Red Flag Laws

[BC38]

Have you ever actually played one of the games you're talking about?

A couple of times, I didn't find them enjoyable. Partially due to the potentially desensitizing effect and lack of empathy they promote. I don't find gory violent movies enjoyable either. watching or causing other people's suffering isn't my kind of entertainment. Even if it is make believe - it strikes me as kind of sick actually.

And really, I think that by that logic, we should also ban football, dodgeball, historical reenactments, cowboy action shooting, IPSC, and IDPA.

False analogy - none of those are about KILLING people at random. IPSC and IDPA originated as training exercises for law enforcement, and do not involve shooting realistic live action figures.

But mostly, I would ask, can you point to one single study that found a correlation between video game play and violence?

See Walking Wolf's most recent post. In college I researched the subject of the influence violent video games have on real world violence - particularly involving kids - and yes there are a lot of credible studies linking the two. Why do you think kids cartoons are all Care Bears and My Little Pony instead of Wiley Coyote vs Road Runner these days?

PS--You do realize that 3D FPSs date back to 1990, right?

Um, yeah. As an MCSE and Computer Engineer, I try to stay pretty well informed about the computer gaming world and technologies. I've always said that gaming is what drives the improvements in computer technology.

Actually, yeah. I don't think it's particularly far outside statistical norms. And how close they are to each other has nothing to do with it. It would be like claiming the opposite because nothing happened the previous two or three months.

The FBI claims a 16% increase in active shooter incidents since 2010. Given the relative rarity of such events, that's nothing

Read Red's most recent post and take those stats back a little farther - to the start of the FPS gaming revolution and then review them again. FPS gaming may have started in 1990, but it took it several years to become ubiquitous. Home computers were still fairly rare in 1990, and game consoles were just starting to take off. Neither had anywhere near the realism of the later (and especially current) games, and in those early games (like Doom) you were killing monsters - not ordinary people. You get a completely different picture than when you just look at the last 9 years - a time period when the active shooter scenario has become an an established "norm" - vs the last 20 years since columbine.

How many they successfully kill isn't a valid measure either. That's like saying drunk driving isn't a problem because cars do such a good job protecting their occupants that fewer people die in DUI related accidents - even if the number of DUI accidents is going up. That makes no sense.

This discussion is about the number of psycho youth who actually go over the edge and start shooting people. Not the number they actually manage to kill. There is absolutely NO question that these incidents have become increasingly frequent in the last 20 years, which just so happens to coincide with the explosion of FPS gaming and the computer horsepower to make it into a realistic immersive experience.

 

[Wise_A]

See Walking Wolf's most recent post. In college I researched the subject of the influence violent video games have on real world violence - particularly involving kids - and yes there are a lot of credible studies linking the two. Why do you think kids cartoons are all Care Bears and My Little Pony instead of Wiley Coyote vs Road Runner these days?

So you can't point to one.

A couple of times, I didn't find them enjoyable. Partially due to the potentially desensitizing effect and lack of empathy they promote. I don't find gory violent movies enjoyable either. watching or causing other people's suffering isn't my kind of entertainment. Even if it is make believe - it strikes me as kind of sick actually.

So really, you haven't, and this is sort of a "I didn't like it so nobody can have it."

in those early games (like Doom) you were killing monsters - not ordinary people.

I can't think of a modern FPS where you kill ordinary people. Maybe GTA? But if anything, that just rewires you to drive poorly. On sidewalks.

You get a completely different picture than when you just look at the last 9 years - a time period when the active shooter scenario has become an an established "norm" - vs the last 20 years since columbine.

Okay.

"Definitional issues aside, the relative rarity of mass shooting events makes analysis of trends particularly difficult. Chance variability in the annual number of mass shooting incidents makes it challenging to discern a clear trend, and trend estimates will be sensitive to outliers and to the time frame chosen for analysis. For example, while Krouse and Richardson (2015) found evidence of an upward trend in mass public shootings from 1999 to 2013, they noted that the increase was driven largely by 2012, which had an unusually high number of mass public shooting incidents. Additionally, Lott (2015) showed that the FBI study’s estimate of a dramatic increase in active-shooter incidents was largely driven by the choice of 2000 as the starting date, because that year had an unusually low number of shooting incidents; extending the analysis to cover 1977 onward and adjusting the data to exclude events with fewer than two fatalities, Lott (2015) found a much smaller and statistically insignificant increase (less than 1 percent annually) in mass shooting fatalities over time."

Mass Shootings: Definitions and Trends | RAND

Yeah, you're right, it is better to look at the number of incidents!

Media, Kids, and Violence
Sarah Miller, RN, National Center for Health Research
Media, Kids, and Violence | National Center for Health Research

You do realize that "aggression" means "they are angry at school", right?

Pathological players have the same problems as any addict--when you take away what they're addicted to, they get angry.

 

[sigp220.45]

Has it been determined the last two yahoos even played first person shooter video games? Not every 20 something plays them.

Blaming games is as dumb as blaming guns.

 

[Wise_A]

The El Paso guy muttered something about it in his rambling manifest. But beyond that, no, and he was motivated by being a racist jerkwad. I don't think that media consumption itself can create the necessary "othering" effect.

I don't even think the problem is a specific age group, since there are a fair number of older spree killers. And in any case, given the nature of their crimes, these individuals should trend towards a younger age range, since their condition is what one would call fatal.

Instead, it's a much more even distribution of ages. I think it'd be a lot more productive to study whether they're socially-isolated because of their own psychology, or whether there's a societal change at work.

But really, I think there are two causes:

(1) These guys aren't getting reliably smoke-checked by their would-be victims.
(2) It's easier to get your own Wikipedia page by shooting a bunch of people, than doing something productive like curing cancer or winning the Olympics.

The solution is to get more people packing heat, and to stop sensational news coverage of these dirtbags. I mean, NBCNews showed El Paso footage with the shooter's gun censored, but his face unblurred. What the hell, guys?

 

[BC38]

So you can't point to one.

Sorry, my prof kept my paper - she said with just a little polish it was good enough to publish, but I wasn't really interested at the time.

So really, you haven't, and this is sort of a "I didn't like it so nobody can have it."

No, it was more like, "this is repulsive, what kind of sick mind finds this kind of blood, gore, and carnage entertaining?"
I have a brother in law who plays them constantly and I've watched him play for hours. Like I said, I find the graphic violence they portray as kind of sickening.

I can't think of a modern FPS where you kill ordinary people. Maybe GTA? But if anything, that just rewires you to drive poorly. On sidewalks.

Cute dodge, but you know full well what I mean. Killing realistic looking people.

"Definitional issues aside, the relative rarity of mass shooting events makes analysis of trends particularly difficult. Chance variability in the annual number of mass shooting incidents makes it challenging to discern a clear trend, and trend estimates will be sensitive to outliers and to the time frame chosen for analysis. For example, while Krouse and Richardson (2015) found evidence of an upward trend in mass public shootings from 1999 to 2013, they noted that the increase was driven largely by 2012, which had an unusually high number of mass public shooting incidents. Additionally, Lott (2015) showed that the FBI study’s estimate of a dramatic increase in active-shooter incidents was largely driven by the choice of 2000 as the starting date, because that year had an unusually low number of shooting incidents; extending the analysis to cover 1977 onward and adjusting the data to exclude events with fewer than two fatalities, Lott (2015) found a much smaller and statistically insignificant increase (less than 1 percent annually) in mass shooting fatalities over time."

Mass Shootings: Definitions and Trends | RAND

Yeah, you're right, it is better to look at the number of incidents!

OK, so then cherry pick the other end of the time scale to prove a different point. How about looking at the frequency for the whole period of the last 20 years - as Red's post did? I don't see you refuting what he posted. Since Columbine in 1999 we have had
Two in '99
One in '02
Two in '07
Two in '09
Four in '12
One in '13
Three in '15
One in '16
Two in '17
Five in '18
Three already so far in '19.
As Red pointed out, starting in '99 the intervals get shorter, and shorter, until there have been no years without at least one mass shooting in the last 5 years. That sure seems like an increasing trend to me.

The other novel part of it is how many of them are young guys. A lot of them teenagers - the very demographic that is so obsessed - or as you put it addicted - to these blood and guts games.

You do realize that "aggression" means "they are angry at school", right?
Pathological players have the same problems as any addict--when you take away what they're addicted to, they get angry.

Your point being? Aggressive feelings lead to aggressive actions. Not every time certainly, but you don't get the actions without the feelings. Surely you don't believe people act aggressively out of the blue without first having aggressive feelings?

 

[BC38]

Has it been determined the last two yahoos even played first person shooter video games? Not every 20 something plays them.

Blaming games is as dumb as blaming guns.

No, as I said earlier, guns don't immerse young minds in a virtual reality where they can commit murder and mayhem without consequences, or reward them with a "win" for killing people. But that is exactly what these games do. Like I said, the games don't "make" them killers, but playing them acts as a form of conditioning that can push an already sick mind over the edge.

Wanna make me a bet on whether they were into violent video games? I've got $100 that says we'll find out they were. Any takers?

 

[rednichols]

Has it been determined the last two yahoos even played first person shooter video games? Not every 20 something plays them.

Blaming games is as dumb as blaming guns.

Not at all. Here's the Canadian shooters' story:

"In a segment on 60 Minutes to air on Sunday night, Mr Schmegelsky reveals he gifted his son, Bryer, an imitation weapon around the time of his 17th birthday.

Mr Schmegelsky said he bought the rifle so his son could “play with his friends”.

He also hoped by giving his son the toy, he would get off the couch and away from the violent computer games he would play regularly.

"It was getting him out of the woods with his buddies, it was getting him outside," Mr Schmegelsky told 60 Minutes.

"I never gave him a real gun. I never gave him a gun that would kill someone."

Now, please don't take this too literally; I'm not suggesting it was the airsoft rifle that is to blame, any more than a real one. I am pointing out that the father of one of the killer's sure saw the connection with violent video games.

Also: it's easy to say 'I told you so' with hindsight being 20/20. In this case I told my wife when the two were accused (no, I didn't work out they were the killers ) that (1) they are video gamers and (2) will be found dead. Both are true statements, according to the evidence we have at hand so far.

The Canadian murders are not mass shooters of strangers; they are what used to be called 'thrill killers' and in this case still of strangers. An example of this is the teenage brother of the founder (now deceased) of today's El Paso Saddlery, who killed his best friend for fun in April of 1960 and incarcerated in an asylum. He was one of the victim's pallbearers!

The killer in the New Zealand massacre: I know I've posted this already in either this thread or the other one that is running in parallel in this subforum right now but here it is again:



I've been tracking this for about ten years now and have to consider these most recent killings as affirmation vs this being a 'yet to be tested' hypothesis.

Columbine, from Wiki:

"They were avid fans of the movie Natural Born Killers, and used the film's acronym, NBK, as a code for the massacre.[22] In February 1998, Klebold envisioned a massacre with a girl like in the film, writing "Soon...either ill commit suicide, or I'll get w. [redacted girl's name] & it will be NBK for us."[238] In April 1998, Harris wrote "When I go NBK and people say things like "oh it was tragic" or "oh he is crazy!" or "It was so bloody." I think, so the **** what you think that's a bad thing?"[239] In Harris's yearbook Klebold wrote "the holy April morning of NBK".[23] Around February 1999, he wrote "maybe going "NBK" (gawd) w. eric is the way to break free."[240] In Harris's last journal entry, he wrote "Everything I see and I hear I incorporate into NBK somehow...feels like a ******n movie sometimes."[26]

Video games
Violent video games were also blamed.[63][241][242] Parents of some of the victims filed several unsuccessful lawsuits against video game manufacturers.[236][243] Jerald Block believes their immersion in a virtual world best explains the massacre.[22]
Harris and Klebold were both fans of shooter video games such as Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem 3D and Postal.[6][244][245] Harris wrote the massacre will "be like the LA riots, the Oklahoma bombing, WWII, Vietnam, Duke and Doom all mixed together."[18] In his last journal entry, Harris wished to "Get a few extra frags on the scoreboard."[26]

Doom
See also: Doom (1993 video game) § Controversies
They were avid fans of Doom especially.[48][246] Harris said of the massacre, "It's going to be like ****ing Doom."[25][247] He also wrote "I must not be sidetracked by my feelings of sympathy...so I will force myself to believe that everyone is just another monster from Doom."[248] In Harris's yearbook, Klebold wrote "I find a similarity between people and Doom zombies".[23]

Harris named his shotgun Arlene after a character in the Doom novels.[25][249][250] Harris said the shotgun was "straight out of Doom".[25][247] The TEC-9 Klebold used resembled an AB-10, a weapon from the Doom novels that Harris referenced several times.[46][249][251]"

Wiki has an article they title 'Active Shooter' that attempts to capture the essence of what is being experienced, now worldwide. I've yet to read it thoroughly but the first paragraph makes the characterization "a type of mass murder marked by scale, randomness and often suicide".

The situation, then is much like thrill killing: no motive in the usual sense. And I believe, that the FBI didn't find a motive in the Vegas massacre because they were looking for a traditional motive vs. a thrill killing. And the Wiki article points out "there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims".

 

[stansdds]

No, as I said earlier, guns don't immerse young minds in a virtual reality where they can commit murder and mayhem without consequences, or reward them with a "win" for killing people. But that is exactly what these games do. Like I said, the games don't "make" them killers, but playing them act as a form of conditioning that can push an already sick mind over the edge.

Wanna make me a bet on whether they were into violent video games? I've got $100 that says we'll find out they were. Any takers?

I gotta agree!

 

[Old_Cop]

Red Flag Laws, quick, easily repeatable, poorly defined much like assault weapons, Saturday night specials. Catchy phrases for politician and media use. It's about convincing an undereducated public that something must be done. Feelings not facts for power and control.

 

[Gamecock]

Video games made them do it? Rilly?

Prevention can't work. Defense can. An armed public is the only answer.

 

[Walkingwolf]

Video games made them do it? Rilly?

Prevention can't work. Defense can. An armed public is the only answer.

Did anyone say that? Did anyone make you type on a keyboard in English? Or is it possible you learned to? There are different forms of personal interaction that young develop from, even adults. Most of us adapt to different technology because of the input around us, a lot in the media.

Video is an accepted training tool used in schools, industry even churches. Give me a break with the indignation because you play video games. You do play these games don't you?

 

[BC38]

...Video is an accepted training tool used in schools, industry even churches. Give me a break with the indignation because you play video games. You do play these games don't you?

I bet I know the answer to that question...

In my over 30 years of examining and discussing this topic I have found that by and large there are only 2 classes of people who defend these violent forms of "entertainment".

The people who play these games, and the people who profit from selling or creating these games.

 

[Imissedagain]

Red Flag
Not effective
Just a lot of Bull?

Criminals, their children raised that way, mentally ill and those easily manipulated..... if there was an easy solution it would have been solved.
That gray area of medical science has failed because of many .... mental health professional’s.... arrogance, greed and the baggage they carry.

The chair of the clinical psychology department at a major university in NYC ....whose kid was a music student and a herd of psychiatric residents, that I met in ‘76 at a wedding in Coney Island, are examples of the problem.

I’ll post those stories.

 

[Gamecock]

Did anyone say that?

65 references to video games in the last three pages.

YEAH, DOZENS SAID IT!

 

[gman51]

Bottom line the cause is breakdown of psychological thinking capabilities.

How many prescriptions drugs have a warning for possible suicidal tendencies? But anything gun related is blamed for mass murder. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure that mental breakdown isn't caused by anything outside of the person's own psychological condition and capabilities. Add a drug with some really bad mental side effects and there you very possibly have the next fuse lit. But oh no the AMA says that is not the cause of mass murder.

No object is safer than the person holding it. Take away the guns or anything gun related, then take away knives, then take away saws, hatchets, ropes, wires, anything that could be used to make a bomb such as a pressure cooker in your kitchen cabinet, a letter opener or box cutter.

There is a reason some people are put in straight jackets. People in jail or mental wards can't have shoe laces or belts. They can use just about anything they can get their hands on to kill themselves or other people when they are mentally unstable. It never is the object but rather how the object is used. People can't even get on a plane without possibly of being x-rayed let alone being metal scanned. We are all being treated as being unstable or unfit to be allowed to have objects that could be used as tools for killing in our possession.
For now it is take away the guns and they can stop mass destruction. Yeah like that is the real reason behind it. Just how stupid do they think people are? People never want to admit they have been made fools of. In this case people are being fooled out of their right to protect themselves. How foolish is that?

 

[LPD256]

This thread is quite interesting. Here are a couple little facts from the FBI. From 2000-2013 approximately 22% of mass shooters were diagnosed with some form of mental illness.

According to the FBI UCR, roughly 450 people per year are murdered where the weapon is a club, hammer, or baseball bat.
About the same number are killed by a knife as a weapon.

900/year on average. With clubs and knives. Has there been a year when so called mass-shooters killed that many people? I’m guessing if you added up all kids killed in school shootings in history, you wouldn’t reach 900.

We don’t have a gun problem. We have a Louisville Slugger problem.

 

[BC38]

65 references to video games in the last three pages.

YEAH, DOZENS SAID IT!

Evelyn Wood is your friend. A lot of those "65 references to video games" are quotes of previous posts or even posts that take your position that the games aren't a problem.

...and we're kinda' straying from the 2nd Amendment here, but...

I see several of us saying that the games let the killers practice what they eventually did, and that the games helped condition their disturbed minds to make it acceptable to them, and that playing these games helped push them over the edge from fantasy to reality. You are the only one I see saying "the games made them do it".

So, just out of curiosity, be honest with us, do you profit from these games - or only play them?

 

[Walkingwolf]

65 references to video games in the last three pages.

YEAH, DOZENS SAID IT!

References, not claims the games made them do it. BUT the games most likely influenced them, as it does with the reaction from some who play them. I personally always can tell a gamer, they seem to have a shorter fuse than most. I used to play them years ago as an adult, and I noticed my own temper getting shorter, I stopped playing them. The only game I play now is solitaire, and I find it calming.

If the games don't affect you I have no problem, but the facts are evident they do affect some people. AND there is little doubt that video is an accepted form of training. Almost every successful business used video for training they have done it since the inception of video tapes.

It also accepted that influences to children can often result in the same unacceptable behavior when they become adults. Smoker parents often result in smoker children, child abused children some become abusive adults.

I am not advocating the removal of video games I am advocating a system of removal of children who are abused. And I believe letting children drink alcohol excessive provided by the parents is grounds to remove the children, no difference for video games. While I have no problem with adults smoking pot, I have a huge problem with parents who supply pot to their children.

 

[HeyJoe]

Yet people worldwide play the same video games and watch the same movies as people do here, without the effects attributed by multiple posters here. The gaming and movies causes mass shooting incidents isnt going to fly. It reeks of a desperate attempt to blame an easy target for mass shooting incidents in the United States. The same applies to attempts to blame mental illnees and medications used to treat it. Again people all over the world have the same mental illnesses as here and take the same medication. And no im not a gamer, nor do i make any money on gaming wholesale or retail. And no im not in favor of red flag laws as are currently being passed without sufficient due process.

 

[sigp220.45]

The first big first person shooter game “Doom” was introduced in 1993. The murder rate was 9.5 per 100,000. There were others (Wolfenstein 3D) but Doom was the breakthrough.

Since then probably a billion FPS games have been sold. Call of Duty is over 250 million just for that franchise.

The murder rate in 2016 was 5.3 per 100,000.

Clearly, violent first person shooter games cut crime and the answer is for more of them, and possibly mandatory play in government run fun camps.

(For the sarcasm deficient, that last paragraph was meant in jest)

Now that I’ve solved that problem we can all get along again.

PS - I played Doom once on my Compaq computer when it first came out. I got motion sickness so bad I barfed and had to lay down with a wet cloth on my head. I haven’t played one since.