Joe Hill Interview

[lampwick]

So let me get this straight: You (Spoonman) argue that US guns laws are NOT to blame for this unfortuante event and that it could happen anywhere in the world. Funny, therefore, that it has only happened in the US - where in some states its ILLEGAL to not own a gun (I'll concede that crime in such states are probably the lowest in US but thats cos ppl know that homeowners and individuals aren't too afraid to use a gun). Now lets spot a correlation: lax guns laws and events occuring.......



The fact that there are many many stores selling guns is the main thing. The Brady Law is useless when they're broken into

[Spoonman]

If you're going to make broad generalizations about the US, you better be right when you do. And I'm afraid that you are not. There is only one COUNTY out of the entire US that requires you by law to own a gun. That's like 0.0001% of the entire US. And there is a difference between gun laws and gun control. When I refer to gun control, it is the increasing strictness on law-abiding citizens to purchase a gun. You're damned right that I'm arguing that our guns laws aren't to blame for this incident. It's the person who pulled that gun who is at fault, not the US government. My only point is that when a place like England bans guns, criminals STILL HAVE GUNS, no matter what the law is. Now let me point out a correlation: The ban on handguns and UK citizens being robbed at gunpoint because criminals now know that law-abiding citizens WON'T be armed.



Please come back when you have something other than false information and logic.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

lampwick wrote..

Funny, therefore, that it has only happened in the US

This has also happened at an internet café in Vancouver, B.C. (that's in Canada, not the US, in case you are ignorant), with one key difference: a CS player actually was shot and killed in that incident, instead of it just being a threat.



http://csnation.counter-strike.net/viewnews.php/5675/



It's not a problem that only exists in the US. In fact, go to a some third world countries, and sadly you'll see desperate populace that is more willing to kill just for survival. Either way, it's sad how little value is placed on human life. This particular case seemed more like a power trip than anything else, though...

[lampwick]

I'm not denying that any criminal wouldn't use guns. The point was that since they are easier to buy they are easier to get hold of ergo. Importing them from US (for example) would be nigh impossible (9/11) and also efforts in combating pirating at both ends of the pond so they can't come from afar.



I make it clear that it could happen anywhere but condemnation comes from the ease of gun availability as above.



PS I know Vancouver is in Canada, but thats still America (continent)

appended @ [time="1071098666"]

I may also add that the particular state in question (see my previous post) know how/when to use firearms. It is, of course, madness to do so widespread since all the nutters out there will surely embark on a killing spree! It most likely such ppl who commit such crimes; and its all too easy to get hold of one. I seem to remember one episode of the Simpsons where altho Homer is a major alcoholic and been in a mental home he's STILL allowed 3 pistols - what message does that send out?!



Of course that isn't real life but certainly sends out the message.



I rest my case

[Spoonman]

[-:Nighthawk:-]

lampwick wrote..

PS I know Vancouver is in Canada, but thats still America (continent)

Canada may be in North America, but you stated in the US, which Canada is clearly not a part of. Nice try, though.

I seem to remember one episode of the Simpsons where altho Homer is a major alcoholic and been in a mental home he's STILL allowed 3 pistols - what message does that send out?!

...because the Simpsons is an accurate portrayal of life in the USA, right? Sheesh, people are dumb.

[lampwick]

-:Nighthawk:- wrote..

...because the Simpsons is an accurate portrayal of life in the USA, right? Sheesh, people are dumb.

You obviously failed to read this then:

-:Lampwick:- wrote..

This obviously isn't real life....

I'm sorry, what was that about dumb people???

[pwnd]

Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music.



- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989

[T|2i|34L]

Since you're going to post in both, I'll respond in both.



Do you really think that a game manufacturer is going to stand up and say, "Yes, of course or games influence your children!" At that point they might as well just say, "Please! PUT US OUT OF BUSINESS!" You might as well quote R.J. Reynolds on the subject of how cigarettes affect your health. /sarcasm



It's just like the argument with television. Children learn by watching and then physically or audibly repeating what they have seen/heard. You cannot deny this, because that is how we have all learned. Remember doing multiplication? 2x2 is 4, 3x3 is 9? It's memorized, but only because it was repeated in front of us a thousand times.



If an unsupervised child is allowed to watch violent TV or play violent games they will learn violence. Period. BUT, if they have a responsible parent they will be taught the difference between these things and reality, socially acceptable behavior, etc...



I would never say that TV or games are solely responsible for violent youth (like this moron at CXG), but rather the parents of these people have failed miserably at teaching common sense.

[pwnd]

hey i was just sharing an interesting quote with you.



of course i'm not siding with the "ban violent video-games" squad, i just thought that that statement was very interesting. it's extremely ironic, gives you something to think about, and is pretty damn funny in my opinion! Look at the date. Sometimes you have to look at the opposition's argument to improve your own, don't have such a closed mind...

[lampwick]

The whole idea about "video-games" (please....) influencing violence is utter BS. It's just another scape-goat used by people looking for an answer, subsequently straw-grabbing.

Put it this way, violent crime was around before Space Invaders and Pacman were even thought of, no better yet, before the computer full stop...........

[T|2i|34L]

Violent crime was around, yes, but children/young adults were not the ones commiting the crimes.



All I'm saying is that if these people had responsible involved parents who taught their kids the difference between right and wrong there wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, the games and the TV are the only things telling kids what is ok.