 22nd, 2013 12:33 PM
Yes, we are, but intelligence is wasted on idiots. The other side has to be at least smart enough to understand what you say, and they aren't.
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunder bolt...... Sun Tzu.
The supreme art of war is to defeat the enemy without fighting........ Sun Tzu.
January 22nd, 2013 12:43 PM
To be perfectly blunt about it, why do we care about "school shootings?" They are a statistically insignificant event. They are a rounding error in the composite of violent crime/overall murder. And they aren't new, in any case. If you are willing to make massive changes to the social structure based on the rarest of events, have at it. But that is TERRIBLE policy making and, indeed, we ARE smarter than that.
Originally Posted by rednichols
Furthermore, that YOU deduced something does not make it fact. There are a whole lotta "deductions," many on this very forum, that are completely divorced from reality. And as to the lack of "violence" in the bad old days before them demon video games, REAL LIFE was actually bloodier and more violent for children than it is today. How many kids "back in the day" grew up hunting, farming/ranching, or were otherwise involved in ACTUAL killing on a regular basis? Why wasn't the "Greatest Generation" the "Mass Murder Generation," considering how much real violence they experienced per capita compared to "kids today?" I've read "On Killing" and several other arguments that support your theory (alas, you weren't the first to "deduce" it either). I agree that they could have some effect on some very small part of the population that was already severely "off" on a psychological/emotional level. I, however, do not support banning anything based on such limited correlation.
Additionally, "blame" and "cause and effect" are the same thing in this context. Video games "cause" school shootings, therefore they are "to blame" for school shootings. This is your position, don't back away from it now by playing a game (no pun intended) of semantics that can't be supported.
And finally, I know plenty about NPD and the ranges therein. You brought up what narcissism "always" entails, thereby eliminating gradations of it in favor of an absolute definition. And no, the fact that there are ranges doesn't negate the "millions" argument, as the very lowest estimates are that there are around 1.5 to 3 million Americans with "full blown" NPD. A much higher percentage have SOME narcissistic traits (thus the debate in the psychiatric community to remove NPD as a diagnosis, and rather assign individuals a "score" on a scale of such traits), with as many as 20% of participants in some studies showing enough of these traits to be considered "partially" narcissistic.
I am not in the habit of shooting off my mouth without having some understanding of the issue (though I can't say that I've NEVER done it, of course). I have been reading about this issue for years. I fail to see any evidence that movies/video games turn an otherwise "good" kid into a school shooter and, even if this WERE the case, I maintain that school shootings - while individually tragic - are not a significant danger to society and should not, in and of themselves, be the basis of such sweeping legislation as would be required to "ban" make-believe violence. And I say this as a parent with children in public schools...
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
January 22nd, 2013 01:02 PM
I think the larger picture is missed here. Something has happened in our society in the last 20 years that did not exist 30 years ago. When I was in High School, it was normal to see rifles and shotguns in racks of pkup truck windows. It was normal to meet after school for impromptu plinking. It was normal for history teachers to display firearms of the period and other weapons as visual aids.
Why should we care about school shootings? Because we hate seeing children killed! That should be obvious, but also it puts the big light on gun ownership.
Statistics? Sure, overall violent crime may have decreased during the rise of video games, but the school shootings started in that same area.
It may not be the complete fault of video games, but it damn sure is suspicious.
Combined with fatherless homes, and the decay of morality, and a kid with an empty head will get filled with something.
" Blessed is that man, who when facing death, thinks only of his front sight"
January 22nd, 2013 01:23 PM
I remember shortly after the shooting, I think it was CNN that featured a father and his two sons starting a movement to get kids to turn in their violent video games. The two boys started by dumping theirs in the trash. They were praised as doing something meaningful to stop this violence.
Throughout the segment the primary thought running through my mind was "If that father, standing at the back grinning and acting proud of his sons, was so concerned that these games were bad for society, why did he allow his children to play adult-rated games?"
Another thing I rarely see pointed out, is the possibility that the murderer is more likely to choose games featuring violence due to their nature, not that the video game is causing them to act violently. That's not to say that only psychopaths play violent games, but gaming is absolutely a mainstream activity these days amongst all demographics. It is not unusual to find games with some degree of violent content in anyone's home, yet a big deal is made when such material turns up in the home of a murderer.
January 22nd, 2013 01:28 PM
This may get lost in the shuffle, but I find it interesting that in the original post, it was stated that you are not yourself a "gamer" but you feel that is the cause for the problems in today's society. This to me sounds exactly like an anti-gun person telling me that they think guns are evil, yet they know nothing about them. Pick up a game sometime, play some insanely violent version even, and tell me if when it's over, you have even the SLIGHtest urge to go murder someone.
I think you'll find the situation similar to guns, in that someone who has never even held one, when they do, they find they are just objects, and the gun doesn't alter your mind in any way.
January 22nd, 2013 01:39 PM
(note, later in the post I refer to a list of school shootings. Looking over this list I see they go back to the 1700s, but are fairly prevalent in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, but they do increase somewhat in the 80's, 90's, and 00s.)
Originally Posted by glockman10mm
Bingo. It took me a little bit to read through the post and put my thoughts together on this, but I have a bit of a theory and it touches on many of the concepts in the comments and in the original post.
I have written of this before, but as a refresher, one theory holds that society goes through a revolving generational pattern with four predominant generation archetypes and that it is the changing pattern that causes the ebbs and flows in society with peaks and valleys; such as the 60's was a cultural peak in many ways in addition to being a very much a 'boomer' generation thing. The theory says that a new generation came into play about 1982-1984 time frame, right about the time Reagan became president. Fast forward about 7-8 years, to 1991 and we notice a dramatic culture change and especially a difference in kids raised in it, as well as a difference in attitudes towards children in general. An example of what I mean by this, would be the latch-key-kid that was raised in a household that took two parental incomes to make ends meet.
My first media encounter with the concept of a school shooting, and attitudes came about this time, and I was already in college; it was the Pearl Jam song Jeremy, which was inspired by a school shooting, though not a mass killing. The first mass shooting I can personally recall was Columbine. That in and of itself says something when you consider the list of school shootings in the united states. Looking at the list as part of writing this post, it shocks me that there were so many and I was honestly not aware of them.
About this time there was also a coarsening of the culture and it was noticeable in music in particular. I mentioned Pearl Jam above, which is prototypical of this change and classic "grunge" rock taking on a darker tone. At or about at the same time, Rap became prolific and it also became a bit of a race to the bottom of who could generate the most offensive material. The thing was that vulgar nature was deified and embraced and gave us "Gangsta Rap" that does nothing but glorify violence, crime, and denigrate women. I have the perception that this is seen as the role model for life in an inner city / urban environment, the breeding grounds of a lot of the problems with society today.
So in essence I am saying that there has been a culture change and that change is responsible for much of what is happening today. Of course this is different than the crazy / insane person that engages in mass or school shootings, but I can't help but sense that there is still part of an underlying culture change that plays into their psyche - the part that we refer to as the 15 minutes of fame, giving them a power in death that they felt they never had in life. In the end, I don't think we can blame music, movies, and video games. Instead we should be looking at these things as a reflection of the culture and attitudes that give rise to these events.
January 22nd, 2013 02:20 PM
This cuts, unfortunately, to a core of our societal dilemma. While some want to (and I think rightly)
Originally Posted by Cold Shot
blame our entertainment industry, they are also quite willing to ignore totally the psychic effects
of certain design elements on guns used to make them appear "military." It is naive to think
the "military" appearance has no impact on the minds of certain shoppers for guns, just as it is naive
to think the front cover of a game or a book or the trailer of a movie has no effect on what the
BOTH VISUALS, the visuals used in the entertainment industry and the visuals used by the gun industry
in gun design or advertising will be seen by folks who --because they are ill-- can't separate the
fantasy from the reality. If I were going to follow the logical thought line of rednichols that one must be
banned, then the other also must be banned.
Probably there is a means to deal with the issues without anything being banned, but we all have to
be a bit wiser. E.g., self-imposed industry standards on both sides would be helpful.
If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
January 22nd, 2013 02:42 PM
You've just described the folks in Washington who want to tell us how to live our lives. Government as a gang of thugs. Better keep them off the video games.
Originally Posted by rednichols
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." ~ P. J. O'Rourke
January 22nd, 2013 02:50 PM
We can't say with any certainty what causes individuals to commit massacres for a few reasons. One is that they are such rare events, as a couple posters previously mentioned, that any data would be statistically insignificant. Secondly, many of the alleged perpetrators take their own lives at the conclusion of the incident so law enforcement and mental health professionals cannot interview them. And finally, OPFOR alluded to an excellent point in his most recent post: the popularity of violent video games and the increased incidence of mass shootings have seemingly occurred simultaneously. It's nothing more than a plausible hypothesis that they're related. We can't say that video games cause people to become violent. Where's the data? If there even is any, it's just a correlation, probably a very weak one, and still ultimately meaningless in this discussion. To this end, we can't blame firearms or pharmaceutical drugs or movies or anything else because there's nothing concrete supporting our hypotheses. Evoking these cause-effect scenarios for gun-related violence is lazy, misguided, and just muddies the water of intelligent discussion. Leave the entertainment industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and the firearms industry alone. They did nothing to cause this latest tragedy.
January 22nd, 2013 02:56 PM
I am from an earlier generation. I do enjoy playing video games of all sorts. I even play with my grandson. He has a limit of how long we play and he completly understands tha violence is ONLY accepted in video games. That being said it seems the issue has many enemies but overlook the actual problem. We all make choices by how we were raised. Today kids are set infront of the electronic babysitter, sent to school to be taught by people we dont even know anymore. ( No telling what the are filling their heads with.) we need parents who involved in the kids life teaching them whats real and whats not. I grew up with only a mom and play video games and have no desire to kill someone, even if I have to.
most of these posts are correct to an extent, there just incomplete.
January 22nd, 2013 02:58 PM
When analyzing this don't forget to factor in the Gun Free Schools Zone Act of 1990.
January 22nd, 2013 03:00 PM
Culture is always changing. But if we are going to blame violent media for one specific, statistically insignificant sub-type of crime, then it makes just as much sense (none) to give violent media credit for the overall reduction in violent crime. Their is still no research that shows a causal relationship between violent video games and actual criminal anti-social behavior. The fact that you can get some kids to play rougher for ten minutes after they play a game is a million miles from shooting up a school.
Originally Posted by noway2
Let's also not forget that Grossman's credibility isn't exactly airtight. Most prominently, he keeps pushing the work of SLA Marshall regarding the shooting behavior of WWII soldiers. This is the old saw that after WWII, because of this research, the military started using human silhouette practice targets to condition soldiers to overcome their reluctance to kill. Turns out that the military did in fact use human shaped targets during WWII and more importantly, SLA Marshall appears to have fabricated the data in his research.
January 22nd, 2013 03:10 PM
I guarantee that children are much more desensitized by what they see on our news and in real life than any violent video game in existence.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK
January 22nd, 2013 03:21 PM
I grew up watching violent movies, and playing violent video games, and playing "guns" in the woods with my friends as a kid. I have never in my 42 years on this Earth, committed a violent crime as a result of those things or not. What I did have growing up, however, was two parents, both USAF officers, who taught me to properly respect, handle, and use firearms from an early age. My father served two tours in Viet Nam with MAC/V-SOG, and spent 30 years in the AF, retiring as an O-6. My mother was an RN in the AF, and got out as an O-3 to raise me when I was born.
What I am tired of, is this Liberal/ Progressive approach of thinking that society and everything but the individual is to blame for his own actions. Raise a child right, teach him right from wrong, and give him a good moral foundation to work from, and I think you're most of the way to avoiding problems. Rely on the government, and institutions to raise your child, and take a hands-off approach to rearing children, and you'll end up with a gang banger, drug addict, or other sort of criminal as likely as not. Take responsibility, do the work, and reap the rewards. Avoid the work, blame everything else for your failures, and then cry foul when things go bad.
I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
January 22nd, 2013 03:28 PM
Apparently "we" are not smarter than this. Using games as a scapegoat makes as much sense as using guns as a scapegoat for the actions of defective people. Add to that the recent gun show negligent discharges, and "we" are looking pretty stupid right now. "Godwin" in a few forums and "we" start looking crazy.
I don't always have nothing to say, but when I do, I post it on Facebook.
Search tags for this page
be smarter than the situation
Click on a term to search for related topics.