Slashdot Mirror


Warriors Of Freedom Prompted Rampage Attempt?

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to a Philadelphia Inquirer article linking videogames to an alleged spree killing attempt. According to the article, "Investigators suspect the three teens arrested.. as they allegedly were about to launch a killing rampage in the small town, found inspiration in violent computer games.. [police] learned that the name the three reportedly had given themselves - Warriors of Freedom - is also an Internet-based combat game." But only a few media reports mention that the violent game connection was made by Jack Thompson, a Miami lawyer and outspoken critic of violent video and computer games - is this a case of shameless Googling to find any obscure game with a similar name and make a connection, or is there genuine evidence here?

32 of 771 comments (clear)

  1. does it matter? by feed_me_cereal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is this a case of shameless Googling to find any obscure game with a similar name and make a connection, or is there genuine evidence here?

    Evidence of what? Playing a violent video game? Big deal. Most kids play violent video games. What kind of games do you expect psycho killers to enjoy: doom3 or oregon trail? These critics really need to understand that a=>b does NOT mean b=>a. It's a very simple logical fallacy. I'm not discounting the possibility that violent games can incourage violent behavoir either, it's just that you actually need to show that video games lead one to violence when one would otherwise not be disposed to it. Violence was here long before video games were.

    --
    "Question with boldness even the existence of a god." - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:does it matter? by ADOT+Troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The British author (amongst other things) Ben Elton wrote on the topic of violence in movies in his book 'Popcorn'. One of the main themes was about violence in movies spreading into real life, he pointed out many times that it's not that people emulate the characters they see directly, but that movies STYLIZE killing and violence - they make it seem COOL. Killing and violence is shown as a quick and effective way to get revenge, achieve goals, make a name for yourself etc..

      Think of how they portayed killing in the basement scene in the first matrix, how 'COOL' was that; a computer hacker/nerd in sunnies and a trenchcoat, with a hot female in latex blasting away numerous innocent people without even flinching - with the propellerheads soundtrack pumping.

      How many people play violent video games and imagine that the people they are shooting are real? Or use the simulated violence to release agression? What happens when life becomes too much and they SNAP and decide to do something about their situation - get revenge on all those motherfuckers in the coolest way you know, bust into school in trenchcoats with semi automatics and spray it with bullets - fantasy becomes reality.

      I'm divided on the issue, as I don't think any sane person would snap like this and bring something patently evil into action, but what about the nutcases that do - have videogames and movies made killing SO cool that it appeals more than anything else? Should we start -constantly- portraying killing and violence as negative, highlighting the consequences and making these actions TABOO in our society, rather than revering them on Screen and in Play?

    2. Re:does it matter? by alptraum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These critics really need to understand that a=>b does NOT mean b=>a. It's a very simple logical fallacy.

      Exactly. Or as statisticians like to say Correlation does not mean causality. Classical example is as the number of priests in a city increases, so do the number of drunks. Well, the correlation between priests and drunks was confounded with the population size increasing, thus the number of group X of just about anything is going to increase.

    3. Re:does it matter? by freeweed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd suggest that removing freedom from the majority only to stop a *very* small minority from doing what they may like have done anyway (sure, I'll admit the evidence is out) is a REALLY stupid idea.

      We don't ban cars because one or two idiots a year decide to deliberately crash into another person. And we don't ban movies that make speeding look cool, even though it kills far more people every day than even the most paranoid would claim videogames have in the past 31 years.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    4. Re:does it matter? by dalutong · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He wasn't asking for evidence that they played violent video games. He was asking for evidence they THEY named themselves after a video game, and not this lawyer.

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    5. Re:does it matter? by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've made a good argument how violence in movies or video games could create more violent people. The thing you haven't shown at all is that this theory is correct. Persuasive arguments are very easy to make. I could probbably make an equally persuasive argument that violence is movies and videogames reduces violence because it releases peoples agressions in a nonviolent way.

      Until one of us shows actual evidence that the theory is correct it's all just a pissing contest as to whose argument _sounds_ better. As far as I'm concerned the only thing that keeps these "violent media causes violence" theories going is that they offer a simple explanation for violence in the society, and a simple solution. People have a strong desire for explanations and solutions... more so than their desire for truth.

      --
      AccountKiller
    6. Re:does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The father of one of these kids went on NATIONAL TELEVISION on FOX NEWS and ADMITTED HIMSELF (without provocation or even direct questioning of it) that all of the guns the children were caught with BELONGED TO HIM.

      So here we have a parent who owned a lot of guns. I don't mean one or two -- I mean a LOT (you saw the photos on TV). He was a gun "collector". AND he failed to lock them up properly so that there was no possible way for his children to get at them. Not only did the kid get the guns but he also managed to get the ammo. Great parenting.

      Of course being a gun nut doesn't make you a bad parenting. But being a gun nut with a bunch of guns that your chidren can access and having a child that would happily steal those weapons, plan a mass murder and then being to embark on said mass murder with friends by his side and the stolen weapons is as sure a sign of "fucked up parenting" as I've *ever* seen.

      In one sentence the father dismissed his son's interest in weapons but admitted he (the father) had an arsenel of weapons and ammo in his house. In the very next sentence, he laid blame not at himself for raising the kid that way or showing any regret that he made the weapons so readily accessible... but instead, he blamed "the gothic belief" (whatever the fuck THAT is) and "videogames".

      A parent with their head up their ass that severely about something as obvious as that is also a parent that probably failed to notice a lot of other things or act on them. Things like their child being withdrawn, sad, depressed, being picked on incessently, being beaten up, being confused, being hurt, being lonely, being suicidal, being homocidal, being delusional and everything else.

      Like I say. Shitty parenting.

    7. Re:does it matter? by richieb · · Score: 3, Insightful
      How many people play violent video games and imagine that the people they are shooting are real?

      I would guess very few, mentally disturbed individuals. There were people who read the Bible and then go on a killing rampage - should we stop people from reading the Bible?

      Or use the simulated violence to release agression?

      As opposed to using actual violence? Is this bad?

      Why not blame CNN - after all they show pictures of real death and mayhem.

      --
      ...richie - It is a good day to code.
    8. Re:does it matter? by paganizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Warning: The following contains something besides a knee-jerk reaction against weapons; if you are unable to stomach this sort of thing, please skip to the next post.

      In this article, it's mentioned that the weapons, not all of which apparently came from one source, had been locked in a big case in the back of the closet

      And from this article, Police said they had recovered two .30-30 rifles, a shotgun, two handguns, two swords, knives, and 2,000 rounds of ammunition

      And, in this article: The firearms belonged to Ronald Lovett. He received his first rifle in 1958 when he was 11 and collected more over the years for target shooting, he said. Matt wasn't interested in guns in the least and never fired one, Ronald Lovett said. When he was born, that was when we locked the stuff away, and most of it has not been touched in 19 years. Ronald Lovett said he kept the handguns in a lockbox and stored the other firearms in a closet in the family's apartment, over a row of stores. Police also recovered 2,000 rounds of ammunition, which Lovett said were 20 and 30 years old.

      One of the pistols, if not more, was a replica civil war era cap and ball pistol.

      If you are deluded enough by the hysterical liberal mass media to consider this an arsenal, then you are completely and totally hopeless, please line up with the rest of the lemmings. The weapons were stored in a approved, safe fashion; the kid showed no sign whatsoever of being a gun nut, never even having fired a weapon when he was obviously aware that they existed.

      The articles do indicate a type of person who would be likely to snap, however; predicting that the person would snap in this fashion would be a little bit difficult, don't you think?

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    9. Re:does it matter? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'd suggest that removing freedom from the majority only to stop a *very* small minority from doing what they may like have done anyway (sure, I'll admit the evidence is out) is a REALLY stupid idea.

      Don't be so quick on the trigger. The post to which you're replying made no suggestion of removing freedom.

      Exposing immature or incompetent people to portrayals of violence is not a good idea. Exposing older kids to portrayals of violence without placing them in a proper context is not a good idea. But that bit of gatekeeping is the job or parents, teachers, and other caretakers, not of state censors.

      Interesting reading from Lt. Col Dave Grossman, a West Point psychology and Military Science professor. (I disagree with his proposed solutions, which involve legislation and litigation, but his data on the problem is pretty solid):

      So will Quake turn you into a monster? By itself, no. If there are other factors pushing you towards violence, it can be a strong influence. And it is conditioning you towards an acceptance of violence; be aware of that, be mindful of what's going on in your brain (always good advice) and be sure to balance it out with counter-influences.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  2. Warriors of What? by Lelon · · Score: 3, Insightful


    As an avid gamer, I can say that I've never heard of this game, and unless there is some evidence on their computers to back up this claim, its basically groundless.

    Offtopic, I love the new gaming icon (Tellah is my favorite video game character of all time!)

  3. warriors of freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you want to go on a huge killing spree and kill lots of innocent people as a "Warrior of Freedom" sign up for the United States Army.

    All the murder, none of the legal problems.

    1. Re:warriors of freedom by Snoopy77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, what the hell, I'll take the karma hit.

      The PsyOps thing is a bunch of crap. It's not even directed at the civilians. Why do civilians need to surrender? They aren't fighting anyone!

      A long way? Compared to dropping atomic bombs on civilains yes but you just cause you've travelled a long way from that does not mean you've reached an ideal destination.

      Your bombing raids in Afghanistan killed more people than 911. You continued use of cluster bombing in Iraq has also killed innocent people. You still refuse to ban landmines and may have even used them in Iraq (you were at least planning to). Despite medical evidence suggesting that they may be harmful for years to come you have pumped both Afghanistan and Iraq full of depleted uranium. You've shot innocent protestors and taken out 'targets of oppotunity' (shoot first, ask later).

      Yeah, war is ugly. Would be nice to avoid it but there is no need to make it uglier.

      --
      "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
  4. Truth? by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >>or is there genuine evidence here?

    Well, is the game installed on any of their computers? If so, then maybe the game has something to do with the group's name. If not, then move along.

    --
    Huh?
  5. Who is to blame? by Hao+Wu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They will blame everyone and everything, except the two causes:

    1) the people who teased them to death for years.
    2) the boys themselves for choosing to plan the crime and carry it out.

    EVERYONE else will be blamed first- you, me, and the internet....

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
  6. Books? by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 4, Insightful
    To anyone who thinks video games should be banned, I ask this question: If the kids were inspired to kill by characters in a book, should we then ban books?

    What about TV? Movies? Magazines? Where does it end?

  7. Rampage Attempt? by Wingnut64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I live quite close to there, and read about it in my local newspaper. The 3 teens had 2 rifles, 2 handguns, a shotgun, knifes and swords. They surrendered when 1 cop showed up and told them to drop their weapons. Rampage my ass, this was just a cry for help. With their numbers and firepower they could have easily killed him, but they didn't. The 18 year old 'leader' just lost his mother (and some other female friend/family member, don't remember which) and didn't fit in at school. He was mentally unstable and socially outcast. Games had little to do with it, except to give them a title to use.

    --
    echo 'Header append X-HD-DVD "0x09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0"' >> /etc/apache2/httpd.conf
  8. Re:My take on videogame violence. by nacturation · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Another interesting question is do violent games desensitize people to violence? Consider an analogy: a boy who grows up in a nudist family won't think anything of seeing naked women -- it's not going to be a big deal. Compare this to a boy who was brought up not even seeing much bare skin at all -- his reaction upon seeing a naked woman will be huge, pardon the pun. At the turn of the century (ie: 1900) it was considered risque for women to show their ankles in public. For a woman to wear a skirt knee-high, she would have been considered a tramp. Times change, and people grow accustomed to the new standard.

    Now a kid who grows up playing violent, realistic games could tend to be lsss affronted by violence. How easy would it be for a kid to look out his apartment window to the street below and imagine getting a perfect rail shot to a person below? Or turning the corner in school and hitting the local nerd with a double-barrel shotgun blast? Now that doesn't mean the kid would necessarily consider acting it out in real life, but is that the first step on a slippery slope towards real violence?

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  9. For the 1000th time, correlation != causation by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lovett's uncle Thomas Crymes said the June graduate of Collingswood High School had been on his computer "constantly."

    "He never went anywhere with anybody," Crymes said.


    Ever think he was on the computer constantly because he was harassed by the other students and had nowhere to go? Maybe that same harassment had something to do with his motive?

    Was the guy that shot up that Lockheed Martin factory also "under the influence" of computer games and violent movies? Or is there a more complex societal problem going on here?

    Ronald Lovett, who works as a electronics repairman on the same block as his apartment, said his son had become withdrawn after his mother's death. His son also often had to defend his younger brother, who has undergone 13 operations for a cleft palate, the father said.

    "When they used to go out when they were little, of course people would pick on the brother, and Matt would have to defend him," Ronald Lovett told CNN. "They didn't get along well with their peers."
    .
    .
    .
    "The boys also had to endure the death of an older half sister who was hit by a car a year after their mother's death, Crymes said."


    What kind of evil SOBs would pick on a kid with a cleft palate whose mother and sister recently died. I thank the Lord that these kids were picked up before they hurt anyone, but if you want to examine "root causes" instead of video games maybe take a look at an utter lack of conscious or morality by all parties involved.

    Evil begets evil.

    Brian Ellenberger

  10. This journalist is so ignorant by BlueTrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Quoted from the article "And among the names Lovett used in a letter left for his family was the Neo, an apparent reference to the main character of The Matrix, which is both a movie series and a computer game." ...

    Instead of pointing out the fact that the movie itself was about cyberpunk, he just said that 'The Matrix' is also a video game.

    I guess that's enough to prove that people who write these kind of articles are ignorant about the subject, are mostly scared about things that they just do not understand and they would prefer that everything would stay the same.

    Maybe we should forbid weapons and take care of our children instead of trying to find evidences that the actual society is responsible of their acts. Guns do not kill, people do. The same for children, they did not went bad because of the actual world, some grow up bad because WE made this world as it is.

    --
    Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
  11. Let's see here... by mcasaday · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • "His son had become withdrawn after his mother's death"
    • "Often had to defend his younger brother, who has undergone 13 operations for a cleft palate."
    • "They didn't get along well with their peers."
    • "Ronald Lovett had focused most of his attention on his younger son, James, because of his disability."
    • "The boys also had to endure the death of an older half sister."
    • "The classmates said he had been mocked for his bow-legged and stooped gait and his clothes."
    • "Matt was an easy target, but he never lashed out. He just took it."
    • "Everybody picked on him"

    The only reasonable explanation for a kid to lash out under these circumstances is the evil influence of games like Mech Commando. I just can't see it any other way.

    I certainly wouldn't put any of the responsibility for these crimes on the people who made up these kids' world. There is no way that people are to blame for this sort of thing.

    It has to be video games. Or rock music. Or D&D. (D&D!? That's sooo 80's.) Or marijuana. Or the devil. Or a malevelont, super-intelligent giant chicken from the center of the Earth. Anything, as long as people don't have to come face to face with their role in the lives of these kids.

  12. Bullying... by iopha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    Lovett also was the target of teasing. The classmates said he had been mocked for his bow-legged and stooped gait and his clothes.

    My guess would be that over 75% of teenagers play or have played 'violent' video games at some point or another. I'm guessing but it feels more or less right. That's probably millions-- tens of millions-- of video game players in the US and across the developed world. Are they all potential killers? Of course not. To argue so would involve twisting statistics around in a 'war on drugs' fashion-- maintaining that marijuana is a 'gateway' drug, which simply isn't true. Very few users of marijuana go on to do harder drugs. But many that do harder drugs have smoked pot (and continue to do so), which is what alarmist conservative organizations, in a thorough betrayal of libertarian roots, emphasize in order to restrain civil liberties.

    But there is simply not enough of a correlation to warrant limits on video games (a form of free speech IMHO anyway) even *if* in specific cases a causal argument *might* be made. The point is that you can't do sociology by anecdote only. By all rights, statistically, toasters are probably deadlier than video games anyway.

    Given the utter lack of *any* systematic correlation between playing video games and engaging in violent, anti-social behaviour, perhaps we should look at other possible causes, Like the bullying and teasing which goes on in every schoolyard, every day, hmmm? I am convinced that the solace this kid found in video games was a result of being called a 'fag' constantly, of being beaten up for lacking social grace, for failure to heed the intricate, consumerist protocol of North American teenhood. Any 'obsession' with video games was a symptom and NOT the problem.

    Bah, sheer sensationalism and a refusal to look at root causes-- of course this seems to be a recurrent theme these days.

    Reminds me of that Onion article--Columbine Jocks Safely Resume Bullying. It's a sad indicator of the state of our civlization when we learn nothing from tragedy, but that's another topic entirely.

    iopha

    1. Re:Bullying... by phorm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've seen physically "different" kids that are perfectly accepted among their peers, and I've also seen physically "normal" kids labeled nerds, geeks, etc. and shunned

      Yes, but it's one thing to be bullied on an aspect you can change (clothes, hairstyle, BO due to lack of showering) - and another to be picked on because of something you cannot change.

      Of course, it's also one of the most common practices. Anything that makes a target is fair game, and the more pronounced the better.

      Still, it is not so much a question of "what" is being picked on, as "why." And most "why's" are not a good enough reason to make somebody's life a living hell. I would know, I was infamously unpopular (everybody knew me well enough to shun me) in High School.

      It's also a cycle. I never had a chance to become more popular in school, so I was never ever to develop overly many friends and greater social habits. After HS, things changed a lot though, as I escaped my isolated reputation and built a better one. Hell, I've even got laid a few times, and I'm a sysadmin/programmer.
      I'll always carry a certain inherant distrust/wariness of others - and I especially find the opposite sex better for friendship, I'm still not great with "the guys" - but it could have been worse.

      I never blew any heads off, though I will admit that the feeling of helplessness made any possible retribution slightly attractive. Perhaps what these kids need to learn is that "High School does not last forever." You can't make them popular as getting rid of bullies does not remove the seclusion/isolation issues, but you can give them hope for the future (I hope).

  13. How about the news media itself? (rant) by k98sven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really.. They're quick to publish spectacular theories on violence in computer games, movies, art, and just about every aspect of culture but themeselves.

    How about removing the beam from their own eyes?
    Modern news media (and especially the American ones) are flooded with violence.
    There is a key difference here though: People, even young children, understand that films, computer games etc. are fiction. News media, on the other hand, is treated as fact, no matter how distorted the picture is.

    People are lead to believe that violence is constantly increasing (even when it's not), that their neighborhoods are unsafe, and that a prowler, burglar or hoodlum could be waiting for them at any minute.

    Excessive violence in news reporting leads to excessive fear. Fear in turn, leads to violence.

    Blame the media is a popular game.. but they still don't get nearly enough criticism, and you can wonder why..

  14. There are no thought crimes... by sTalking_Goat · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Just after Columbine happaned I remember spending a lot of time during class working out the easiest way to take out the most people by myself with a limited number of weapons.

    I sat around and thought about the merits of snipering from a tower vs. armed assualt complete with smoke and infared goggles. I remember thinking about it in detail planning every little thing I could think of, researching ammo types, max lethal range for certain easily available rifles etc.

    Now granted my knowledge of firearms came alot from Video Games, but not any more than from Tom Clancy books and the History Channel. In fact since this was pre-CS I'd say most of my knowledge came from the History channel, especially some wonderful documentaries they aired on assasinations, that thought me the merits of the AK-47/74.

    Now the difference between me and these guys is a simple one. I probably did as much planning as they did if not more. In fact I dare say I fantasized about it. But I stopped just short of collecting weapons and making the large leap between "I'll think about killing half my school" and "I'm going to kill half my school".

    Why is this? The answer to that question is the fundamental issue here. I'm am not violent by nature. I tend to avoid fights even though I'm 6' 2" 230lbs. The fights I've been in, I've tended to reign in my punches at the last minute because I don't like hurting people.

    I shudder to think what I'd be like if I had a violent personality. I can bet I'd be a lot more dangerous than these guys, more effecient anyway.

    And thats what it comes down to basically. Not video-games or media in general. Having the knowledge to do something isn't the same as doing it. Despite what the media keeps telling everyone. There is something else that makes you violent or not. I wish people would stop looking for easy answers.

    --

    My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...

  15. This kid was stupid long before this by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He was born braindead. And then had help from is 'parents'.

    "Oaklyn teenagers also say he also practiced martial arts and had compiled a list of his enemies since elementary school."

    Any 'link' between this incident and video games, or the other popular theory, The Matrix, is mere hand waving by the media.

    I'd expect most teens that have played video games have played at least some that involve "blowing something up", or shooting something. All but the most bland edutainment games, and openended games (SimCity, etc) involve some sort of destruction.

    Could Frogger be linked to massive roadkill on the highways?
    Could SimCity be linked to corrupt politics and poor city managament?
    Could Bewitched be linked to a rise in adult witchcraft?

    Damn, these guys are stupid. But it does sell newspapers.

  16. Re:Funny quote from one of the linked articles: by ninti · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You don't think the skills you use in FPS games will be no help at all in real life? I have to disagree, I think there are several things that can be transfered. Take the idea of mulitiple shot firing. Most people put in a real situation will either fire one shot and stop or fire their whole clip at a target regardless of its status. Playing video games teaches you that firing in small batches is a very effective way to kill something while controlling ammunition (and is taught by the military for that reason), and that once a target is down you can stop firing. Leading your target if they are moving is another thing that games can teach you to do well. Games can make you much better at pattern recognition and evaluation for targets, shooting multiple targets, and switching targets fast.

    I had never picked up a gun until several years ago, and when I did I found I was actually quite good at it on the first day. I attribute that to, at least in part, years of video games playing. There is a reason that the military is starting to use video games as training devices for their troops, they do help you with certain skills involved in combat situations.

    While I agree that this guy is a moron, and that there is certainly a lot of the physical aspect of gun training that video games will not help you with, I do not think you can completely discount the training aspects of video game use.

  17. Re:Guns kill not games by Cychwyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And guess where all the now illegal guns would go. Not disappear into a puff of green smoke, but probably sold/given/stolen into the hands of criminals. So now they've got even more guns and the "good guys" have none. I don't think making the possession of firearms illegal over night is going to solve anything, nor do I believe that owning a gun should be a right, not a earned privelege. The Canadians seem to have found the right balance, but how to get there from here...

  18. So what what by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So what if they were inspired by a video game or by The Matrix. The entertainment industry still has a ways to go before it catches up to God, Allah, and Jesus. More people kill based on religious beliefs than anything and I don't see a whole lot of regulations on worship.

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
  19. Re:does it matter? (yes) by waterbear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You've made a good argument how violence in movies or video games could create more violent people. The thing you haven't shown at all is that this theory is correct. Persuasive arguments are very easy to make. ......Until one of us shows actual evidence that the theory is correct it's all just a pissing contest .....

    It's surprising how often sceptics about the link between portrayals of violence and the actuality of copycat violence often shelter behind demands for unusual levels of evidence. In ordinary life, people tend to judge that when there is a striking similarity between the individual characteristics of what first of all one person does in public or shows to the public, and then what other people do shortly afterwards, it _is_ evidence of copying -- absent something that would reasonably account for the similarity even if the activities were independently conceived. What else is fashion?

    Copycat violence has been well known at least for a couple of hundred years -- an early example followed Goethe's book 'Sufferings of Werther' that was followed for a time by a wave of similar-pattern romantic pistol suicides among disappointed young men. There are many much more recent examples where striking similarity between the characteristics of the prototype or image, and then of the violence that followed after it, make the inference of copying overwhelmingly probable.

    The way that many people nevertheless resist accepting that this kind of copying is a fact indicates that there is something specifically causing that resistance -- and in some cases I suspect the cause of that resistance is probably $$$$.

  20. Blame the Game and We'll all be Safe by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Let's see ... we have a 18-year old whose mother died when he was 9, whose half-sister died when he was 10, whose younger brother had a serious birth defect and had to be defended from aggressive teasing, whose father was trying to be a single dad while wokring long hours. The kid was relentlessly teased throughout school. He was depressed, withdrawn, and isolated. His father said on a TV interview that he wished he had been able to get more counseling for the boy after his mother's death.

    Yup, it was the Matrix and that video game all right. Ban them and we'll all be able to sleep well at night.

    The schools that tolerated harassment of students of a nature that would get an adult fired from almost any workplace had NOTHING to do with it. The pathetic social support system in the USA, and the general lack of good low-cost mental health programs had NOTHING to do with it. It's the games.

    1. Re:Blame the Game and We'll all be Safe by Cyno · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No amount of counseling is going to fix a sick society.