Can't say I agree with banning "killer" games at LANs, but I guess it will be interesting to see if it actually stops school shootings or is chalked up along with all the other evidence suggesting otherwise. If any reduction in school shootings can be properly and statistically linked to the banning of violent games, that is.
Because "school shooter was regular guest at LAN-parties" is totally a common headline and all. Even supposing that violent video games are what make school shooters shoot schools, this would do nothing to prevent it.
There is so much violence that is being broadcasted, it's interesting logic to single out video games. If anything, I would blame bad parenting for a good portion of these shootings.
"Killer" games is a phrase that doesn't necessarily include any game in which you kill. It tends to focus on active participation in the killing process and/or excessive blood and gore. You can forget Quake or Gears of War. World of Warcraft should be okay due to the relatively cartoonish level of violence. RTS games might remain relatively unaffected because you don't "look through the eyes of the killer" or "pull the trigger yourself."
And it's still a pointless law that will accomplish nothing worthwhile.
<!--quoteo(post=1716544:date=Jul 9 2009, 05:44 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Jul 9 2009, 05:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716544"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So hum how about wondering where the guns come from instead? (Note, I don't know at all firearms policies in Germany)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Gun laws in Ger are extremly strict. ;)
But there will always be a black market, so if you really want a gun, you will get one. If somebody would want to go postal, would he care if his gun is legal? dont think so...
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1716550:date=Jul 9 2009, 01:36 PM:name=PhiXX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PhiXX @ Jul 9 2009, 01:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716550"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But there will always be a black market, so if you really want a gun, you will get one. If somebody would want to go postal, would he care if his gun is legal? dont think so...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, more guns would totally make everything better because the US has the lowest gun crime and homicide rates because everyone can protect themselves with a gun.[/sarcasm] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence" target="_blank"> Oh, wait.</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1716558:date=Jul 9 2009, 01:56 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 9 2009, 01:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716558"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah, more guns would totally make everything better because the US has the lowest gun crime and homicide rates because everyone can protect themselves with a gun.[/sarcasm] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence" target="_blank"> Oh, wait.</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe this to be a tad unprovoked. PhiXX was just making an observation. Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?
Paintball wasn't banned. Currently a ban on production and distribution of violent video games is in preparation. This is absolutely ridiculous, but I hope the Constitutional Court will stop it, if the law ever comes into effect.
<!--quoteo(post=1716580:date=Jul 9 2009, 09:30 PM:name=Rob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rob @ Jul 9 2009, 09:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As far as I know, yes. But without any sources I'm not sure.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1716580:date=Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM:name=Rob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rob @ Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I believe this to be a tad unprovoked. PhiXX was just making an observation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe it was unprovoked. If so, I apologise. However, I always hear the "ban X and only criminals will have X" line brought up in this context. Maybe I'm just reading into his post too much. <!--quoteo(post=1716580:date=Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM:name=Rob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rob @ Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's what link to gun and non gun homicide rates overall and per population is for if you're interested. IIRC Japan, Germany, and G.B. all have relatively strict gun laws so you could use them for a start of a comparison. Of course there are lots of factors to consider, like population density, average wealth, unrest, etc. Still, The U.S. has an abnormally high rate.
Funny thing: Legal guns aren't even a smidgen less deadly than illegal ones. Yes, Germany has gun laws. I've never had an interest so I can't vouch for their strictness, but I wouldn't be surprised if strict is what they are. But guns are not illegal in Germany, and it is completely possible to remain a law-abiding citizen for long after you have a firearm in your possession, and up until very shortly before the moment you turn somebody's head into red paste - and you can do this in just about any country. This thread isn't a gun debate, and Germany's gun laws don't seem to be relevant to it. Go read Ray Bradbury's "A Piece of Wood," it's a good read.
Back to the subject at hand: The complete ban on violent computer games is not going to happen. The proposed law is unconstitutional - not that this will necessarily prevent it from getting passed initially due to some legislative mumbo-jumbo. But if that happens, the courts will overturn it when they get around to it. Bureaucracy moves slowly.
<!--quoteo(post=1716550:date=Jul 9 2009, 06:36 PM:name=PhiXX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PhiXX @ Jul 9 2009, 06:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716550"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Gun laws in Ger are extremly strict. ;)
But there will always be a black market, so if you really want a gun, you will get one. If somebody would want to go postal, would he care if his gun is legal? dont think so...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There will always be a black market, yes, but it is much easier to go on a rampage if you have easier access to a gun. Imagine, one morning you snap, you break your father's locked drawer, take the gun, shoot people. It takes quite a lot less effort than going to a shady dealer you probably never met before considering your background, which means less time for you to rethink your actions.
It's not a problem-solver (and probably even unfair for those who can legaly/safely carry a weapon) but if it saves lives, would it be too much to leave your weapon at a shooting range or something?
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1716697:date=Jul 10 2009, 06:22 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ Jul 10 2009, 06:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... aaaaaaand the thread slides even further down into the gutter than the sensationalist title would lead you to expect.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's a decently related topic, since we're talking about the banning of "murder simulators" and all. It wouldn't be much of a thread otherwise: OP: Germany Bans Video games Us: Man that sucks/is stupid End of Thread
This development in Germany is pretty sad, the goverment is just looking for something to blame for a problem they don't want to face. One interesting result of a countrywide ban would be to see if there will be any impact on violence in schools and such (wich I doubt will happen), and if not then it will be painfully obvious that they were wrong in banning ALL violent games. What worries me is that the ban would not just prohibit the playing of violent games, but it will basically outlaw all game developers from Germany (i.e Crytek)... wich is bad for the industry.
In my mind, a firearm is a tool that can be used as a weapon - like a knife. It demands respect and the knowledge of its function and uses. If you're going to own a firearm of any kind for self defense, you need to understand that it's not a magic shield that will save you. Neither is it your friend. A weapon in the hands of someone incompetent in its use is more dangerous to the user than anyone else. The application of it should be done using highest personal responsibility and it should not be taken lightly.
I get so pissed off seeing youtube videos of people shooting random things with arcs of fire over some hillside, or idiots who waste a perfectly good Kevlar body armor to shoot themselves with a pistol and video tape it.
You're absolutely right, Rob. I remember days in which my dad and I went fishing (yep, we still do that in some parts of the country). He brought a pistol and we shot cans with it. He always made it a strict point to not put the can in a high spot as to not shoot into the woods behind it if you missed, because although odds are you'd likely not do any damage, there's always the possibility that someone could get shot being careless like that. He taught me to keep it in safe mode only until the second before firing and to put it back into safe mode immediately afterwards. He was also very strict about killing things with it, as he liked to hunt but he emphasized that it was to prevent overpopulation and that killing things just to kill things in general was not respectful of nature.
It sort of made me realize how important gun safety is even though he never actually said it. I have a hard time thinking that me or my father wielding a gun would ever cause an incident unless it were a matter of self-defense, which is perfectly justifed imo.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1716719:date=Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM:name=Hawkeye)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hawkeye @ Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Anyway, what about Day of Defeat? I would have figured that would have been banned in Germany before counterstrike. :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Good point. I wonder about that. <!--quoteo(post=1716719:date=Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM:name=Hawkeye)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hawkeye @ Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ" target="_blank">Myth: Gun Control stops crime</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why would it? People will always commit crimes; that's not news. The reason for control is to have fewer gun-related deaths.
Also, I'm not for the banning of all guns. The genie is out of the bottle in that respect, and there are plenty of responsible people who own guns for good reasons. I don't think I agree that an irresponsible person with a gun is more a danger to them self than others though. I think that's one of the more important differences between a gun and a knife beyond the increased killing power.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
I'm sure this war on violence will be as effective as the war on drugs has been.
Kids, those normal things you did that we think made you more violent, well, now they're forbidden fruit and if you do it your a bad person and none of your peers will think you are cool. Nope, no way.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1716728:date=Jul 10 2009, 02:57 PM:name=Hawkeye)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hawkeye @ Jul 10 2009, 02:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716728"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It sort of made me realize how important gun safety is even though he never actually said it. I have a hard time thinking that me or my father wielding a gun would ever cause an incident unless it were a matter of self-defense, which is perfectly justifed imo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is something that most pro-gun (just to clarify, I don't particularly care one way or the other) folk seem to claim; "guns are safe if you know how to use them" and/or "I've never had an incident and I can't imagine that I would."
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to guns. People who *aren't* as gun safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause an incident that is not a matter of self defence.
Cereal_KillR made what's probably the most valid point I've seen in most debates (and it's made fairly often). "Banning guns", as in the case of the UK, does not get rid of guns. That's obvious. Hell, there was an armed bank robbery in my town just yesterday. But guns aren't common here. To get a gun you have to go through some effort to get a hold of one, effort that would get rid of any short term rage.
If I snapped right now, I have no way of getting a gun. There isn't one in my house, I don't know anyone who owns one. But if someone in my house legally owned a gun, it wouldn't be particularly hard to smash open a lock, get the gun, and shoot someone. *That* is the type of incident that strong gun control laws aim to reduce. No one is claiming that banning guns would instantly end all gun related crime.
<!--quoteo(post=1716741:date=Jul 10 2009, 12:11 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ Jul 10 2009, 12:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716741"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>This is something that most pro-gun (just to clarify, I don't particularly care one way or the other) folk seem to claim; "guns are safe if you know how to use them" and/or "I've never had an incident and I can't imagine that I would."
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to guns. People who *aren't* as gun safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause an incident that is not a matter of self defence.</b>
Cereal_KillR made what's probably the most valid point I've seen in most debates (and it's made fairly often). "Banning guns", as in the case of the UK, does not get rid of guns. That's obvious. Hell, there was an armed bank robbery in my town just yesterday. But guns aren't common here. To get a gun you have to go through some effort to get a hold of one, effort that would get rid of any short term rage.
If I snapped right now, I have no way of getting a gun. There isn't one in my house, I don't know anyone who owns one. But if someone in my house legally owned a gun, it wouldn't be particularly hard to smash open a lock, get the gun, and shoot someone. *That* is the type of incident that strong gun control laws aim to reduce. No one is claiming that banning guns would instantly end all gun related crime.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly, you can take any potentially dangerous tool and replace it with the word "gun" in the above bolded sentences and it would make sense. Watch:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is something that most chefs (just to clarify, I don't particularly care one way or the other) folk seem to claim; "knives are safe if you know how to use them" and/or "I've never had an incident and I can't imagine that I would."
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to knives. People who *aren't* as knife safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause a violent incident that has nothing to do with cooking.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See? You didn't really make any point. And you can't. Because a gun is no different than a knife or a baseball bat, or whatever else people claim is violent. The point is that a gun is merely a tool that is used. Of course banning a potentially violent item will reduce it's usage in violent crimes. It would be like if a nation banned rope then bragged about how one is hanging themselves.
Comments
Seems like a dumb law. Not too surprising though. Videogames are going through the same free speech fight comic books/music/movies/TV went through.
... or is that even possible?
What games can be played at LAN's if you can't kill stuff? No RTS, no FPS... Hell, no (MMO)RPG, what does that leave us?
And it's still a pointless law that will accomplish nothing worthwhile.
Gun laws in Ger are extremly strict. ;)
But there will always be a black market, so if you really want a gun, you will get one. If somebody would want to go postal, would he care if his gun is legal? dont think so...
Yeah, more guns would totally make everything better because the US has the lowest gun crime and homicide rates because everyone can protect themselves with a gun.[/sarcasm] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence" target="_blank"> Oh, wait.</a>
I believe this to be a tad unprovoked. PhiXX was just making an observation. Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?
Paintball wasn't banned.
Currently a ban on production and distribution of violent video games is in preparation.
This is absolutely ridiculous, but I hope the Constitutional Court will stop it, if the law ever comes into effect.
<!--quoteo(post=1716580:date=Jul 9 2009, 09:30 PM:name=Rob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rob @ Jul 9 2009, 09:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As far as I know, yes. But without any sources I'm not sure.
Maybe it was unprovoked. If so, I apologise. However, I always hear the "ban X and only criminals will have X" line brought up in this context. Maybe I'm just reading into his post too much.
<!--quoteo(post=1716580:date=Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM:name=Rob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rob @ Jul 9 2009, 03:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, do countries with strict gun laws have overall lower homicide numbers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's what link to gun and non gun homicide rates overall and per population is for if you're interested. IIRC Japan, Germany, and G.B. all have relatively strict gun laws so you could use them for a start of a comparison. Of course there are lots of factors to consider, like population density, average wealth, unrest, etc. Still, The U.S. has an abnormally high rate.
Back to the subject at hand: The complete ban on violent computer games is not going to happen. The proposed law is unconstitutional - not that this will necessarily prevent it from getting passed initially due to some legislative mumbo-jumbo. But if that happens, the courts will overturn it when they get around to it. Bureaucracy moves slowly.
They could be left with whatever the German version of PBS is, and the weather channel.
But there will always be a black market, so if you really want a gun, you will get one. If somebody would want to go postal, would he care if his gun is legal? dont think so...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There will always be a black market, yes, but it is much easier to go on a rampage if you have easier access to a gun. Imagine, one morning you snap, you break your father's locked drawer, take the gun, shoot people. It takes quite a lot less effort than going to a shady dealer you probably never met before considering your background, which means less time for you to rethink your actions.
It's not a problem-solver (and probably even unfair for those who can legaly/safely carry a weapon) but if it saves lives, would it be too much to leave your weapon at a shooting range or something?
It's a decently related topic, since we're talking about the banning of "murder simulators" and all. It wouldn't be much of a thread otherwise:
OP: Germany Bans Video games
Us: Man that sucks/is stupid
End of Thread
Anyway, what about Day of Defeat? I would have figured that would have been banned in germany before counterstrike. :P
What worries me is that the ban would not just prohibit the playing of violent games, but it will basically outlaw all game developers from Germany (i.e Crytek)... wich is bad for the industry.
In my mind, a firearm is a tool that can be used as a weapon - like a knife. It demands respect and the knowledge of its function and uses. If you're going to own a firearm of any kind for self defense, you need to understand that it's not a magic shield that will save you. Neither is it your friend. A weapon in the hands of someone incompetent in its use is more dangerous to the user than anyone else. The application of it should be done using highest personal responsibility and it should not be taken lightly.
I get so pissed off seeing youtube videos of people shooting random things with arcs of fire over some hillside, or idiots who waste a perfectly good Kevlar body armor to shoot themselves with a pistol and video tape it.
It sort of made me realize how important gun safety is even though he never actually said it. I have a hard time thinking that me or my father wielding a gun would ever cause an incident unless it were a matter of self-defense, which is perfectly justifed imo.
Good point. I wonder about that.
<!--quoteo(post=1716719:date=Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM:name=Hawkeye)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hawkeye @ Jul 10 2009, 08:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ" target="_blank">Myth: Gun Control stops crime</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would it? People will always commit crimes; that's not news. The reason for control is to have fewer gun-related deaths.
Also, I'm not for the banning of all guns. The genie is out of the bottle in that respect, and there are plenty of responsible people who own guns for good reasons. I don't think I agree that an irresponsible person with a gun is more a danger to them self than others though. I think that's one of the more important differences between a gun and a knife beyond the increased killing power.
Kids, those normal things you did that we think made you more violent, well, now they're forbidden fruit and if you do it your a bad person and none of your peers will think you are cool. Nope, no way.
This is something that most pro-gun (just to clarify, I don't particularly care one way or the other) folk seem to claim; "guns are safe if you know how to use them" and/or "I've never had an incident and I can't imagine that I would."
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to guns. People who *aren't* as gun safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause an incident that is not a matter of self defence.
Cereal_KillR made what's probably the most valid point I've seen in most debates (and it's made fairly often). "Banning guns", as in the case of the UK, does not get rid of guns. That's obvious. Hell, there was an armed bank robbery in my town just yesterday. But guns aren't common here. To get a gun you have to go through some effort to get a hold of one, effort that would get rid of any short term rage.
If I snapped right now, I have no way of getting a gun. There isn't one in my house, I don't know anyone who owns one. But if someone in my house legally owned a gun, it wouldn't be particularly hard to smash open a lock, get the gun, and shoot someone. *That* is the type of incident that strong gun control laws aim to reduce. No one is claiming that banning guns would instantly end all gun related crime.
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to guns. People who *aren't* as gun safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause an incident that is not a matter of self defence.</b>
Cereal_KillR made what's probably the most valid point I've seen in most debates (and it's made fairly often). "Banning guns", as in the case of the UK, does not get rid of guns. That's obvious. Hell, there was an armed bank robbery in my town just yesterday. But guns aren't common here. To get a gun you have to go through some effort to get a hold of one, effort that would get rid of any short term rage.
If I snapped right now, I have no way of getting a gun. There isn't one in my house, I don't know anyone who owns one. But if someone in my house legally owned a gun, it wouldn't be particularly hard to smash open a lock, get the gun, and shoot someone. *That* is the type of incident that strong gun control laws aim to reduce. No one is claiming that banning guns would instantly end all gun related crime.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly, you can take any potentially dangerous tool and replace it with the word "gun" in the above bolded sentences and it would make sense. Watch:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is something that most chefs (just to clarify, I don't particularly care one way or the other) folk seem to claim; "knives are safe if you know how to use them" and/or "I've never had an incident and I can't imagine that I would."
What these claims seem to be forgetting is that people other than you can and do have access to knives. People who *aren't* as knife safety conscious as you are. People who *will* cause a violent incident that has nothing to do with cooking.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See? You didn't really make any point. And you can't. Because a gun is no different than a knife or a baseball bat, or whatever else people claim is violent. The point is that a gun is merely a tool that is used. Of course banning a potentially violent item will reduce it's usage in violent crimes. It would be like if a nation banned rope then bragged about how one is hanging themselves.