Slashdot Mirror


Australian Counter Strike Shooters

jaronc writes "News.com.au are reporting an Australian court has been told that two men dressed as characters from 'Counter Strike' shot and killed a man during a Sydney home invasion in 2002. Let the blaming begin......"

508 comments

  1. Whew.. by LilGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    At least it wasn't a GTA re-enactment, that woulda been much uglier... unless of course the CTs didn't difuse the bomb.

    --

    You're nothing; like me.
  2. Dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just as Australia allowed HL2 to be released...hope this doesn't hurt future games...

  3. 'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by chesapeake · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So this means they were wearing either army fatigues or a shirt with glasses. I fail to see how that's related specifically to CS, unless they went around screaming out "fire in the hole" and "it's gonna blow!".

    Even assuming that they became unhinged from playing too much CS, doesn't mean that we should ban it. People did go crazy and kill people before computer games existed...

    (This is still tragic, however, and I don't intend to lessen the tragedy.)

    1. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by PDA_Boy · · Score: 3, Funny
      So this means they were wearing either army fatigues or a shirt with glasses.

      If they'd been running around naked, the claim would have simply been changed to "dressed in the manner of a Counter Strike mod".

      This looks like the kind of situation in which it would be ridiculous to allow common sense to prevail over sensationalism.

    2. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting
      People did go crazy and kill people before computer games existed...
      Yes, but they did it in a fun, Gov't sanctioned manner (wars). One of the downsides to a civilized society is a lack of good outlets for sick, chemically imblanced people to kill and maim. But hey, it's cool, the current administration is taking care of that :D.

      Jokes aside, any society is going to have a miniscule percentage of really, really sick people. In the past they got jobs as torturers and executioners. Now that we're civil, we've still got those people, and they're still sick bastards. We need better systems in place to catch them before they do any harm. But damned if I know how to do it.
      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    3. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the number of s&m clubs is amazing, and they are only growing...

    4. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Call me crazy but I don't believe you can really be born a murder. Granted their are neuro-chemical imbalances and all that would increase the likely hood. But I have to say pointing a finger at even an implied reason is just as silly as blaming CS. Ridiculous.
      I believe there always is a slow degradation of mental balance that accures that everyone just writes off as them having a a bad day or moods. Slowly the mind folds on yourself and you become retrospective with your mind focused on one thing. Logic goes, if you ever had it, then ethics and finally morals and you've draw in on yourself with a focus like work or t.v. or games.
      Nope, it always comes down to his enviroment forcing stressors on them they make small innocent bad decisions, like withdrawing from conflicts, which build until they overwelm the person. It's very sad cause it's not that hard to spot if you just take time to look at someone else. A little help at the beginning can save lives.
      Life is exponential... one factor multiplies and multiplies and multiplies......

    5. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We need better systems in place..."

      Two words: THE MILITARY.

    6. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by bersl2 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It would be helpful if periodic visits to mental health professionals were just as usual as visits to a physician or pediatrician or dentist. Granted, it's harder to diagnose mental problems than physical ones, but basic preventative screening would go a long way.

    7. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by frankvl · · Score: 2, Funny

      So this means they were wearing either army fatigues or a shirt with glasses

      OR they were dressed up like those little brain eating jumpy thingies. In that case, I would indeed blame the game.

    8. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by oakbox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There IS a test for this, it's called the Hartman Value Profile. It's basically a test to see if you are evil. The Nixon administration was planning on implementing it to test kids to see who would end up going to jail later in life.

      The test was accurate, and unchangeable. If you were a sick person at 8, you were going to be just as screwy at 18 or 28. It looked at your world view.

      Anyway, telling someone, "You're values are screwy, you'll end up in jail or as a burden to society and there's nothing you can do about it" lacks a certain . . . niceness. So the idea was killed off.

      Now the test is used to see if you would be a good salesperson :)

      --
      Not just answers, the correct questions.
    9. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with that is that in the abcence of a war to get them killed in, you're taking the sickest people and teaching them how to kill effectively...

    10. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1, Funny

      Nonsense. People killed prior to 'civilized society' much like they do today: with knives, poison, their bare hands, guns. Nothing much has changed.

      I will say, however, that there was more convention made in society for the pathologically deranged. I imagine that's what we've got politics for now.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    11. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they got a high score

    12. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That sounds really terrific. And if the government doesn't approve of our thinking and tests results they should be allowed to imprison and/or drug/lobotomise us. Fuck that. The government has no business mandating how people are allowed to think or behave until *after* they have committed a crime.

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
    13. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If they'd been running around naked, the claim would have simply been changed to "dressed in the manner of a Counter Strike mod".

      You mean like this attempt of a naked guy to board a plane heading to Australia?

    14. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by ideatrack · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      This looks like the kind of situation in which it would be ridiculous to allow common sense to prevail over sensationalism.

      Two words: presidential election.

    15. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by arose · · Score: 1, Funny
      Now the test is used to see if you would be a good salesperson :)
      Let me guess: they take the ones with srewed values? :-D
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    16. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by famebait · · Score: 1

      I say re-introduce real gladiator fights.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    17. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Winner of the fight gets a free iPod?

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    18. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have to respectfully disagree. Many of these "professionals" still follow the works of Freud or Jung. Many still believe that Rorschach blots actually mean something. Many think that recovered memories are all true.

      While so many quacks exist in the profession, and while so many superstitions are still touted as truth, I am staying as far away as possible from any mental health professional.

      What we do need is a complete overthrow of established Psychiatry and Psychology to allow some real science to be brought in and taught. Therapists should be scientists first, and counsellors second. Of course they should be good at counselling, but they need to know why counselling works, and the biological bases behind psychological symptoms.

    19. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and the wiberal wied wall da way wome

    20. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by kfg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      In the past they got jobs as torturers and executioners.

      Whereas now we sentence them to a term in Parliament.

      KFG

    21. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when you know that saying "I get the urge to cut someone into itty bitty pieces, when my friend Harold (he's right here, you know. I don't know if you noticed him) tells me that it's ok" gets you a one way ticket to the mental ward, you're probably going to lie about your screening.

      While it's in your own best interests to tell your physician of any unusual symptoms, it is usually against your interests to tell a psychiatrist of anything that will get you locked up.

    22. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by AgBullet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Gawd-daymn. They must play a lot of CS over in the Middle East...

    23. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by PyraX · · Score: 0

      Im sure this is just the news certain groups have been waiting for, regardless of any coincidences

    24. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by rishistar · · Score: 1

      If they were carrying a 'Hello Kitty' torch they could blame it on Doom 3. Except the game wasn't out when the crime was committed.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    25. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1
      As of Nov. 3, 2004, I am now a member of the ACLU and the EFF. Donate, because we are going to need every cent.


      Might want to add the NRA to that. Get those Second Amendment rights put to their rightful use.

    26. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by mikael · · Score: 1

      So this means they were wearing either army fatigues or a shirt with glasses.

      If they'd been running around naked, the claim would have simply been changed to "dressed in the manner of a Counter Strike mod".


      And if they were wearing cheap polyester off-the-shelf suits, they would have been characters from Leisure Suit Larry.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    27. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by c0p0n · · Score: 1

      ...two men dressed as characters from 'Counter Strike'...

      Yeah. Let's kill all those crazy Delta Force bastards, they're dressed almost exactly as the "counter" forces. They must be potential murderers!!!

      --

      Your head a splode
    28. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by goatan · · Score: 1
      It would be helpful if periodic visits to mental health professionals were just as usual as visits to a physician or pediatrician or dentist. Granted, it's harder to diagnose mental problems than physical ones, but basic preventative screening would go a long way.

      It's seems the more someone visits a mental health profesional the more mental problems they end up with. Go in thinking your normal get told you fancy your mother or something equaly odd and come out with some real problems. Oh and who decide what is a problem and what to do about it, most head shrinkers i have met have more problems than there patients.

      --
      Saying Apple is better than MS is like saying Botulism is better than rabies.

    29. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by krymsin01 · · Score: 1

      Or Vice City.

      --
      stuff
    30. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by the+bluebrain · · Score: 1

      In "Island" Aldous Huxley suggests that these imballanced people be emloyed in some area where they have a physical outlet, such as being a lumberjack.

      Monty Python goes one step further, of course, and suggests that what these imballanced people *really* want to do is to wear "suspenders and a bra", and to be "just like mama".

      ... is there a "Monty Python's Lumberjack Song" mod for CS?

      --
      yes, we have no bananas
    31. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The government has no business mandating how people are allowed to think or behave until *after* they have committed a crime."

      You reckon do you ? What about all those people in Guantanmo bay who are kept there because "if we let them out they may commit terrorist atrocities"

    32. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That was half-life, not counterstrike.

    33. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by TomServo · · Score: 1

      This seems obvious to me, but somehow I doubt that Counter Strike teaches anyone how to kill more effectively than one would intuitively know given how a gun works.

      I honestly don't see it being more effective to zigzag back and forth blasting wildly, all while screaming "CAMPING FAGORT!11!eleven!!", and bitching about AWPs than any non-CS player could be.

      Back a little more on subject, I play a LOT of racing sims. They can teach a lot of the fundamentals. You learn things like the proper line around a track, how to use the throttle and brake to steer rather than relying on the steering wheel, etc etc. I do think it helps. However, it's no substitute for the real thing. That also, IMHO, applies in cases like this. You can learn some fundamentals like how to communicate and work in a group (as long as you're on a private server, good luck on a public one) and that taking the time to line up your shot is more effective than spraying like an idiot, but it's still not going to help you any more than a basic lesson on gun usage will, and certainly not going to make you an expert marksman or anything.

    34. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "She's gonna blow!" thank you very much.

      I bet they were in standard L337 Crew uniform. Ah, my homies. Solidarity!

      You can tell them just from their silhouettes, did you know? The mirror shades are required.

    35. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by SQLz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, what tipped police off was the use of the word 'gay', in every sentence.

    36. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by gijsvanswaaij · · Score: 0

      Therapists should be scientists first, and counsellors second. Of course they should be good at counselling, but they need to know why counselling works, and the biological bases behind psychological symptoms.

      What you are talking about is neuropsychology. This branch of science that is still in an early stage, and therefore it will be almost impossible to draw this type of conclusions based on neuropsychological methods. We simply don't understand enough of how the brain works.

      And what do you mean with "superstitions"? Apart from a few exceptions, modern theories on psychology are all quite well founded. Why else would there be so much money pumped into research on both human and animal behaviour? As long as you stay away from gurus and all kinds of "alternative" healers, you should be OK.

    37. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Iron+Sun · · Score: 1

      You do know that Australia isn't part of America, don't you?

    38. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by r2q2 · · Score: 1

      I think denying a primal instinct is unnatural and doesn't work. Sometimes everyone is blood thirsty and for most people video games will suffice. The really screwed up people settle for the real thing.

      --
      My UID is prime is yours?
    39. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by T'hain+Esh+Kelch · · Score: 0

      So this means they were wearing either army fatigues or a shirt with glasses. I fail to see how that's related specifically to CS, unless they went around screaming out "fire in the hole" and "it's gonna blow!".

      Let's just be glad for the fact that they didnt screamed 'ULTRA KILL!!!'.

    40. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by duffahtolla · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But there are people born without any sense of "other". These people are considered cold and heartless and are the ones that can spontaneously become sociopaths. What you describe is what can happen to normal people, but presupposes that all people are "normal". This is not the case.

      When an eight year old thinks pulling wings off of baby birds is just a way to pass the time, you've a dangerous sociopath in the making.

    41. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 1
      The Nixon administration was planning on implementing it to test kids to see who would end up going to jail later in life.

      The plan was dropped after Nixon tried the test himself, and flunked.

    42. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by DrSkwid · · Score: 1


      Four Other Words : Prime Minister of Australia

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    43. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by xeyr · · Score: 5, Funny

      I live in Australia and I'm not so sure about that...

    44. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by DrSkwid · · Score: 1


      Melly ... was suffering from manic depression, or bi-polar disorder.

      Perhaps it was a desperate attempt to recapture the flag with no armour and just using gauntlet

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    45. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by erick99 · · Score: 1

      The article was not specific about how they were dressed so they could have been dressed in a manner that was more specific to a character or perhaps dressed as you suggested. You can't be sure without more detail.

      --
      http://www.busyweather.com/
    46. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      An AC wrote: The worst tragedy here is that the victims should've been safe behind Australia's gun control laws. All the law did was render them defenseless. :-(

      Too few details to say conclusively... but I'm inclined to agree.

    47. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by duffahtolla · · Score: 1
      A bizarre and recent case of someone who is not normal:

      http://news.google.com/news?q=boy+kill+family+shre k&btnG=Search+News

    48. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or create new jobs for the bastards...

    49. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by ryanvm · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how that's related specifically to CS, unless they went around screaming out "fire in the hole" and "it's gonna blow!".

      I don't know - even that's pretty thin. Now if they were throwing flashbangs in front of each other as they tried to enter the house I could see the connection.

    50. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Well, we used to be allowed to say "hey, that dude's crazy, someone lock him up". Now that's impossible.

      Granted, such a system is open for abuse and exploitation by the powerful against the powerless.

      But now you have multiple serial rapists/murderers going to a couple of years of outpatient 'counseling' are declared 'cured' and *nobody* is allowed to keep an eye on them or treat them in any way differently in fear of violating their civil rights.

      Needless to say that at this point, the pendulum has swung too far in favor of civil rights, but there are a lot of people who post on /. that would fight tooth&nail to prevent any sort of a swing back toward punishment, evaluation, or any sort of govt surveillance.

      Basically, you can't have it both ways. "Freedom" and "Security" are at the extremes mutually exclusive (at least when you are talking about Homo Sapiens Sapiens as we know them). A society that is 100% based on "civil liberties uber alles" is little more than a State of Nature. Empty-headed slogans aside, the concept of 'society' is the needful trading of liberties for security on many levels.

      --
      -Styopa
    51. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by JerkBoB · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What we do need is a complete overthrow of established Psychiatry and Psychology to allow some real science to be brought in and taught.

      That you lump these two professions together shows that you don't truly understand the distinctions between them. That's OK, you're not alone by far. In my experience, most people just assume that they're synonyms.

      Here's the key distinction between the two: a Psychiatrist is an M.D., meaning that they have gone through the same 4 years of medical school as any other doctor. They are a doctor first, and have spent time in the emergency room and the ob/gyn wing and on the inpatient units. They've done surgical procedures and have likely seen patients die in the OR or ER. In most training programs, they do a whole year of nothing but medicine after they graduate from medical school.

      Psychologists go to university to study theory. They have the degree of PhD. They are no more a medical doctor than your history prof or your CS prof. If I were in a car accident and there happened to be a Psychiatrist and a Psychologist driving by, I'd sure as hell rather have the Psychiatrist getting out to take a look at me while the Psychologist called the EMTs.

      I don't make this distinction to denigrate Psychologists, but calling for more science in the field of Psychiatry shows that you don't really understand the field.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    52. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by orpx · · Score: 1

      One of the downsides to a civilized society

      One of the downsides to a civilized society is that it will never be 'civilized' enough to host the sanity of humanity. There's always going to be some arrogant asshole who labels another chemically imbalanced because they dont like their cookies and tea at 12. When cookies and tea causes all the problems.

    53. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Taladar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Being against the government having the right to do something against you before you commit your first crime and being against letting these people live freely a few years after their first crime are not mutually exclusive. I think we can afford to not let them out if they are proven guilty but we would really open the system for abuse if we give the government the right to lock someone up before they do something illegal.

    54. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by ilikecaffeine · · Score: 1
      When an eight year old thinks pulling wings off of baby birds is just a way to pass the time, you've a dangerous sociopath in the making.
      True. But what's the cause of that? The melding of gametes 8 years before, or the time in between? I say when an eight year old thinks pulling wings off of baby birds is just a way to pass the time, you've already made a dangerous sociopath years before.
    55. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by RichDiesal · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt the validity of a test that outright asks you "Would you torture people in a concentration camp?" Right now, integrity tests are used to predict future job performance in HR firms because the degree to which you are a decent human being seems to indicate the degree to which you will succeed in a work environment. But within integrity testing exists two camps - overt testing and personality-based testing. Overt testing is much less valid because the test asks you, outright, if you're a decent human being. Most people with low integrity, when something important is on the line, will lie their asses off to get a good score (called "faking good"). By camouflaging the questions (a personality-based test), you can get much more accurate responses. The same problem looks like it would exist with the Harman Value Profile, except instead of asking you "are you a decent human being?", it asks "are you a raging psychotic killer?" Who would possibly test highly on this except the most psychotic individuals? And if you're only going to point out only the top 0.5% of the crazies, what real use is it anyway?

    56. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by CoffeeJedi · · Score: 1

      the ONLY scenario that i can think of.. is that they dressed up in dark clothing to be concealed, when police asked about their outfits, one of them made a remark about dressing up like Counter Strike. CS didn't really have anything to do with it, it was probably the only thing the killer could really relate to about their outfits. The press gets a copy of the police report, sees there's something about "counter strike", does a little research... and BAM, its a new "video-game murder" when the real motivation is probably something completely different.

      --
      May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage. RAmen.
    57. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      Wonder how if the Nixon administration would have passed that test.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    58. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 3, Funny

      Over here in the states, we refer to your PM as "Governor Howard" :)

    59. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know you got modded "Funny", but I also live in Australia and I find my sense of humour has taken a bit of a battering over the last couple of weeks...

    60. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by xeyr · · Score: 1

      Believe me, mine too. But by being a smartarse, I might make it through the next 3 / 4 years.

    61. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by TheOrquithVagrant · · Score: 1

      > I seriously doubt the validity of a test that
      > outright asks you "Would you torture people in
      > a concentration camp?"

      The HR test doesn't ask that. The questions are not "would you..." this or that - the phrases are devoid of such context, and the test simply asks you to enumerate phrases such as "torture a person", "slavery", "baby", etc on a scale of badness/godness, from most positive to most negative.

    62. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      You'd have to be picky about your choice in military organization. Many of the world's military forces spend quite a bit of time not killing people. It makes for a fairly poor outlet if your "talent" is lacking a mental block to killing. And, in fact, if this particular talent stems from poor impulse control, you'll likely find it very difficult to function in a military organization.

      Granted - there are exceptions. But those exceptions tend to involve military forces that do a lot of dying if they bump up against anybody other than another incompetent force or civilians. But then, the same flippant response that calls out "the military" might also comment that getting these people killed is the whole point.

    63. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


      Even assuming that they became unhinged from playing too much CS, doesn't mean that we should ban it. People did go crazy and kill people before computer games existed...


      Yes. But we can't go around baning God, can we?

      Especially when God has personally told us about evils like Counter Strike and Dungeons and Dragons. Fantasy is all evil, you know. I've got some quotes taken out of context from some scripture based on ancient Middle Eastern mythology to prove it.

      Wait. Did I just fork to a tangent?
    64. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by mink · · Score: 1

      I have never seen this before, explain how using only the throttle and brake you can stter a car?

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    65. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Whatever dude, you are obviously still in your anal phase!

    66. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by cabjf · · Score: 1

      The government has no business mandating how people are allowed to think or behave until *after* they have committed a crime.

      Wait, I saw that moview, Minority Report with Tom Cruise (one of his better movies)!

    67. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by WoBIX · · Score: 1

      What makes you think they're crazy? Using the "I'm-not-responsible-for-my-own-actions" ploy has been successful for years. 1) First, pick a popular media item. 2) Incorporate an aspect of that into a crime. 3) If you get caught, blame it on over exposure to that particular game/show/song. 4) Get reduced sentence due to mental defect. It doesn't sound crazy at all. Devious and sick, but not crazy.

    68. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I have never seen this before, explain how using only the throttle and brake you can stter a car?

      I don't think (or at least hope) he meant with no steering, but more like with controlled sliding (drafting), etc. That means there is less steering done by the driver and you can take turns much faster that way.

    69. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by hesiod · · Score: 1

      He didn't say he agreed with prisoners being sent to Guantanamo. If he has a problem with gow regulating thought, he probably has a problem with government wrongly imprisoning & torturing people.

    70. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Why else would there be so much money pumped into research on both human and animal behaviour?

      Umm... because when there is a buck (or a billion) to be made, many people are willing to do whatever they can to get it.

      Do you honestly think the pharmaceutical companies really care if you actually need their product or not? Most of the time, no, (there are responsible companies out there) they just want to move as much product as possible. For instance, there is no proof that any of those penis enlargement pills work, but the pushers keep spouting great claims anyway, regardless of the truth.

    71. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      In that case, Good News Bersl2! Manditory Governmental Mental Health Screening is here! Well, they are trying it out on children first. And pregenant women, too. As of 2005, all schools must hold regular screening for mental ilness in all of their students, and all pregenant women must also report for montly mental screening, during their entire pregenancy, and for 1 year after. You see, according to the "New Freedom Commission" mental problems are rampant in the "comsumers of all demographics", and often go undiagnosed. Therefore, they recommend that "consumers of all ages" be screened for mental illness regularly, starting at age 0! That's right, newborns must be screened, too!

      Yearly screening for all school chidren is nearly here. Some people voted against it, saying its already a problem that children are diagnosed with diseases and given psychotropics for "normal childhood rambunciousness", and their parents arrested for NOT given them the drugs, and this screening will only result in an even larger percentage of the population being on mind altering drugs their entire life, when there is not a thing wrong with them. The vote was 94 Republicans and 1 single Democrat, against 118 Republicans, 196 Democrats, and 1 Independent, not enough to stop this ammendment to a bill that is otherwise all about Appropriations. Therefore, to stop the bill now, the only choice is to cut funding for schools and other programs!

      And this is just the first step. As I said earlier, their ultimate goal is to screen "consumers of all ages." Just like Soviet Russia did, in fact. No need to adress critisizms from people who are then diagnosed with paranoid schitzophrenia, or dementia, right? And they cannot defend themselves against the charges, because they are not accused of any crime, they are just sick and need help.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    72. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > The plan was dropped after Nixon tried the test himself, and flunked.

      Are you joking? I ask because it's funny, but I wouldn't doubt it was the truth.

    73. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by lazn · · Score: 2, Funny

      "They are no more a medical doctor than your history prof or your CS prof."

      True that, my Counter Strike professor was not even done with highschool yet, much less his medical degree.

      ==>Lazn

    74. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by clem9796 · · Score: 1

      I agree, that's the same as saying GTA trains you to become a mass murderer. Well, if that's the case, i'm going to start playing Madden 2005 more often and become a football star.

      Personally, i think you start off cracked, outsiders just assume it's the environment. I can see environment if you were held in a POW camp for thirty years, or constantly being ridiculed and abused by parents, bullies etc, but not a video game. Rainbow 6 does not teach you how to infiltrate an enemy camp.

      I play everything from E rated to M.. am I okay? Well, i guess that's a personal opinion too, but i think so. I've also been on the internet since 5 bucks per hour text games and i'm not a p0rn searching movie bashing internet junkie either... OTOH, i'm pretty toughened up when it comes to seeing graphic stuff online because i've been exposed to it for so long so maybe i am a little screwy. It's all in the eye of the beholder. Now, back to Madden :-)

      --
      IANALOOA
    75. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Sign me up.
      Anyone know where to get some acid for my supersooker?

    76. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, the parent post broke my joke as his sig was changed. Oh well, it used to be a pyramid scam sig.

    77. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      There's this psychiatrical illness named ADHD,
      it makes you very active and action minded,
      coupled with short attention spans.
      Some develop into artists, some into criminals,
      according to theory largely because of upbringing.

      Disclaimer: IANAP, but my mother teaches at a school
      for children with (severe) psychiatrical problems.
      autism, paranoia, ADHD, etc.
      They have classes of 4 children, and that's a strain.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    78. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just FYI, the comment you're responding to was talking about the military teaching people to kill, not counter strike.

    79. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by msim · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which, it's 8:30am and i'm at work and i already think i need a drink. Fortunately not "another" drink.

      I'm shocked that the elections bombed so badly here in .au, as soon as i heard bush got in for another term the first thing i thought was "that's it, the worlds screwed"*.

      * That's assuming it isn't already.

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
    80. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      from the link:

      [...]he might have fallen out and could have been sucked up by an engine," she said.

      "If he had survived that and was in the wheel well when the landing gear was retracted,[...]

      If he survived falling out and being sucked into an engine, I'd be seriously fucking impressed. Either the person who wrote the article or the person delivering this quote is a mongoloid*.

      * Honestly, no insult meant to mongoloids.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    81. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by kaladorn · · Score: 1

      However, it's no substitute for the real thing. That also, IMHO, applies in cases like this. You can learn some fundamentals like how to communicate and work in a group (as long as you're on a private server, good luck on a public one) and that taking the time to line up your shot is more effective than spraying like an idiot, but it's still not going to help you any more than a basic lesson on gun usage will, and certainly not going to make you an expert marksman or anything.

      No, Ghost Recon might be a bit closer (trying run and shoot is just going to get you dead - using cover, keeping low, firing controlled bursts, using area effect and indirect weapons where you don't care much about collateral damage, etc. - those work and are a bit closer to reality). Still, having been an infantryman, let me say that paintball and good FPS simulators like GR can teach you some useful lessons. Of course, they can teach you lots of really really bad ones. The problem is, someone not formally trained by something like a proper military will never know the difference. And learning to drop a mouse on something and click is not the same physical skill as holding a long arm or sidearm steady and aiming at a moving, possibly firing, target. And in the game, you just hit space and respawn if a round kills you because you made a bad decision. Most of us can't do that in real life.

      There is no substitute for the real training, but then most militaries don't train to shoot unarmed civilians.

      --
      -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
    82. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by kaladorn · · Score: 1

      Jokes aside, any society is going to have a miniscule percentage of really, really sick people. In the past they got jobs as torturers and executioners. Now that we're civil, we've still got those people, and they're still sick bastards. We need better systems in place to catch them before they do any harm. But damned if I know how to do it.

      It would probably surprise you to know most executioners and torturers (well, some of the latter, probably most of the former) were not sadistic men. They were, in many cases, salary men - public servants, paid by the city or town or kingdom. They, in some cases, tried to be very scientific about their job, doing it as well as possible because it was a legally mandated punishment - they took no particular glee in the hurt that was caused. Corporal punishment has been around for a long time and has had some success as a deterent. Capital punishment has been around for a long time and has had some success also.

      I think most sick people in olden days did the same kind of thing they do today - quietly conducted crimes or became outright brigands and murderers in lawless areas.

      --
      -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
    83. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Your logic can be applied equally for the reverse. You say that people are born without murderous tendancies, and outside influences negatively shape them into killers.

      Could it not also follow that people are born killers, and the morals and standards imposed on people by society quell those urges?

      Keep in mind that Humans are omnivorous, predatory animals, so a killing instinct would be expected. That being the case then it would make MORE sense to assume that we are all born killers, and are conditioned otherwise.

      Now even in this reversed scenario, the "possible" negative implications of violent media are the same. In your example, violent media influences a normally non-violent person and turns them violent. In my example a violent person who has been conditioned by society to be non-violent, is influenced by media in a way that is counter to societal conditioning. Either way, violent media would appear to have a negative effect.

      My personal belief? If someone is a killer, they are a killer. No game or movie will change that. Media influence may change the way the killer commits the act, but the act itself falls on the person.

    84. Re:'Dressed' as Counterstrike shooters by TomServo · · Score: 1

      Sorry for EXTREMELY slow response.

      Generally, when you've got a car at the limit of adhesion, you're already turning the wheel to just the right amount for the angle you're going for, and you're near 100% of your tires' adhesion. At that point, turning the wheel more to turn sharper will just drive the front tires over 100%, making them wash out, you can actually turn *less* by turning the wheel farther into the turn because the tires break adhesion and start skidding, generally losing about 30% of their grip (if my memory of the Skip Barber lessons is correct).

      Once you're at the limit, the steering wheel should be kept relatively steady through the corner, but the throttle and brake should be used to adjust the car's attitude. Get out of the throttle a bit to get the car to turn in sharper, get back into it harder to get the car to turn shallower. By shifting the weight forwards and backwards on the chassis, you're shifting the amount of traction between each set of wheels, and the car will react accordingly.

      Similarly, when heading into a turn, there's a limit to the point where the steering wheel is effective, and if you want to improve your car's ability to turn in, give it just partial braking to shift weight to the front of the car.

      The thing is, you're always going to turn the wheel to the optimum point for any given corner, and when you're right up at about 100% of the tires' traction, the only thing that will make any difference in the radius of the turn at that point is shifting weight between the fronts and the rears, and you do that via the throttle and brake.

      I highly recommend "Going Faster! The Art of Race Driving" from the Skip Barber Racing School if you want to get a little more into that. The Gran Turismo 3 manual had a bit from that book, but it's no substitute for the book, just like simming is no substitute for the real thing.

      Again, sorry for the 11-day late response.

  4. people are historically myopic by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they think that violence can be blamed on videogames

    as if before videogames, there were no violence

    the concept also undermines personal accountability: "the devil made me do it"

    if you pick up a gun and shoot someone in real life, you are 100% to blame, it doesn't matter if you have been playing fps games for 10 months straight, it just plain doesn't matter

    if you believe in the concept of personal accountability, you can not blame the media for anything

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:people are historically myopic by IoN_PuLse · · Score: 1

      I often see video games come up in studies that find "evidence" that video games increase aggressive tendancies in children. What about football, soccer, and sports in general? People tend to get pretty worked up and violent over those things.

    2. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Furthermore, maybe people are confusing cause and effect. Person A has violent tendencies to begin with, and so likes playing FPS games....

    3. Re:people are historically myopic by nathanh · · Score: 5, Informative
      if you believe in the concept of personal accountability, you can not blame the media for anything

      Too black and white. I do believe in the concept of personal accountability, but I also believe that the media is partially responsible for shaping our behaviour. They contribute to our personal knowledge (through both information and misinformation) and that affects how we react to events and other people.

    4. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think that pong and pacman incited quite a bit of violence... not to mention yar and even super mario brothers.

    5. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      as if before videogames, there were no violence
      No, before video games all the troublemakers played Dungeons and Dragons.. When I was a kid, if you played that, people would think you were in a crazy demon worshipping cult.
    6. Re:people are historically myopic by DarkZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Too black and white. I do believe in the concept of personal accountability, but I also believe that the media is partially responsible for shaping our behaviour. They contribute to our personal knowledge (through both information and misinformation) and that affects how we react to events and other people.

      If that were true, wouldn't there be many, many more crimes in developed nations than there currently are? Millions of people have seen the thousands of violent movies that have been available in the United States over the last fifty years, and violent video games regularly sell millions of copies there, and that's just in one country alone. If Counter-Strike made people crazy, wouldn't, at the very least, HUNDREDS (if not thousands or millions) of people be dressing up in military fatigues and "killing the hostages" in their neighborhoods all across the world, rather than just a couple of nutjobs in Australia?

      There are a lot of crazy whackjobs out there who will kill people, regardless of whether you give them a Grand Theft Auto game, a copy of Mein Kampf, or just Curious George Goes To The Hospital. This is as true now as it was before the discovery of electricity and its subsequent gifts of TV, movies, and video games.

    7. Re:people are historically myopic by kfg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      . . .if you believe in the concept of personal accountability. . .

      Well of course I do. They talked about it on Oprah once.

      KFG

    8. Re:people are historically myopic by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      ok so does that mean that because I get a real thrill out of hearing "head shot" and "black monkey" in UT2003/2004 and that i LIKE playing that game that I'm unhinged???

      huh??? huh??? do I???? huh?????

      where do you live! huh??? huh???? huh????

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you cannot have played the game since it calls you a Flak Monkey, not a Black Monkey.

    10. Re:people are historically myopic by the+bluebrain · · Score: 1

      [...]if you pick up a gun and shoot someone in real life, you are 100% to blame, it doesn't matter if you have been playing fps games for 10 months straight, it just plain doesn't matter[...]

      Rumour has it that the army uses FPS's to train soldiers not to think too much before pulling the trigger. The idea is that it just becomes reflex, and the games are sufficiently similar to reality that the relex cuts in even in meatspace.
      Sounds sensible to me, but I'm too lazy to google for it.

      Point being that if you've watched 10'000 dudes' blood splatter in VR, there will be a lag between seeing the same thing in RL, and the realization that this time, it's permanent.

      However, I do agree with you that individual responsibility is supreme, and if some guy is too dumb to realize that yes, FPS's have more of an effect on him than he would like to believe - lock up, chuck key, and neuter for good measure.

      --
      yes, we have no bananas
    11. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sounds are a mixed bag. Some are well done, others just sound like complete ass. The annoucer saying "Flak Monkey" sounds like he is saying "Black Monkey". Stuff like that should have neen fixed early on, even after people complained about it with the demo. No excuses for this.

      It's been a typical think in the UT series from 2003 on, so lumpy is right.

      MOST people think it says "black monkey"... in fact 10 of the 20 people here at work that join in the lunch ut firefights think so.

      I suggest you get a clue.

    12. Re:people are historically myopic by fwitness · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, it's the problem of correlation verses causation . If you found in a survey that 90% of all serial killers chew gum, you may have found a correlation. However, this does not necessarily mean you can use causation to say that gum-chewers are more likely to become serial killers.

      For the statistically inclined, the relationship is exellently explained by the wikipedia entry. Basically the theory goes that there may be some hidden or lurking variable that was not tested.

      So in this case it could be that some violent criminals play CS, and many who play CS are violent. There may be some other factor involved though. I could even conjecture that perhaps crazy people do violent things a lot, and sometimes this includes video games.

      Hmm. Nah, maybe it's the gum thing.

      --
      -- I have fans? Wow.
    13. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until you KNOW someone who has been convicted of manslaughter and has become a ward of the state in a juvenile detention facility, you DO NOT KNOW how violent video games can affect a young person.

      At one point in time I would have agreed with your theory, but after seeing my best friend's little brother be convicted, it kind of changes your view on these things.

      Of course, this is /., so now actual expertise or experience is needed to wax philosophical...

    14. Re:people are historically myopic by bigpat · · Score: 1

      " I do believe in the concept of personal accountability, but I also believe that the media is partially responsible for shaping our behaviour. They contribute to our personal knowledge (through both information and misinformation) and that affects how we react to events and other people."

      The media is not responsible for shaping our behavior, we allow it to shape our behavior.
      If people don't recognize and seek out good values versus bad that is unfortunate, but it must be considered entirely their responsibility. If the only institution that shapes your values is the entertainment industry, then you you are doomed.

      Life is not what is handed to you as you sit on your couch.

    15. Re:people are historically myopic by Taladar · · Score: 1

      The OP did not say that. He said the have violent tendencies so they like violent games. He did not say there are no other reasons to like these games.

    16. Re:people are historically myopic by Taladar · · Score: 1

      The Media is not the only thing that shapes our behaviour but you can not deny that the media gives you most of your information about the society and what is socially acceptable. The only problem I see here is that some people can not differentiate between fiction and non-fiction media.

    17. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You pinched that example from Law and Order, of all places.

    18. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is not a simple one to one of being automatically influenced.

      that violence in the media is just one particular influence. there are also good things in the media that influence people the other way. there are thousands of different factors that help shape people's values, beliefs and actions.

      that doesnt remove personal accountability, but it can go to explain some of their actions, or why some people do certain negative actions.

      people try to see things as a single cause, the world is not like that.

    19. Re:people are historically myopic by bigpat · · Score: 1

      I do not deny it, various media are the only way we can perceive the world which we do experience directly, but we have more choices of media now than in the history of mankind. Information is everywhere. The overall quality has not gone down, just the quality of information offered to couch potatoes has recently diminished a bit. But even they have reasonable choices available at the push of a button. People need to buck up and take full responsibility for what they choose to believe and stop blaming others for their stupidity.

    20. Re:people are historically myopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you, but how do you educate people? If you're explaining, you're losing. The reason a lot of people are convinced with illogical arguments is that they lack critical thinking skills.

    21. Re:people are historically myopic by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      If that were true, wouldn't there be many, many more crimes in developed nations than there currently are?

      Nope.

      The grandparent is positing that exposure to violent media (whether it be games, movies, or stuff on the news) may have an influence on behaviour. Then grandparent is not (necessarily) suggesting that it is the sole influence.

      Our behaviour as reasoning beings is shaped by our experiences. How we interpret, evaluate, and respond to the world around us is a complex (chaotic!) process. If someone spends several hours a day playing Counterstrike (for example) then it probably will have at least some influence on how they think. I'm sure there are FPS players on Slashdot who have caught themselves thinking about where the best cover is out in the real world, or choosing appropriate sniping locations in the back of their minds. I've seen comments from GTA players who have caught themselves driving more aggressively after a gaming session. Playing and FPS online, the chat that goes back and forth on some servers is blisteringly rude, bordering on the sociopathic.

      Most people seem to do a pretty good job compartmentalizing their real and imagined worlds, and we generally don't let Counterstrike or anything else in a game heavily influence our perceptions or behaviour once we shut down the computer. Certainly blaming a psychotic act entirely on a game is a decidedly dubious claim.

      People's behaviour is influenced by their parents, by their friends and family, by spouses, by coworkers. It is influenced by clergy, by the nightly news, by the editorials in the morning paper, by scenes of surgical airstrikes in Iraq, by photographs of bloody casualties in New York or Baghdad, by the partisan hacks on Crossfire. Our perception of the world--and consequently our interpretation of what is appropriate behaviour in a given situation--is influenced in small or large part by every other experience that we have. To state that exposure to violent movies and games has no influence whatsoever strikes me as naive, if not outright disingenuous.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    22. Re:people are historically myopic by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Something that goes along with "the devil made me do it" is "idle hands are the devil's playground". It could be said that today's children, young adults and even 20-somethings simply have too much time on their hands as opposed to the previous Western eras when they at least had chores to do, and many of those chores were executed on a farm (a vast labor sink if there ever was one).

      I don't think video games should be demonized nonetheless. Idle folk have to find something useful, engaging and of social benefit to do. Playing CouterStrike day after day, only means you are probably a sociopath, not that the video game itself is a terrible thing.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    23. Re:people are historically myopic by royalblue_tom · · Score: 1

      And causation vs correlation is a case of the logical falacy "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" IIRC.

    24. Re:people are historically myopic by fwitness · · Score: 1

      Yea, I run into this problem every day. Very, very frustrating. It's almost impossible not to *try* to convince people to have better thinking skills.

      Such is the world we live in.

      --
      -- I have fans? Wow.
    25. Re:people are historically myopic by rekt · · Score: 1
      If you found in a survey that 90% of all serial killers chew gum, you may have found a correlation.
      Actually, you haven't yet found a correlation there, because you haven't tested the non-serial-killer population. if you find that 90% of normal people who aren't serial killers also chew gum, then there is not even a correlation, let alone causation. This was one of the mistakes made by Frederic Wertham in his book Seduction of the Innocent, which condemned comic books as a genre by pointing out that nearly every juvenile delinquent boy had read comic books. Of course, nearly every boy had read comic books in that era, and the majority of them had not turned out delinquent. Wertham had proved no correlation.

      Evidence of a correlation is valuable, and shouldn't be dismissed simply because it doesn't imply causation. it is a clue that can be used to search for hidden variables that may actually be causal factors (though nothing is ever so clean as strictly causal or non-causal in the real world).

      Don't hide your head in the sand arguing about "correlation vs. causation" simply because you like video games and want to keep them legal. Actual demonstration of causality is extremely difficult to do, and most inferences we make on a daily basis as humans are done on the basis of correlation, because it's actually a pretty good heuristic.

      However, if you can show that there isn't even a correlation, that is a much more powerful argument to use in shaping public policy than just claiming that no one has proved that video games cause violence.

    26. Re:people are historically myopic by fwitness · · Score: 1

      Nicely put.

      I'll have to check that book out. I completely forgot about the whole "comic books cause aberrant behavior" issue from a while back.

      --
      -- I have fans? Wow.
  5. Next up by eclectro · · Score: 5, Funny


    Some guys dressed as the Mario Brothers come to fix the pipes.

    Let the blaming begin.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Next up by metlin · · Score: 4, Funny


      *sigh*

      Why don't women from Duke Nukem come and offer me some sweet loving? :-(

    2. Re:Next up by lewp · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe they're trying to perfect that feature before releasing Duke Nukem Forever. That'd be the only reasonable explanation for it taking so long.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    3. Re:Next up by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Some guys dressed as the Mario Brothers come to fix the pipes.

      Personally, I have always committed my murders while hoverring in the air wth my arms sticking out of my ears.

      I find the sight of the victim scuttling back and forwards in panic as I slowly float down making `thrump, thrump' noises most entertaining.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    4. Re:Next up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If Pacman ever affected us as kids, we'd all be running around darkened rooms, munching strange pills and listening to repetitive music..."

    5. Re:Next up by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      No, there's more to that. You must remember that Super Mario Bros was an extremely political game. the guys dressed as Mario Brothers lead the glorious people's revolution to overthrow the oppressive capitalist government!

      Let the red star flag fly over the overthrown evil exploiter monarch's liberated castle! All hail Lenin!

    6. Re:Next up by Spacejock · · Score: 1

      At age 4 my daughter cut all her hair off with a pair of scissors, then tried to make it grow back with 'Barbie's magic hair wand' (A stick with a drawing of a star sellotaped to one end.) She was copying 'Barbie hair stylist', a computer game where you cut a model's hair then grow it back with a wand for another try.

      Still, she picked up a valuable lesson on the difference between fiction and reality.

  6. I'm sorry but... by Omniscientist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can you assume that they were dressed up as counterstrike terrorists/counter-terrorists? Dressing up as Goblez from Final Fantasy IV is one thing, but a terrorist/counter-terrorist is a common real-life/movies/video games thing, and it can't be narrowed down to just Counterstrike.

    1. Re:I'm sorry but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Golbez ;P

      Or were you under Lunarian mind control at the time? ;)

  7. Which gun? by shuut · · Score: 1

    It doesn't say what gun they used to shoot people, does anyone know?

    1. Re:Which gun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sig SG-550 Sniper. god damn campers

    2. Re:Which gun? by dbloodnok · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well reports are coming in that the accused pressed B-4-1, followed by B-6 and B-8-2 immediately prior to the attack.

    3. Re:Which gun? by chewy_2000 · · Score: 1
      Being Australia, I'm guessing it wouldn't be an assault rifle, they're just too hard to get (completely banned for civvies) unless you have some serious criminal contact.

      Probably an old centrefire rifle, or even a .22, which are possible to get (but still very difficult). Perhaps a handgun, but they are very heavily restricted.

    4. Re:Which gun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn AWP/M whore!

    5. Re:Which gun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vegemite gun. The sickly black yeast extract kills victims instantly by burning a hole through the contact area and filling the lungs with toxic vapors.

    6. Re:Which gun? by RamboCalrissian · · Score: 1

      I bet the guy they attacked's last words word "I hate this game!"

  8. Here's a question for you... by Undefined+Parameter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the accused had dressed up as characters from the Clue(TM) boardgame, would boardgames be blamed, and why or why not?

    ~UP

    --
    Eat the Path.
    1. Re:Here's a question for you... by metlin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's always been blaming somebody or something for the problems in the society.

      During the middle ages, certain literature was deemed inappropriate and were censored/banned for being the cause of several problems of that time.

      Later on, it was the radio and how it was spreading bad cultural values. Television followed, and people find the need to censor Internet now.

      Games are just another target, I remember that in some Asian country, a board game was banned because there was an element where you would end up as being a junkie.

      People forget that we have violent instincts within us, just because we have learnt to temper them does not mean that they do not exist. Some people have trouble controlling them, and we can try and find ways of shifting the blame, but the fact is that no matter what, there will always be someone or the other who'd do something stupid.

      And with each new age, we'd find something or the other to blame it all on.

    2. Re:Here's a question for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps because the military doesn't use "Clue" as a method to train soldiers, as it does with FPS shooters? Any idiot off the street knows FPS shooters are more immersive. Whatever your thoughts, a specious comparison proves nothing.

    3. Re:Here's a question for you... by prockcore · · Score: 4, Funny

      If the accused had dressed up as characters from the Clue(TM) boardgame, would boardgames be blamed, and why or why not?

      An unidentified man in his mid to late 50's was charged Tuesday with the bludgeoning death of another man. The man possessed no identification, and gave his name as only "Professor Plum."

      After several hours of investigation, the police determined that Plum brutally attacked Mr. Body with a candlestick. They haven't determined whether the attack took place in the Billiard room, or the Dining room.

      Mrs. Scarlet was present during the attack, but as she was armed with a revolver, police have ruled her out as a suspect.

      In other news, a thimble has just purchased an upscale stretch of real estate along Boardwalk Ave.

    4. Re:Here's a question for you... by Associate · · Score: 1

      learnt
      I see you're using the regualr form. Very nice, very nice.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    5. Re:Here's a question for you... by Associate · · Score: 1

      Ten bucks says the Enron execs roll doubles with loaded dice to get out of jail.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    6. Re:Here's a question for you... by metlin · · Score: 1

      I assume that was a compliment and not a disparage? :-)

    7. Re:Here's a question for you... by Clansman · · Score: 1

      I think D&D has had such a press in the past,so yes.

    8. Re:Here's a question for you... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      You've got to love irregular verbs.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    9. Re:Here's a question for you... by Associate · · Score: 1

      Compliment, compliment. I had started thinking about it the other day while playing DoD. If you pick up an enemy gernade, it says Player catched the grenade. Everybody makes fun of that. But the issue of regular and irregular verbs entered my head. And your use of the regualr form instead of the more popular irregular, caught my eye. Forgive the long post, I'm just trying to kill the 20 seconds required before posting.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    10. Re:Here's a question for you... by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      Clue(TM)

      How can you trademark a normal word??? in the UK, that boardgame is called Cluedo... which IS trademarkable...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    11. Re:Here's a question for you... by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Mr Body? He's Dr Black in the UK, at least.

    12. Re:Here's a question for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how do you pronounce cluedo? rhymes with judo?

      the trademark essentially means you can't make a board game and name it clue. that's all.

    13. Re:Here's a question for you... by el_benito · · Score: 1

      The suspect in question was returned to their home and told SORRY!

      --
      http://liquidben.com - Aspiring to an 'under construction' gif
    14. Re:Here's a question for you... by Mr+Guy · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I wonder if that seemed too racists for us at the time. It was launched here in 1949, with the correct spelling of "Mr Boddy", according to Hasboro's Clue Game History. Or maybe we just appreciate cheesy puns more.

    15. Re:Here's a question for you... by UWC · · Score: 1

      You want cheesy game-related puns? I informed a friend a while back that Hasbro owns both Milton Bradley and Parker Brothers. He innocently asked, "Isn't that some sort of monopoly?"

    16. Re:Here's a question for you... by The+Jarvi · · Score: 1

      lol the best laugh i've had in a long time!

  9. Definitive proof! by jacksonj04 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Video games really are responsible for making the tiny majority of people without sufficient grip on reality to not go out and shoot people, go out and shoot people!

    How the hell did they get weapons though? It's not like you can walk into a shop and press 'b', and i'm sure that l33t h4x0rz1ng the shopkeeper is gonna get you funny looks and nothing more.

    --
    How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    1. Re:Definitive proof! by Associate · · Score: 1

      No, they didn't simply press [B]. They continually annoyed their teammates until they dropped one for them.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    2. Re:Definitive proof! by julesh · · Score: 1

      How the hell did they get weapons though? It's not like you can walk into a shop and press 'b', and i'm sure that l33t h4x0rz1ng the shopkeeper is gonna get you funny looks and nothing more.

      Nah, they just went "IDKFA" and miraculously had everything they needed...

      (I'm getting too old.)

    3. Re:Definitive proof! by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Hey! Whaa don't one of ya bitches just answa me - is that a bazooka right there?!

      See this if you don't get it

      Cover me! Ah'm about to get ma bazooka!

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    4. Re:Definitive proof! by Begossi · · Score: 1

      noobs.. had they used IDDQD they wouldn`t even be on trial right now.

      --
      Friend of the Wise, Brother of the Brave.
    5. Re:Definitive proof! by JRIsidore · · Score: 1

      How the hell did they get weapons though?

      Now that's easy, they started with nothing but a knife (or crowbar) and aquired the guns on their way through the lev.. eh.. town.

      --
      :w!q
    6. Re:Definitive proof! by julesh · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter. They'll just end up IDNOCLIPping their way out of prison. :)

    7. Re:Definitive proof! by TheGatekeeper · · Score: 1

      Um, IDSPISPOPD.

      And yeah, I didn't even have to look that up.

      --
      'The staff in the hand of a wizard may be more than a prop for age,' -Hamá, the doorward
    8. Re:Definitive proof! by freakmn · · Score: 1

      You are both correct, parent in doom1, grandparent in doom2.

      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
  10. Terrorists Win by Knuckle+Sandwich · · Score: 0

    They know they were dressed up as characters from Counter-Strike because the one guy kept yelling at the other guy, "Stop team flashing! Ugh! Everybody type vote 3847 in console!"

  11. meh by danielmullins · · Score: 1

    Well, they looked like characters from a million other games too. The article does not mention if they were CT's or T's. Did they carry AK's. Put on a green army jacket and a gun and you quickly look like a character from many games. idiots

  12. This is like the recent Melbourne gangland murders by deep+square+leg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Except that the killers were dressed as Mario and Luigi.

  13. The question is... by 't+is+DjiM · · Score: 1

    ...were they lame enough to use the AWP or the riot shield?

    --
    --Use ant to make .war
  14. Erm... which character? by tod_miller · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Art imitating life imitating art...

    Counterstrike 'characters' are just people dressed in common attire that you would most likely see someone on a killing spree wearing...

    Now did these guys play counterstrike?

    As for let the blaming begin It amazes me how quick people are to strike down something they have no comprehension of.

    For one thing, you strike down all media blame of computer games prompting violent behaviour (and films etc) and you simply pass it off as 1+1=3 in thier minds because you play violent games and you don't murder people.

    That doesn't mean to say there is or isn't a connection, and there are no conclusive studies that some people who are a little socially eclipsed that are affected by continuous and sporting presentation of killing.

    Now I am not saying either way, but I am not sarcastically throwing down the gauntlet for possible ridicule either.

    These people must have been capable of this murder prior, and the fact that somehow (I do not know how, unless they jumped aorund whilst firing saying "I pwn you b1tch3s!" like most server players - or used an aim bot) the relationship between clothing attire and a computer game (shakey to me) just muddies the fact that someone got shot, and what was the motive for these people.

    One day people might start trying to use computer games as a defence... or worse, it may be the cause, we do not know yet, but the portrayal of real violence and death in italy (see Gladitor flick) is sickening, and we are on the verge of that popularisation of gore and death (see Bad Boys 2, which was a shit aweful film for gratuitous violence, to an almost comedic extent)

    I actually had flinching urges to try car jacking after playing GTA2 for 48 hours solid (better than studying at the time). Maybe I am weak.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    1. Re:Erm... which character? by mog007 · · Score: 1

      The vast majority of people that play violent video games don't commite violent crimes. That's the truth. It's proof positive that these people do this things for a number of reasons. Odds are they had a fucked up childhood, and bad parenting made these guys think that reality is just as ficticious as a video game. Maybe they had a mental disorder of somekind due to some screwed up genetics.

      The fact that just about everybody on /. says that violent video games isn't peposterous at all, because less than one percent of the people that will read about this story and play video games are going to emulate the game in some fashion.

    2. Re:Erm... which character? by ScouseMouse · · Score: 1

      As a quick addition. Nowhere in this article does it say that these two men had ever even seen the computer game in question.

    3. Re:Erm... which character? by jadel · · Score: 1

      I was quite enjoying Vice City for a while until I noticed a tendency to try and drive on the right side of the road which conflicted with the fact that in .au traffic is on the left side.
      In future it would be nice if Rockstar games would include a switch to change the traffic handedness...

    4. Re:Erm... which character? by Hockney+Twang · · Score: 1

      1+1 does equal 3, for very large values of one.

    5. Re:Erm... which character? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I was quite enjoying Vice City for a while until I noticed a tendency to try and drive on the right side of the road which conflicted with the fact that in .au traffic is on the left side.

      Too bad it takes place in Miami. Perhaps they'll drive on the left in GTA Melbourne.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    6. Re:Erm... which character? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      I know what you mean- After getting Burnout 3, it's hard to look at a traffic jam or busy intersection without thinking "Man, I could earn so much here..."

    7. Re:Erm... which character? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason it would be blamed is exactly because they have no comprehension of it.

    8. Re:Erm... which character? by Taladar · · Score: 1
      In future it would be nice if Rockstar games would include a switch to change the traffic handedness...
      Or maybe it would be nice for these few countries that drive left, use inch, feet,... to turn around and use the standard ways of doing things in the rest of the world?
    9. Re:Erm... which character? by CoffeeJedi · · Score: 1

      i agree!
      immediatly following a long session of Carmageddon, i got in my car to drive somewhere... when i left my neiborhood and encounted another motorist, my first instinct was to drive off the road, change my angle and broadside them, i stopped myself after my hands automatically flicked the steering wheel... so i pulled onto a side street for a minute to catch my breath and relax... i was fine for the rest of the drive, but those first few moments really scared me

      also, after a marathon halflife session, i was walking across campus when off in the distance i thought i saw a friend, but wasn't sure if it was her. for about a second i wondered why i my eyes wouldn't "zoom in" as i unconciously clicked my right middle finger on a non-existant mouse!

      --
      May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage. RAmen.
    10. Re:Erm... which character? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similar experience: After a couple long nights of Deus Ex, anything high up, in the corner of my vision, and shaped like a red or green ring caused me to jump back around the nearest corner. That is, anything that looked like one of the surveilance cameras in that game made me freak out in real life. Weird.

    11. Re:Erm... which character? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, it's hard to say where Rockstar will set their next GTA game now that the three cities from the original GTA have been exhausted, but there's always the possibility it would be somewhere meant to resemble some place outside the U.S. The original did have a "London 1969" expansion pack which was pretty cool, and I'm fairly certain traffic was on the left in that one.

      Personally, in GTA I drive on whatever side seems to have fewer cars at the moment- when you have the pedal to the floor on a busy city street, all traffic is oncoming.

    12. Re:Erm... which character? by royalblue_tom · · Score: 1

      ... use inch, feet,... to turn around and use the standard ways of doing things in the rest of the world?

      Good point! When is America going to convert to the metric system, and do away with those confusing Miles, Inches, Pounds, Gallons ... ;)

    13. Re:Erm... which character? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There must be a joke here somewhere about Marathon, Half-Life, and Have Blue, but I have no idea what it is. Or maybe it's just an ironic situation.

  15. Dressed like what? by October_30th · · Score: 5, Insightful
    dressed as characters from the computer game Counter Strike.

    Ah, so you see guys like this only in computer games like CS?

    I don't see where the game comes in. If one wants to play the blamegame, why not blame a movie or a book, for instance?

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Dressed like what? by cttforsale · · Score: 1

      There's a book based on the Rainbow 6 video game?!?!?! Man I gotta read that! Which comic company did it DC or Marvel? It doesn't say....

    2. Re:Dressed like what? by Medgur · · Score: 1

      Amazing, a direct link to a ginormous jpeg. Do you have a hate on for the admins at sonypictures.com? It's still late at night for most of north america and this story hasn't been posted that long, yet already the site is starting to show some drag.

      Poor server... Probably didn't even see it coming.

    3. Re:Dressed like what? by October_30th · · Score: 0

      Heh. Like sonypictures.com could be slashdotted. Sonypictures.com will laugh at the effect.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    4. Re:Dressed like what? by onion2k · · Score: 1

      There were 2 of them though. If one were dressed as a terrorist, and the other as a counter-terrorist.. then its quite clear they were inspired by the game.

    5. Re:Dressed like what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see where the game comes in. If one wants to play the blamegame, why not blame a movie or a book, for instance?

      Easy. The people doing the blaming don't play video games, so they find them a convenient target.

      It's harder to blame movies, because everyone watches movies; it's harder to find people that are clueless about them.

    6. Re:Dressed like what? by Tom7 · · Score: 1

      Or the United States Armed Forces?

    7. Re:Dressed like what? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, when there are both movies and computer games about something, bad things happen. People dress up as characters and eventually you wind up with very bad things happening...

      Like this.

    8. Re:Dressed like what? by corrosive_nf · · Score: 1

      I dont know if you are joking or serious, so I will just say the game was based on the books, and its fucking stupid that so many people assume the books came after the games.

    9. Re:Dressed like what? by cttforsale · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry. I thought is was sledge hammer sarcasm...

  16. Cliche by d2_m_viant · · Score: 1, Funny

    So we all knew this was coming... TERRORISTS WIN!

  17. They were wearing pants, boots and a shirt by ArcticCelt · · Score: 1
    ...Outfit that was inspired by the violent computer game, Counter-Strike," he said...

    Oh my good, they were wearing pants, boots and a shirt!

    (Counter-Strike outfits have nothing-particular except that they look pretty similar to what you can find in reality.)

    --

    Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
  18. Not for Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a really lame post. The man dressed as a CS character was a serial home invader, not someone acting out a CS scenario. The CS angle was not raised at trial and nobody is blaming it on CS. Must be an awfully slow newsday for Slashdot.

  19. Blame? by BortQ · · Score: 4, Funny

    I blame Satan. Granted I do blame him for most things. That guy's an asshat.

    --

    A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
    1. Re:Blame? by JamesTRexx · · Score: 1

      I blame Satan.

      You can't keep on blaming everything on Bill Gates!
      Although I do tend to get more violent after Windows on the server freaks out and doesn't do what I tell it to do than after playing Unreal.

      --
      home
    2. Re:Blame? by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      I always found Unreal to be soothing. Gameplay is not too hard, the controls are very solid, and you have huge open areas. Of course, another one of my favorites, Painkiller, can be very aggravating, especially on the boss levels. (Long load times after dying 25 times in a row, mostly)

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  20. uniforms by stimpleton · · Score: 3, Funny


    ...two men dressed as characters from 'Counter Strike'

    I didn't realise Counter Strike uniforms had those wide bimmed hats with the corks on strings.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    1. Re:uniforms by GloomE · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's the default model here in Australia.
      And the hostages are all sheep.

  21. Who overplayed CS? by SolitaryMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder, who overplayed CS: two guys, dressed like freaks and shooting at people, or those who identified them as CS characters?

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
    1. Re:Who overplayed CS? by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      Probably the guys dressed like freaks and shooting at people.

  22. On a more serious note by pipingguy · · Score: 1


    You might want to read this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Lepine

  23. Mario may be more dangerous than you think.... by metroid+composite · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe it was just a rumor, but I do remember hearing reports of kids jumping on their cats and wondering why they didn't respawn after leaving and reentering the room....

    Of course, these reports were back in the early 90s when there were fewer FPSs to blame everything on.

    1. Re:Mario may be more dangerous than you think.... by frankvl · · Score: 1

      They DO have 9 lives, don't they??

    2. Re:Mario may be more dangerous than you think.... by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Of course, these reports were back in the early 90s when there were fewer FPSs to blame everything on.

      Eleven years later, people are still blaming things on Doom.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  24. Errata... by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    but the portrayal of real violence and death in italy (see Gladitor flick) is sickening

    The gladiatoral matches that were common entertainment were attrocious, and the glamourisation of all fighting sports, and by my reckoning the over violent nature of Hollywood (I mean, punisher is a marvel comic, yes comics are violent... but I found the violence in that film too graphic for an audience that would comprise of people who think, oh another comic>screen movie, like spiderman I bet..) I am not saying we should censor it for those people who want to see it, but I was mildly irratated that the movie houses wanted to put so much graphic content in that movie.

    I hope the case is made. (see bad boys 2, after bad boys 1, a fairly decent flick, I was quite annoyed that the film went OTT with graphic violence)

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    1. Re:Errata... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what I find funny? It is easier for these kids to get ahold of real videos of people being murdered (see: beheadings) online, because of this little thing called Freedom of Speech

      However, they aren't allowed to go in to see an R Rated feature film at their local cineplex (which is a pretty safe place) because there are people in the Government who think that it is bad for them.

      Now, I admit, not all of Hollywoods outings are exceptional forms of art, but I would sooner have my people see Will Smith and Martin Lawrence killing people onscreen than those damned dirty terrorists doing it for real.

      Why are places like Ogrish.com allowed to show the real stuff when Blockbuster is bound by law to deny certain people access to certain forms of entertainment, which are only pretending to do it?

      I am not an advocate for censorship, not in the least... I just think that the censors have their system ass backwards, is all... the real damaginf shit is one mouseclick away!

    2. Re:Errata... by tod_miller · · Score: 1

      Ratings are not censorship.

      I think there should be regulation of the movie industry, and of course, where there are regulations, there are things that break regulations, and if they do, and are edited to not break regulations, you can call this censorship.

      I personally preffer tougher regulation of graphic violence and sexual content in films, for the simple sake that hollywood ponytail spivvs will see:

      sex and violence == $$

      and we will have the silly trash we have on the movie today (see showgirls)

      I thought bad boys 2 was far too graphic, and badly written at that.

      I am not imposing anything on you, just stating my own preference in this mad world.

      Just like, I preffer mustard and ketchup together, if you don't then fine.

      I would go to a regulated cinema for normal movies, and adult cinema for adult movies, and perhaps 'gore houses' for gratuitous violence.

      Just don't paint these under a fluffy cinema experience.

      Games however, I like 'em bloody and gratuitous, go figure.

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  25. Are games a problem? Yes. by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 1

    The problem on the surface is obviously the game itself, though I have doubts as to the importance of putting so much starch in your clothes that you look like a character in CS.

    The games put the ideas in the head. The games provide a sort of desensitization to the violence. The games do not provide a real penalty in losing.

    That said, the effect of the violent games, while undoubtedly unwholesome and mentally unhealthy, is largely overstated and likely only the most miniscule part of the reason this guy went on his murder spree.

    Most people are not affected adversely, in any serious way, by these violent games. Social adjustment, upbringing, as well as other factors like mental stability at a chemical level protect most people from the violent imagery and its deleterious effects on the psyche.

    However, for those who have had bad social experiences (social outcasts like Klebold and Harris), bad upbringing (this guy), or a history of mental illness (this guy again) are ripe for the kind of psychological damage that a violent game can do.

    The difference between a game and news, which is always brought up by opponents to this kind of comparison, is that the news is passive. Something bad happened to someone else, no matter how gory or evil it may be. A game, though, requires that the player carry out the action themselves. It is the difference between seeing and doing. A soldier may watch another man die by his friend's gun, but his experience will be wholly different when he watches that a man die from his own gun.

    I don't doubt that there are other factors involved here. I also don't think that such games ought to be outlawed, though some certainly do think their penalty outweighs any benefits of having such a game. However I do think that it is important not to look away from these games as having a dangerous effect on certain elements in society who are ill-equipped to handle the violent imagery inherent in such games.

  26. The blames roll on... by lothar97 · · Score: 1
    The next time a roller coaster breaks, they'll want to blame Roller Coaster Tycon. The next time city hall goes bankrupt, they'll blame SimCity. The next time a street race occurs, they'll blame Need for Speed 2.

    Hmmm, hasn't this kind of behavior happened pre-video games? It's convenient for the media to blame a scapegoat (video games, France, crack babies, etc) than to actually have an informed factual discussion of the underlying issues.

    I know the next time an orange hopping creature with a horn nose gets eaten by a snake, I'm blaming Qbert.

    --

    1. Re:The blames roll on... by ArcticCelt · · Score: 1

      Great, maybe I can sue Sierra for making me an hairy middle age slacker chasing women out of my league after to much playing Leisure Suit Larry!

      --

      Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
    2. Re:The blames roll on... by IInventedTheInternet · · Score: 1

      "I know the next time an orange hopping creature with a horn nose gets eaten by a snake, I'm blaming Qbert." I'd blame acid or mushrooms before Qbert.....

  27. Kids by peeon · · Score: 1

    Lesson of the day, dont play counter strike, it kills.

  28. Next story.... by fred911 · · Score: 1

    is from Papua New Guinea.

    News from down under...

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  29. Numbers just don't support the blame game by ntxb229 · · Score: 1

    I actually wrote a paper on this subject for an english class freshmen year and when you actually look at the percentage of crimes mimicing video games vs. total number of people playing these games, the percentage is very shitty. I don't have the paper on me but when I say the percentage was shitty, we're talking chances of getting hit by lightning shitty. I also found that studies conducted on the affect of violent games towards creating agression weren't very convincing. In some of them they would have you play a game for 15 minutes and then make you stop. I'd get kinda pissed too, wouldn't you? The bottom line is that when it comes to blaming people's actions on video games, there is hardly any evidence to support it, let alone anything even remotely compelling.

    1. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by Shambhu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but you're obviously biased.

      Seriously though, are we supposed to be impressed by a freshman english paper that you can't find?

      Actions influence thoughts. Thoughts influence actions. And you can add in speech, as well. This doesn't mean that X hours of CS will make you a murderer; it doesn't turn you into a zombie. But, IMO, violence begets violence, whether it is abstract or concrete, real or imaginary.

      There is always the matter of degree, and because most of us can distinguish between a game and reality, the influence of the game is greatly lessened. Throw in other mitigating factors like the fact that playing these games often relieves stress and is fun, and the net effect may even be positive. (I stress the word 'may').

      I make this argument mostly philosophically. And I don't necessarily practice what I preach, as I like to play such games when I get the chance. I just think that the position that there is _no_ influence or correlation is naive or ignorant. But most of all, it is self-serving.

      --
      Rome wasn't bilked in a day.
    2. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by isometrick · · Score: 1

      This article wasn't about the U.S., but here are some statistics that could apply:

      60% of all Americans play video games, or about 145 million people. We can assume the percentage wasn't this high in 1994.

      According to the U.S. Department of Justice, violent crime rates declined since 1994, reaching the lowest level ever recorded in 2003.

      Since so many Americans (60%) play video games, it seems like it would have affected the overall trend of violent crimes if it was an important factor.

      It seems like in most cases where video games "influence" people to carry out violence, the people were already inclined to do it.

    3. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep getting hit by lightning, you insensitive clod!

    4. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by Lifewish · · Score: 1

      My counterargument would be that the violence in question is a part of our psyches anyway. Computer games just give an outlet that is relatively harmless.

      I'm just coming to the end of a 48-hour undergrad work session, and if I can't find something to take my frustrations out on then my chance of going postal can be expected to dramatically increase.

      An aside: anyone able to enlighten me as to where the phrase "going postal" comes from?

      --
      For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
    5. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      That reminds me, I ought to stop playing Lee Trevino's Fighting Golf.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    6. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by arkanes · · Score: 1
      In the late 90s there was a rash of US Postal workers snapping under stress and shooting everyone at the office. A couple people who didn't work at at the PO used it as an outlet for shooting people too. Kinda like school shootings.

      Note that nobody blamed video games for that, and media shied away from blaming themselves, even though it's reasonable. At least as reasonable as blaming video games.

      Games don't make you do anything. But if you're going to snap and kill people, then it might influence the way you do it. If you're borderline crazy already, and you play a lot of GTA, then when you go over the edge you might act that out. Same with the postal thing - if you're crazy already, then hearing 24/7 coverage of someone shooting a post office will likely influence you when you snap.

    7. Re:Numbers just don't support the blame game by Lifewish · · Score: 1

      "Games don't make you do anything. But if you're going to snap and kill people, then it might influence the way you do it. If you're borderline crazy already, and you play a lot of GTA, then when you go over the edge you might act that out. Same with the postal thing - if you're crazy already, then hearing 24/7 coverage of someone shooting a post office will likely influence you when you snap."

      On the bright side, that at least stops people doing anything *really* innovative. Car crime and violent behaviour are pretty scary on an individual level, but I won't start to get worried about this til I see a computer game where the aim is to design high-yield explosive devices.

      --
      For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
  30. camper by Maskirovka · · Score: 5, Funny
    news.com.au are reporting an Australian court has been told that two men dressed as characters from 'Counter Strike' shot and killed a man during a Sydney home invasion

    Rumor has it he was camping.

    1. Re:camper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, if you are stupid enough to run straight into my gun I will shoot you.

    2. Re:camper by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 1

      Fucking campers.

      It's a legitimate strategy!

      --

  31. Sounds like a lawyers ploy by spindizzy · · Score: 1

    In criminal law the lawyers will use whatever they can to influence the jury. What is said in court is used to influence and emotive plays are stock in trade. Frankly this brings nothing new except another legal gambit to light.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
  32. What's with his name? by Shambhu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some posters are doubting whether the alleged perps were really dressed specifically as CS characters, and not as generic swat team members or terrorists. I'd give them the benefit of a doubt for the time being, but keep in mind that just because the linked article didn't say what the supporting evidence is doesn't mean there isn't any.

    There is one small clue, however. Look at his name. Is Sophear Em really his birth name?

    --
    Rome wasn't bilked in a day.
    1. Re:What's with his name? by mikeophile · · Score: 1

      This is just the sort of thing one would expect to happen when fraggers decide to mate and name the kids with l33t-speak.

    2. Re:What's with his name? by michajoe · · Score: 1

      > Is Sophear Em really his birth name? Absolutely. If it was just his nickname in the game, he'd be S0ph34r 3m!

    3. Re:What's with his name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I knew a Cambodian guy named Sophear once. It's certainly possible for that to be his real name.

    4. Re:What's with his name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't surprise me if it was his real name. In that area of Sydney there are a lot of people from a Middle-Eastern background, so having an unusual name like that wouldn't surprise me.

      It does look suspiciously like an online nick though.

  33. That's Nothing by johnnywheeze · · Score: 4, Funny

    I heard that there's a bunch of people who after playing too much "America's Army", stormed through this country in the middle east, killing thousands of people for nothing more than oil!

    Forget Video Games. The american military causes violence, let's ban that instead.

    1. Re:That's Nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      this gets modded flamebait ?
      hah, flamebait for telling the truth, the army is just a legalised form of what those wannabe counterstrikers did: killing innocent ppl for no valid reason whatsoever

      it's a hypocritic and biased world when all sorts of arms (guns) are legalised but plants are illegal, when someone mentioning sarcasm about 'american's army' making publicity for legal killing under the myth of a divided corrupt nation, is being moded flamebait

    2. Re:That's Nothing by DeathByDuke · · Score: 1

      and like most players in Americas Army, they shoot the wrong things.

    3. Re:That's Nothing by Catnapster · · Score: 1

      Forget video games *and* the military.

      People cause violence. Ban people instead.

      Stupid people, always screwing everything up.

      --
      The world can be wrong today for once.
  34. Some people just don't care.... by iamcf13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like a plain case of open murder.

    Too bad about the wife. Her husband was murdered and she became a widow.

    The 'Counterstrike' angle was just used by the killer(s) as a disguise.

    Some people cannot or will not separate reality from virtual reality in video games.

    Yeah, such games can be (great) stress relievers but when you start feeling compulsion to do deadly stuff from the games in 'real life', you should think about stopping playing that particular game and play something more abstract like the (in)famous game TETRIS where nothing is killed or hurt in the game. Other alternatives would be non-violent sports games like golf, or board games. I would suggest pinball games but most of those have violent content or themes in them--however small.

    Again, it is all left up to individual and what they want to do in such situations--I am only making non-violent suggestions.

    PS: I am surprised the court case is still ongoing nearly nearly 3 years after crime.

  35. Wait a second by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought Australia was supposed to be some kind of gunless utopia.

    Where'd they get the guns to do this?

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:Wait a second by forkboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just had an argument with an Australian over gun control, on another discussion site. (plug: it's a decent science discussion forum, based out of the UK, but people all over the world read it. check it out)

      Just goes to prove my point that people who want guns will find them on the black market anyway, so restricting law-abiding citizens from owning them only serves to strengthen the positions of gun-wielding criminals.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    2. Re:Wait a second by JamesTRexx · · Score: 1

      ...restricting law-abiding citizens from owning...

      So you rather have some junkie break into your house, grab your gun and then use it to kill other people?
      Restricting guns means less guns that can be used to kill. The real criminals will find a way to get one anyhow, but it will prevent the average Joe Blow freaking out and using one.
      Only in a society with levelheaded people that wouldn't be a big problem, and frankly, the US for instance isn't one of them. I don't even want everyone here in The Netherlands the right to bear arms.

      --
      home
    3. Re:Wait a second by ttys00 · · Score: 2, Informative

      For the most part it is. Shootings don't happen very often outside of the realm of organized crime. The average citizen goes their whole life without seeing a gun.

      It is very, very hard to keep things out of Australia - just like keeping drugs out of America, there is just too much unmonitored coastline to watch. A friend of my former Sydney employer is retired and sails around the world for fun - in January this year he sailed from Fiji directly into Circular Quay (past the Opera House) without being stopped by any form of authority. He could have brought in guns, bombs, drugs, you name it.

      In parts of Sydney and Melbourne it is trivially easy to find black market guns... you just have to ask certain people. A Steyr of the sort used in Counterstrike and by the Australian army will set you back about AU$10,000 (US$7500).

    4. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No you are wrong, that is an very very dangerous justification of lax gun laws. It's NOT about availability, it's ALL about economics.

      If you want a black market handgun in Australia, you are looking at a price tag of several thousands of dollars. The same gun in the US would be, $50 perhaps. That price tag is the key - what down and out crim can afford that? It's unrealistic to think that we'll ever remove all illegal guns from circulation, but free market economics mean we don't have to.

      Yes there are still guns on the street (I've never seem one). But I'd rather live in a society where gun crimes are front page news - not summary statistics. As an Australian I'm very proud of our gun laws and feel that they serve as a good model for other nations to actively tackle this problem. Don't wait for a massacre like out Port Arthur tragedy.

    5. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you american ? it wouldn't suprise me if you are, and quickly are looking to mock another country cuz ur too sad about the condition about gun"control" in the USA, kids get guns for their 6th birthday there oO BUT BLAME COUNTERSTRIKE !

    6. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In parts of Sydney and Melbourne it is trivially easy to find black market guns... you just have to ask certain people. A Steyr of the sort used in Counterstrike and by the Australian army will set you back about AU$10,000 (US$7500).

      That's about double the market price here in the US for a Steyr AUG. I can't decide whether that's a good price (because it's black market), or a lousy one (because it's a US$3000 premium over market.)

    7. Re:Wait a second by DZign · · Score: 1

      As a good owner, you should put your gun in a gun-safe where it belongs and no junkie can get it.

      The problem is that pro- and anti-gun groups are very extreme.. the pro group wants everyone to own a gun and be able to walk around with it, while the anti-group wants no gun to exist on this world.

      Guess what.. they're both wrong and the best way is somewhere in the middle. I'm in Belgium myself and like the Netherlands, I think there aren't many problems with gun ownership. Although here in Belgium there's now a discussion if they should also be allowed for the defense of property, as legally you're only allowed to use a gun for self-defense (ie the past years there were some problems with juwelers who shot the robbers).

      It all depends on where you live.. live in a large city or very populated country like in Europe, and everyone walking around with a gun isn't the best idea and should be restricted. But people living in the USA on their farm with no neighbours for miles around and one sheriff who lives 200 miles away.. they'll find it necessary to have the right to own a gun and defend their family with it.

      The 'gun-grabbers' seem to forget it is too late to get rid of all guns. A gun is not something like a car or plastic toy which breaks after a few years and you throw away. 50 year old guns which are maintained still work as good as they were new. And there are already millions out there which have never be registered. So it's an illusion to ever get rid of them all (and then people will use baseball bats or other weapens).

      As long as people feel safe where they live, only a small minority of people will have the need to own a gun for self-defense. Problems start when criminality becomes too high and everyone wants to own a gun to defends his house/family.

    8. Re:Wait a second by cryptor3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you want a black market handgun in Australia, you are looking at a price tag of several thousands of dollars. The same gun in the US would be, $50 perhaps. That price tag is the key - what down and out crim can afford that? ... Don't wait for a massacre like out Port Arthur tragedy.

      $50 my ass. If you ever buy a gun for $50, you'd better have a good emergency room nearby, because that gun is going to explode in your hand.

      Incidentally, in the aforementioned Port Arthur tragedy, the individual possessed an AR-15, and an FN FAL, guns that easily command a price tag over $1000 dollars each (even in the post-ban United States). So much for a thousands-of-dollars price tag deterring crime.

    9. Re:Wait a second by Canberra+Bob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Lets not let facts get in the way of feeling good about ourselves.

      There is a slight problem - gun related crime has INCREASED in Australia since the "tough new gun laws" were introduced. Registered firearms have very rarely been used in crime in Australia - as far as I recall only ONE registered handgun has ever been used in a murder in Australia. Generally crime is committed using unregistered (illegal) firearms, fancy that.

    10. Re:Wait a second by arose · · Score: 1

      A gun in a gun safe isn't very useful for self defence, is it?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    11. Re:Wait a second by Mant · · Score: 2, Insightful

      gun related crime has INCREASED in Australia since the "tough new gun laws" were introduced.

      So? Do you think the gun laws are the only factor in gun crime? Of course not. Crime and gun crime is a complex issue, depending on all sorts of social and economic issues.

      So the issue is, if there were not any strict gun laws, would the rate be rising faster or slower?

    12. Re:Wait a second by Mant · · Score: 1

      So much for a thousands-of-dollars price tag deterring crime.

      Citing when counter example doesn't help you disprove a point about a general deterent. Not saying the high price works, but your logic certainly doesn't.

      Deterrents will always fail on some people, that doesn't mean you give up on all deterrants.

    13. Re:Wait a second by Canberra+Bob · · Score: 1

      These "tough new gun laws" were introduced in Australia in what? 1996 or so? Since then the economy has improved, and the general standard of living has improved (and no Im not a Howard fan before you stoop as low as accusing me of that ;) ). Maybe as people earn more they can afford these guns that were too expensive to buy before? Now before I try taking too many cheap shots (excuse the pun), I totally agree that it is a complex issue - I would suggest that social problems cause crime, and criminals will obtain firearms irrespective of whether or not they are illegal (criminals are strangely enough not too bothered whether they break the law by definition). Because of this I would argue that gun laws will have minimal impact on gun related crime and instead to stem gun related crime other factors are in fact far more influential.

      We have had many depressed economic times in the past, recession in early 80s comes to mind, and didnt have a marked increase in gun related crimes even though semi automatic rifles were available at K-Mart (oh for the good old days where you could buy ammunition at your local department store *sigh*).

    14. Re:Wait a second by Mant · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just goes to prove my point that people who want guns will find them on the black market anyway,

      That strikes we as something of an oversimplification. You are saying that no matter how difficult or expensive it is to get a gun illegaly, criminals will end up with as many guns?

      Gun control laws aren't going to stop every crinimal getting a gun, but aim to stop some getting guns.

      so restricting law-abiding citizens from owning them only serves to strengthen the positions of gun-wielding criminals.

      And stop accidents with guns, and stop people using guns in the heat of the moment (they may find other lethal weapons, but the victim has more chance), and reduce the number of criminals with guns.

      Lets remember that outside the USA the population of the rest of the 1st world generally doesn't want guns and is largely in favour of them being heavily restricted. They like their much lower murder rates. Some criminals will always get guns, and things like this shooting will always happen. You can't look at one crime though, you have to look at the bigger picture.

    15. Re:Wait a second by Profound · · Score: 2, Informative

      Lets not let facts get in the way of feeling good about ourselves.
      There is a slight problem - gun related crime has INCREASED in Australia since the "tough new gun laws" were introduced.


      I think you are ignoring some facts yourself.

    16. Re:Wait a second by DZign · · Score: 1

      ok smartass.. I'll elaborate on that.

      Either you've got a permission to carry and then you carry it on you. And no burgler who comes into your empty house would steal your gun as there's no gun to steal; like the parent poster complained about. And it works for selfdefence as you complain about.

      Or you are at home and then you either keep it also on you, or you put it in a gun safe.

      And yes there are small gun safes to place in your bedroom with electronic locks, which allow very fast access to it in case you were sleeping and hear something in your house.
      So a locked away gun can still be used by its owner for selfdefence.
      Read a bit on rec.guns about it.

    17. Re:Wait a second by caveat · · Score: 3, Informative

      Buh, the sporting goods store in town has a used AR-15 for $389.99, comes with a trigger lock, case, and two 30-round mags. Pretty good deal. Course, I decided I'd spend $349.99 on the HK G3 clone; 7.62 is much manlier than a wussy lil 5.56 :D

      --

      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    18. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rec.guns

      The fact that guns are filed under rec. is a bit unnerving, don't you think?

    19. Re:Wait a second by jimi+the+hippie · · Score: 1

      If you want a black market handgun in Australia, you are looking at a price tag of several thousands of dollars. The same gun in the US would be, $50 perhaps.

      And how would you know that?

    20. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be true in some part but lets not forget that a huge number of senseless killings and gun related violence around schools and with the youth in general stems from kids from the suburbs who found daddy's gun not the kids getting them from the black market. They ususally are used on themselves, i.e gang-on-ang violence or at least used to try to stay alive/have enough money to live, eg bank, post office, shop robberies.

    21. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I kind of break the stereotype for "geek".

      I spend two or three hours a night at the gym and/or studying martial arts. I used to kickbox, and moved on to study tang soo do, aikijuijitsu, and tai chi chuan. One of the many realizations this has given me is that _anything_ becomes a weapon in the hand of the willfull. It's those unwilling to be violent who really need a weapon.

      People were killing each other a long time before they figured out what they could do with gunpowder.

      The US has much better statistics on other forms of violent crime, and the projected reason is because any half-witted criminal is gonna think twice before jacking with someone who may or may not have a .45 under their shirt.

      But, after all, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. The rest of the world can argue the point and use the facts however they want.

      From my perspective, every [wo]man has the right to defend themselves, and a gun is an effective way for a 100lb woman to gain an advantage on a 300lb rapist. I don't expect everyone to invest the years it can take to develop the skills to defend oneself unarmed. An unarmed law-abider should have the ability to stand against the serial killer who can do his job with any number of household items.

      Also, in the US, most who participate in organized crime have access to enough money to buy a gun, whether they're in the states or Australia.

      My feeling on gun control is that it's just another way for socialist (yes, the US is socialist too, we just have better marketing) governments to provide people with the illusion of security while making the people dependent on them. It's just another way to limit personal accountability for anything.

      When the people of the world realize that they can't legislate utopia, perhaps then they'll start to educate for it instead.

      In the meantime, a wolf is a wolf, whether or not it's laying with the sheep. Guns are just a good way to give the sheep fangs.

    22. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dunno about now, but when i was still living in louisianna (almost 15 years ago), you sure the hell COULD buy a 9mm handgun in any pawnshop for 50$ :)

    23. Re:Wait a second by b3x · · Score: 1

      as bumper sticker, popular with gun nuts, says here in the US:

      if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

      Allowing everyone to have a gun, evens the playing field :)

    24. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the big problem with too easy availiability is that you get kids wanting to get guns just for the coolness factor (when i was 15 i could have easily bought a mac/uzi in CA for a couple hundred $$ if i wanted to ....so i think the problem is OVERAVAILIABILITY)

      Now im in europe, and yes you can easily get guns too depending on what country your in (usualy hunting rifles), but laws are way more strict here, and surprisingly problems related to gubs are alot lower here too.

      You can still get handguns, either pay outrageous black market prices, or go through tons of paperwork to get registerd in a club or something ..but the fact remains, criminals included, guns are pretty scarce around here.

      Tho i still wonder if i had to choose between getting shot, bashed by a baseball bat, or cut open by a knife ..which id choose. Hard question :)

    25. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Score -1: Using logic in a gun-control debate

    26. Re:Wait a second by chl · · Score: 1
      gun related crime has INCREASED in Australia since the "tough new gun laws"

      Of course "gun crime" has increased. After all, half the population are now "gun criminals" under the new laws, if they did not surrender their formally legal guns.

      OK, the above is just a wild speculation, but we all now how statistics can be massaged to support all kinds of views. Most people do not realise that criminal behaviour is defined by the law -- a higher crime rate does not necessarily mean a worse quality of life, it might just mean a rise in the number of laws.

      BTW, the increase of violent crime after strict gun laws were enacted is also often reported for the UK, as is its opposite.

      chl

    27. Re:Wait a second by El · · Score: 1
      You are saying that no matter how difficult or expensive it is to get a gun illegaly, criminals will end up with as many guns? No, not just as many guns. Just a lot more guns than law-abiding citizens. Restrictions on means of self-defense always favor the aggressor.

      stop people using guns in the heat of the moment (they may find other lethal weapons, but the victim has more chance) If you don't trust yourself to not get pissed off and pull out a lethal weapon, then perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to drive either...

      outside the USA the population of the rest of the 1st world generally doesn't want guns and is largely in favour of them being heavily restricted. Can you cite the studies that indicate this? Last time I checked, hunting was still legal almost everywhere...

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    28. Re:Wait a second by El · · Score: 1

      I do hope you haven't been playing a lot of CS or GTA3 lately... have you? ;-D

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    29. Re:Wait a second by sootman · · Score: 1

      "So much for a thousands-of-dollars price tag deterring crime."

      Yeah, 'cause criminals would never, you know, STEAL a gun.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    30. Re:Wait a second by cryptor3 · · Score: 1

      Which is exactly why it's pointless to raise the price of a guns.

    31. Re:Wait a second by cryptor3 · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand the point. The point is that a $50 gun is likely to be a piece of crap.

    32. Re:Wait a second by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      If you want a black market handgun in Australia, you are looking at a price tag of several thousands of dollars. The same gun in the US would be, $50 perhaps.

      The least expensive gun I've ever bought was $89 plus tax and fees. In the end it cost me over $100. It was a two shot .38 Special Derringer.

      Inexpensive guns like that are not going to be taken to AU for sale on the black market. No criminal wants them.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    33. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shop smart. Shop S-Mart.

    34. Re:Wait a second by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      depends where you get it; I don't think the guy's talking about going into a gun store and buying one legally... on the street guns are sold for $50 or less easily, especially if they were recently used in a crime...

    35. Re:Wait a second by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      Of course, because now gun-wielding criminals know the innocent person they're going after won't have a gun!

      The kind of laws our "civilized" countries pass these days never cease to disgust and frustrate me... heh

    36. Re:Wait a second by caveat · · Score: 1

      Nah, Ghost Recon w/the Navy SEALS 2.0 mod all the way...now I just need to find me some black BDUs and I'm all set :D

      --

      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    37. Re:Wait a second by caveat · · Score: 1

      I think that price you quoted is for a civilian SAUG, semi-auto only...I can't find any prices ATM, but I think that Class III (select fire) SAUGS go for about the same price as the Oz black-market ones.

      --

      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    38. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The innocent person in Australia has never carried a gun - handguns are just not part of life here.

      Gun crime can only be assessed in terms of broader historical trends. In Australia, every type of crime - violent, monetary, volume, you name it - has declined significantly over the last five years. Gun crime is down by the same margin as everything else. The real story about the gun control laws in Australia has been the decline in suicides. Guns really are a lot easier to use in suicides than any other tool.

      Cheers, Phil

    39. Re:Wait a second by dcam · · Score: 1

      I think what you fail to understand is that the reason this makes the news in Australia is that it is unusual. The reasons this doesn't make the news in the states is that it is not unusual.

      I've also had a long and rather interesting discussion on gun control in Australia vs gun control in the US.

      --
      meh
    40. Re:Wait a second by mibus · · Score: 1

      If you ever buy a gun for $50, you'd better have a good emergency room nearby, because that gun is going to explode in your hand.

      Which will probably do more to stop people from having (and using) guns than any other form of gun control :)

    41. Re:Wait a second by Bohemoth2 · · Score: 1

      Criminals don't buy guns they steal them Dumbass!
      Pwned!

      Now is there another antigunner that wants to take me on? I'm ready.

    42. Re:Wait a second by riprjak · · Score: 1

      Flawed reasoning.

      To be a morally superior society we need to be morally superior. If I posess a weapon, I intend to use it. Using a weapon against another human is wrong.

      If you want to defend yourself, disarm the attacker and use their weapon. THIS is defence as the only reason it happened was because the attacker brought the weapon and there is no possible way to argue that YOU the defender were responsible for the attackers injuries. If I have a weapon waiting and attack someone with it, this is NOT defence, this is assault as it is possible I ambushed my "attacker" when there was no threat to myself. Case in point as to why civilians should not be armed; a man "defending" two women from a "rapist" shot a perfectly innocent newspaper delivery man in the head once over here.

      This sums most of my arguement against weapons for self defence. Weapons are for professional soldiers and police. Hell, most police arent sufficiently accurate and skilled with firearms for me to be comfortable with them carrying them.

      A great human (ghandi for example) would not even attempt this defence and would not resist the attacker. Im not great, but I try to live well and respect the rules of civilisation.

      In my ideal world, the MILITARY would respond to armed incidents with decisive force to clear and pacify, not to arrest. Those who choose to depoly weapons against civilians should be dealt with permanently as they are in my opinion unsalvageable savages.

      If you own a weapon there is something fundementally broken inside you. Look at the insecurity that requires you to arm yourself, you have a problem.

      People make choices, they and no one else are responsible. However, if you are fucked up enough to kill/hurt people you either have a broken mind or your parents didnt raise you with proper values. Look at the degree of absurd violence against innocent people in the third world to see it has nothing to do with video games.

      Mostly, I blame parents, religion or damaged minds for violence against other people. If we just respected each other and the rules of society, it would be all good.

      Ah well, enough off topic ranting... this shit annoys me... both the implication that "video games" made me do it and the arguement that you should arm yourself because other people are armed.

      You are as safe as you want to feel and CANNOT with any degree of weaponry prevent a determined adversary from killing you. Relax, enjoy life and dont live in fear; if bad shit goes down, deal with it on the spot and move on.

      err!
      jak

    43. Re:Wait a second by forkboy · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that people stalking into a man's home dressed in fatigues and gunning him down are a common occurence in the states? That would be on headline news for weeks, unless of course it was THE POLICE doing it.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    44. Re:Wait a second by forkboy · · Score: 1

      To be a morally superior society we need to be morally superior. If I posess a weapon, I intend to use it. Using a weapon against another human is wrong.


      I own several firearms. I do not intend to use any of them aside from shooting targets at the range. I relax, I enjoy life, and I do not live in fear. If bad shit goes down, I don't draw a piece at the drop of a hat. However, if that bad shit is an intruder who wishes to cause my family harm, you bet your ass he's getting a Hydrashock or two.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    45. Re:Wait a second by forkboy · · Score: 1

      Gun ownership per capita is higher in Canada, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, that I can think of off the top of my head.

      You speak of the big picture. The big picture says that gun ownership is not the problem, it's the social issues in a society that generate the crime, not the amount of available firearms. There is enormous prejudice, class separation, and anger in American culture. It's in our history, and we're slowly working it out. The guns are an instrument, not a cause. But they're not going away, so I choose to have them and hopefully not need them.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    46. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the government of the United States. Not this administration, but over that past several administrations. The Patriot Act. McCarthyism. Hoover's FBI. Japanese and German Americans being put in camps during WWII.

      The primary reason to possess arms is, as a last resort, for the people to take back their government. If only the military and police have weapons, who is in control? Are you a citizen or a subject? The US is supposed to have a government "of the people, for the people, and by the people." Historically, governments have shown that they cannot handle power very well, and as such should not be trusted. The right to peaceable assemble, the right of free speech, and the right to keep and bear arms are very closely tied together. The first steps are ideally to be watchful and educated about the issues, to vote, to protest, to have laws changed. Sometimes this just doesn't work. There are more than enough examples of unarmed citizens/subjects being domimated by those who are in power, who have the money and the arms.
      Love your country. Fear your government.
      The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

    47. Re:Wait a second by riprjak · · Score: 1

      ...getting a Hydrashock or two

      Ah so you only own firearms for range shooting; that is why you own AP rounds rather than ball or wadcutters, right??

    48. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then the wolf must pack a sniper rifle in order to restore hierarchy.

    49. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please back that up. I live in the Netherlands and the only guns i see are carried by police officers.
      They're illegal for other folks, unless they agree with random searches.

      It's nice when the government and the people prefer to not cause harm.

    50. Re:Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they're checkups, not searches.

  36. Slashdot fodder by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1, Funny

    Wow, perfect article. Everybody can righteously rant about how there is absolutely no evidence that violent games affect people or kids. Mod points for everyone!

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  37. Let the blaming begin..... by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    This will always bother me. Society looks for scapegoats responsible for the violence such as TV, Movies, and how video games. Perhaps it's time we look the perpetrators in the eye, in this case, a couple of people one of who is said to be an adult dressed up as elite commands from Counter Strike, and say, "Dude, you're fucked up". Someone who attempts to fly off a building because they got too caught up in a
    Dungeon and Dragons style adventure is fucked up. Someone who drives around in a swamp and tries to jump over cop cars with a trunk load of moonshine is fucked up. I guess we could take a moment to gasp at the fact that they lacked any sort of imagination to do something very stupid but it doesn't change the fact that they are a threat to others and likely would have been a threat anyway. What's next, dressing up like a bus driver to escape accountability for domeic violence?

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  38. zaa by MrCawfee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well because

    tv makes people kill people.
    video games make people kill people.
    rap music makes people kill people.

    the only thing that is safe for our children is books... on something completely unreleated: has anyone read that book by Tom Clancy were that one guy crashed that plane into the whitehouse? that so cool and impossible to emulate.

    1. Re:zaa by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      It was Executive Orders. Tom Clancy is one hell of a writer.

    2. Re:zaa by BlueLightning · · Score: 1

      Technically it was "Debt of Honor" in which the crash occurred, and to correct the parent poster it was the Capitol, not the White House.

    3. Re:zaa by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      I read the two in the same day, so they kind of merged together ;)

  39. premeditated. by hkht · · Score: 2, Informative

    it was good luck that they dressed as counter-strikers, it will be much easier to prove they were "extremely" premeditated in their crime. counter-strike should get credit for help nailing these kooks not blamed for corrupting an already crazed couple of human beings.

  40. Dam them terorists! by node159 · · Score: 1

    They must have been dressed as 'terorists' :P

    --
    GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
  41. No information by IInventedTheInternet · · Score: 1

    There's not enough information in this article to make any conclusion. It seems nothing more than sensationalized reporting. Australians seem to fear video games more than most, having banned manhunt, Postal 2 and others. This is just to inspire fear in the public and unite them against a non-enemy (something that should have a regulatory eye kept on it, but nothing to be banned)
    The most outrageous thing about this article was that it is given this much attention before the facts are apparent.

  42. In other news ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

    A man who was dressed like Kerry killed someone. Now the government examines if the Democrats should be forbidden.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    1. Re:In other news ... by BlacKat · · Score: 1

      For the love of $DIETY if you are going to try that trick at least dress up as Bush? ;)

    2. Re:In other news ... by arose · · Score: 1

      Don't they both dress in suites? Politicans, lawyers... This isn't such a bad idea afterall!

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  43. Re:Are games a problem? Yes. by October_30th · · Score: 1
    Most people are not affected adversely, in any serious way, by these violent games.

    And? The same could be said about the Bible or Quran, for instance. It is also important not to look away from these books as having a dangerous effect on certain elements in society who are ill-equipped to handle the violent imagery inherent in such books.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
  44. culture of violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think what many people fail to see here, is that what violent games create and feed is a culture of violence. You say its sport? Entertainment? Perhaps... But ultimatly, how does a game where you imitate the actions of a commando going for the "kill" help our society be a healthy, happier place? Do games like CS/DoomIII/Unreal etc, contribute?

    Yes, this is an anon post. So flame/mod down at will because I am sure a great deal of /. readers are gamers. But surely there must be something true in the above to some of us here

    1. Re:culture of violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your point is an interesting one for sure, but before we start addressing computer games perhaps we should address the REAL wars going on all over the world?

      Games don't kill people. Americans kill people.

    2. Re:culture of violence by Imazalil · · Score: 1

      Perhaps sure, but I believe games, like any other medium, bring out what is already inside. And of course people with certain tendencies (wanting to shoot people) are drawn to games/movies/books/etc that indulge those tendencies (getting to shoot people).

      In my opinion if the game was actually responsible for pushing these guys over the edge, it could have been anything else, a movie, tv show, book, you name it.

      Now about a happier better society, Violent tendencies are in everyone, different people release it in different ways, sports, drinking, wife abuse, video games. The truth is that people just plain suck and have a lot of anger, the trick is in how to release it. Generaly speaking, video games are a great way to release this anger.

      Im.

    3. Re:culture of violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think you're a bit confused. There's a certain age when testosterone is playing a very important part in the hormonal life of a young human male. That being said, aggressiveness, competitiveness, and other expressions of the dominant influence of testosterone WILL maniphest themselves. Now, after aknowledging this simple biological fact, you should have no problem understanding that (extremely) violent computer games actually prevent a controllable and rather fulfilling way to consume the energy of said testosterone. I challenge you to solve the dillema: violent video games (with friends) in the safety of one's room, or "going out, nailing a chick"/"going out, give that nigga a chest pocket"/"going out, play daredevil". I'm curious if you have kids, if so, if you have a son, and if so, where would you have him spend the natural compulsions of his age. As with many other things, some "problem solvers" think it's possible to just.. I dunno.. make the problem go away.

  45. Damn lawyers by affa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Its more likely a tactical move by the defence in setting things up.... later on when it goes to trial they'll can the game as an excuse..... In years gone by people just used to claim insanity.....

    I mean.... they didn't even tag the ground!!!

    --
    sig's are for weenies
  46. This Terrible Crime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... can only be blamed on the influence of the "video-game", Counter-Strike.

    (well, somebody was gonna say it.)

    These kids today and their make-out parties... grumble... mutter... grumble...

  47. Re:Next up Shrek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    yeah like the boy who killed a family after watching Shrek

    Pierre, left alone to do his homework, got his father's rifle and went to the lounge to watch "Shrek". After a while he loaded four cartridges into the gun.

  48. completely wrong by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    does the violent movie turn a normal guy into a killer?

    or does the violent movie placate the violent tendencies in us all?

    does the pornography turn the normal guy into a rapist?

    or does pornography take antisocial urges and empty them in a magazine instead of a real woman?

    so i take your "media influences" and throw it right back at you: if media does influence, then it takes our violent and antisocial sexual urges and provides a harmless outlet for them

    even if, even if you somehow show me some normal guy who shoots someone because of a videogame or a movie, which i don't even believe, i can still show you ten guys who would be shooting real people if they weren't doing it in a videogame

    so you want a more peaceful society?

    more pornography and violent videogames- I AM NOT JOKING!

    human nature is not a picture of innocence that media comes along and warps... human nature is a seething cauldron of sex and violence that media placates

    got it?

    if you honestly believe plays ANY hands in making people violent or sexually depraved, then you are trying to tell me that before media: before videogames, movies, records, books... that we were somehow peaceful and loving

    bullshit!

    violent movies and videogames and pornography prevents thousands of murders and rapes every year

    i sincerely, wholeheartedly believe that

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:completely wrong by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm digging up some old reading here so please be nice with the corrections, clarifications. But I believe you just outlined the 'contagion vs catharsis' philosophical debate from back when the ancient greek/roman philosphers had the same argument. The simple question is do fantasies/stories of unacceptable behaviours incourage them, or give safe outlet to them. I think the fact we've been arguing this since antiquity shows it's neighther clear cut nor easy to answer. Personally I think it can do eigther/both depending on the person and circumstance. Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    2. Re:completely wrong by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      You missed what he said.

      He said that you were being too black and white about it, not that you were wrong.

      Of course the media affects what we do and who we are TO SOME EXTENT, to say otherwise would be pretty naive, but the question is, what is the effect and how large is it?

      It's something more than 0, but almost certainly a lot less than the amount required to turn a well adjusted person into a killer.
      And likewise, the effect will vary from person to person, some people might be affected in a positive manner by violent games (providing an outlet, like you said), but others might show less desirable effects. Either way, it's still not the game's fault what a person does after being exposed to it, but you can't say that they have no effect at all.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    3. Re:completely wrong by nathanh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      does the violent movie turn a normal guy into a killer?

      Once again you're being black and white. I don't believe a single violent movie will turn any normal guy into a killer, but I do believe that violent movies can be one of many factors that leads to violent actions.

      so i take your "media influences" and throw it right back at you: if media does influence, then it takes our violent and antisocial sexual urges and provides a harmless outlet for them

      I believe that both are true. Media can provide an outlet for some people. It can also encourage antisocial behaviour in others. I think for most people that both are true at the same time. Cogitate on that one!

      got it?

      I think I "got it" several decades before you even started thinking about it. This isn't a new argument. It predates my birth by at least a few 1000 years.

      if you honestly believe [media] plays ANY hands in making people violent or sexually depraved,

      Yes.

      then you are trying to tell me that before media: before videogames, movies, records, books... that we were somehow peaceful and loving

      That does not follow from what I believe. You are not thinking clearly.

    4. Re:completely wrong by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      also don't forget that there's violent movies and violent movies. however, if entertainment propagates the idea that violence is somehow "cool" then it is a different story. nevertheless, there's still this whole concept of parents who have this odd thing called responsibility which if i understood correctly also included actually teaching the values of society to their children. failing that, there's school. that still leaves those people whose conscience just doesn't quite tick but those have always been around and always will be. and in a lot of cases even these individuals can be approached from a logical point of view. even if they fail to see something is "wrong" they can still be taught that something is "not a smart idea"

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    5. Re:completely wrong by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      > People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.

      But doesn't that just give the same people more oportunities?

      (sorry *ducks*)

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    6. Re:completely wrong by nova20 · · Score: 1


      if you honestly believe [media] plays ANY hands in making people violent or sexually depraved,

      Yes.

      then you are trying to tell me that before media: before videogames, movies, records, books... that we were somehow peaceful and loving

      That does not follow from what I believe. You are not thinking clearly.


      Well then what do you believe? I'm sorry, but if you're going to make a point, you should back it up!

    7. Re:completely wrong by goon+america · · Score: 1

      Well, we've had 100+ years now of an era of empirical psychological research.

      And, the status of the catharthis/contagion debate in this context is... I hate to say it (I was a big CS fan, myself), but there is no scientific support for the cartharthis hypothesis, but there is some support for contagion. One of the classics is the Bobo doll experiment, in which children who saw a person attacking a doll soon imitated it later. In adults, the effect is not as strong, but it's still there. There is no experiment that I'm aware of that shows the viewing of or participation in some form of conflagration or violence makes its repetition less likely, though there are unfortunately quite a few that show the opposite. So, while this debate may be intractable a prioi, it may not be experimentally.

    8. Re:completely wrong by HeavyK · · Score: 1

      The Bobo doll experiments don't hold any water. Hitting a Bobo doll in a lab controlled enviroment isn't the same as hitting a person in real life with intent to hurt them.
      For one thing Bobo dolls are meant to be hit and everybody even kids know that, and aggressive play is far different from real life aggression with intent to harm.
      For instance kids after watching a wrestling match or some violent R rated action movie will play wrestle or pretent to shoot one another with fake guns or there fingers afterwards, but they don't really intend to hurt one another. It's just play. I did it all the time when i was young kid.

    9. Re:completely wrong by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      It does however show that children learn from adult example. Somthing we pretty much already knew. However it just doesn't address catharsis vs contagion. Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  49. yes, censorship on Tom Clancy's books ! by Atreide · · Score: 1, Funny

    Let's cut books and Holywood movies, they promote this kind of outfit.

    --
    The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then :-(
  50. TETRIS made me do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was arrested for dropping heavy objects off a building. I had a perfect stack going and all I had to do was drop this one last girder. That was when the blue men with guns broke down my barricade on the roof door and were quite rough with me.

  51. ban alcohol then by iezhy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    every day, theres hundreds of lethal incidents worldwide, caused by people under alcohol influence

    shouldnt it be banned first then?

    1. Re:ban alcohol then by IoN_PuLse · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I was referring to other game-like (ie: not digesting a liquid) activities. I don't drink, so sure, ban alcohol.

    2. Re:ban alcohol then by kingj02 · · Score: 1
      every day, theres hundreds of lethal incidents worldwide, caused by people under alcohol influence
      There are hundreds of lethal incidents worldwide, caused by people using firearms.

      There are hundreds of lethal incidents worldwide, caused by people driving cars.

      There are hundreds of lethal incidents worldwide, caused by people engaging in life.

      Simply banning something is not the solution.
      --
      Ardente veritate incendite tenebras mundi
    3. Re:ban alcohol then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that was his point.

  52. Evidence they were influenced by counterstike.. by rjshields · · Score: 1, Funny

    After the incident, one of the men shot the other in the foot, at which point the second called him a "f**king n00b teamkiller" and tried to ban his IP.

    --
    In this world nothing is certain but death, taxes and flawed car analogies.
    1. Re:Evidence they were influenced by counterstike.. by rjshields · · Score: 1

      Modded me overrated, ehh. Bit too close to the truth was it? Or just no sense of humor today?

      --
      In this world nothing is certain but death, taxes and flawed car analogies.
  53. Guns don't kill people, rappers do... by fantomas · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    As Goldie Lookin Chain sing... ;-)

  54. They would have got away with it by Metatron · · Score: 2, Funny

    If they hadn't spray tagged the walls "Pwn3d by Sophear" :-)

  55. Let the blaming begin??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No shit let the blaming begin! Could someone please tell me how this is NOT at least influenced by CounterStrike?

  56. With the death penalty... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...They won't respawn.

    1. Re:With the death penalty... by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      .au does not have the death penalty.

      "Australia officially abolished capital punishment nationwide, under the Crimes (Death Penalty Abolition) Amendment Act 1985. Under Commonwealth law, the Death Penalty was abolished in 1973 by Section 4 of the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973.

      The last state-sanctioned execution was the hanging of Ronald Joseph Ryan on February 03, 1967. His execution stopped the nation, literally. The hanging created the biggest public outrage ever seen in the history of Australia, that no person was executed ever again."

  57. Such is freedom by groomed · · Score: 1

    This is sure to draw a lot of personal responsibility nuts out of the woodwork. Political and ideological dogma compels them to ridicule even the most reasonable doubts or concerns about the glorification of excessive violence in entertainment. Because to them, principle is everything, regardless of where it leads.

    Even if we are disgusted with, or just plain tired of, games that idealize wanton violence and nihilistic solipsism, at the end of the day we should just put those feelings aside and join the crowd to cheer on the society that keeps churning them out by the dozens. Because such is freedom, baby.

    1. Re:Such is freedom by BlueLightning · · Score: 1

      This is sure to draw a lot of moral responsibility nuts out of the woodwork. Political and ideological dogma compels them to ridicule even the most reasonable doubts or concerns about the restriction of freedoms of expression. Because to them, principle is everything, regardless of whether it actually affects them personally or not.

      Even if we are disgusted with, or just plain tired of, people who leap to blame violent criminal behaviour on computer games containing violence with no evidence to back up their claims, at the end of the day we should just put those feelings aside and join the crowd denouncing the society that keeps churning these games out by the dozen. Because such is opinion, baby.

  58. I blame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let the blaming begin.

    Yes, I'd like to start by blaming two guys who shot and killed someone during a home invasion in Australia for giving Counter Strike a bad name. By turning up in clothes that in some way bore an uncanny resemblance to a couple of fictional characters they've allowed the prosecution team an easy play. This in turn will bring a fun computer game into disrepute as the media swings it influence-ray around catching enough moronic members of the public in it's beam to have at least some lasting effect.

    Had these guys been dressed as George W Bush and Tony Blair... well... maybe we could ban those two warmongers who are responsible for thousands of brutal murders.

  59. Elian Gonzalez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember seeing a pic of a CT in a real-life situation before. I know it's a cheap joke, but...

    *taps 'E'*
    Come with me!
    http://www.cubanet.org/mira/nyt_photo.jpg

    DeMeh!

  60. On the other hand... by Lifewish · · Score: 1

    An acquaintance of mine is convinced that excessive playing of Quake saved his life. The story goes that, one morning after a protracted gameage session, he was nearly mown down whilst cycling to school. The hairtrigger state of his nervous system resulted in him swerving out of the errant van's path before his tired brain had even grasped what the fuss was about.

    The legend is silent on whether he subsequently rocket-jumped onto the van and shoved a grenade through the windscreen...

    --
    For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
  61. Reason behind the righteousness by Lifewish · · Score: 1

    I think mostly people are bothered cos it tends to be geeks and/or social outcasts - the sort of people who frequent slashdot - who get caught in the crossfire. Read Voices from the Hellmouth from the Slashdot Hall of Fame for a classic example.
    Damn right we're bothered by this issue.

    --
    For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
  62. But before video games... by lxt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "as if before videogames, there were no violence"

    Certainly in the UK, before videogames it was "Video Nasties" that was corrupting the youth into violent deeds. Today, nobody seems to care that kids watch "Zombie Blood Massacre III". I'd imagine in a decade there will be some other piece of technology being blamed by some for the downfall of society.

  63. amusingly, in california by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I cannot afford preventive medical care at the moment, but I will soon be able to get mental health support if i go crazy from dental pain. What kinda morons vote to tax millionaires an extra 1 percent for mental health services, but dont provide preventive care for anything else?

  64. hmmm wasn't it in the reverse by inmortal · · Score: 1

    Ok, I find this thing intriguing: weren't the counter strike player models made trying to copy the reality? (copying the policemen as they appear on the street, terrorists like in the tv...) So I think that the game characters were dressed as the two persons did...

    --
    Rimember: Jappi Pipol In Da Jaus
  65. Re:Are games a problem? Yes. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 0
    The games put the ideas in the head. The games provide a sort of desensitization to the violence

    True, but of the mass murderers we have had in this country, none appear to have been motivated by computer game experience.

    Martin Bryant was a racist, redarded nutcase with an unfortunate source of money given to him by a well meaning older person. Julian Knight was really in the military, and pissed off with life in general.

    From everything I have read about these people, computers and games don't appear to be a factor. I can't recall CS or a similar game being a factor in the high school massacres of recent years in the US, either. And you would expect it there because those students are right in the network gaming demographic.

  66. Acceptable levels of violence by panurge · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Once upon a time the British had an empire (bear with me, this is relevant). This meant that all the mindless, violent thugs thrown up by society could be drafted into the army and sent where most of them would die of disease, some would die in battle, and some would grow up to be Imperial administrators and complain about the low level of troops we got nowadays. This kept the violent thugs away from civil society and enabled political and social development in the UK.

    Learning from this, the US did the same for many years. There was a nice big civil war in which all the people too aggressive to survive in a developing civil society obligingly killed one another. Then there were gold rushes and the development of the West, and the antisocial thugs were able to go and fight one another over land and gold until eventually civilisation caught up with them.

    And now? The thugs are too dim bulb to get into the armed services, which don't work by getting killed en masse any more. So they hang around civil society and become gang members and drug dealers, and we have to catch them and lock them up. Some of them grow out of it and some don't.

    Games are an expression of the way homo sapiens sapiens was originally designed to work. Blaming them for our lack of ways of dealing with psychopaths is easy because actually fixing the problem is very hard. Never before have we had a society where the majority of sociopaths and psychopaths aren't simply killed off before they reach the age of 21 or so.

    Sometimes I wonder if the answer isn't simply to execute not only all killers, but everyone who commits an unprovoked violent assault on another person with a weapon. The effect would be much the same as the policy that built the British Empire and the US.

    I'm not really putting this forward seriously, but what are the objective reasons why this is a Bad Idea?

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  67. Not to state the obvious, but by 21st+Century+Peon · · Score: 1

    Are we sure that they weren't *actual* C-T agents (officers, goons, whatever) on a raid?

    --
    "Knowledge, sir, should be free to all!"
    ~Harcourt Fenton Mudd
  68. Logical Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well seeing as they were dressed as either Seal Team 6, the British SAS, the Israeli GSG-9 or the French GIGN, since those are the outfits worn in Counter-Strike the logical thing to do is ban them. Yes, let's dismantle the worlds best counter terrorism units because this guy dressed up like one of them and shot someone. The CT's in CS are not original costumes, all of them are taken from these real life counter-terrorism units. If your suggesting we should ban CS because it includes these costumes it would make a lot more sense to dismantle these groups - after all, even the most disturbed minds there is still a barrier between reality and virtual reality they'd need to cross.

  69. What is murder? by ling_chow · · Score: 1

    Is murder a crime? Who can really judge ones acts as immoral, righteous, hypocrite, murder-ish; Not I. Believing a video came can brain wash ones mind into a murderous state is down right wrong. Who here has not murdered anyone? I have, and I'm proud of it. No longer will I be forced to pay for child support due to a car "accident". How do we know the producers of counter strike did not base their 2 characters off these 2 murders? Did the 2 murders even play counter strike? These are all questions I would love to have asked before I judge them as murders

  70. Healthy, happier place? by Lifewish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, if you assume that a world in which I don't beat my sister round the head with heavy objects is healthier...

    Computer games have saved me on two occasions when I was literally seeing red. It doesn't happen much but, when it does, shooting the proverbial out of a terrorist bot is about the best therapy I've come across. For comparison, the time I didn't manage to get to a computer resulted in a big hole in the plasterboard, which was certainly not healthy for my fist.

    I have a very irritating sister. Thanks to computer games, this state of affairs continues.

    --
    For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
    1. Re:Healthy, happier place? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should start planning your family now. As in not having one. If you think your sister drives you crazy, many wives and children are much more effective at pushing the buttons.

      Get a grip on your anger now while you still have a chance at a happy and fulfilling life.

    2. Re:Healthy, happier place? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no kidding. Its good that you have found a way to defuse your anger, but dont let that become an excuse, or even let you forget that anger is a problem in the first place. What are you going to do in situations where you cant run and hide in a game?

  71. 2002 ?!?!? by thygrrr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Errrm, why does the article stat that this happened in 2002? A murder trial that takes so long is suspicious, isn't it?

  72. murder? by ling_chow · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Is murder a crime? Who can really judge ones acts as immoral, righteous, hypocrite, murder-ish; Not I. Believing a video came can brain wash ones mind into a murderous state is down right wrong. Who here has not murdered anyone? I have, and I'm proud of it. No longer will I be forced to pay for child support due to a car "accident". How do we know the producers of counter strike did not base their 2 characters off these 2 murders? Did the 2 murders even play counter strike? These are all questions I would love to have asked before I judge them as murders

  73. News is starting to irritate me... by stor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...I better go play a mindless game of CS. Cya!

    Cheers
    Stor

    --
    "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    1. Re:News is starting to irritate me... by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Hostage Down.
      Hostage Down.
      HEAD SHOT.
      Damn it...

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
  74. Don't blame CS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because you don't get points/money for shooting hostages! :)

  75. CS hand language by mad+flyer · · Score: 1

    Does someone still have the link for the picture explaining CS hand language (with things like "Finish my sandwich and reload" or "can't move my cat is sleeping"

    Can't find it anywhere...

    1. Re:CS hand language by lendude · · Score: 1

      Can't link to it, but I can email you the pc - it's SWAT team handsignals and it's hilarious.

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
    2. Re:CS hand language by lendude · · Score: 1

      errhh - make that "email you the pic". Don't think I can encode the pc :P

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
    3. Re:CS hand language by Neoncow · · Score: 1

      Try these. Searched google for military hand signals

      Funny one:
      http://www.johnnyq.com/ms.png

      Dirty one:
      http://societyhappens.com/sushi/various/signals.jp g

  76. In other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "news.com.au are reporting an Australian court has been told that two men dressed armed with weapons shot and killed a man during a Sydney home invasion in 2002. Let the blaming begin......"

  77. You gotta be kidding me. by shakparl · · Score: 0

    If you ask me, this is just fodder for tabloid news and doesn't bother to dig deeper for the real motivations. One thing that's always disturbed me about USA is the general toleration of loads of ultra-violence in movies and video games combined with a puritanical, almost childish and repressive attitude towards sex. In contrast, don't European nations have lax laws regarding smut/porn, yet are more apt to censor or legislate against firearms and the depiction of violence? It seems like a recipe for disaster to repress a natural urge, and then provide ample opportunities to purchase firearms while practically glorifying the use of them in movies and video games. Then again, there's nothing like a few rounds of CS to blow off some steam and stress, and if the Japanese and Canadians can have the same violent games and movies and still not have much violent crime, what is the deal with USA? You take the point.

    1. Re:You gotta be kidding me. by jlanthripp · · Score: 1
      We'd have the violence even without the video games.

      Let me start this little tirade by saying that I was born in the United States and plan to live in the United States until I die. Sure, we ain't perfect, but I love my country despite its flaws. I believe in the right of the people to keep and bear arms, oppose the banning of violent movies/tv/video games (and the banning of sexual content in the same), yada yada.

      We'd still be the most violent industrialized nation on the planet even if you took away all the guns, the violence on television and in the movies, the violent video games, etc. etc. etc. We love violence, as a society. We glorify and glamorize it. We aspire to be better at it.

      Take away our guns, and we'd be knifing one another. Take away the knives, and we'd be battering one another with our cars. Take away the cars, and we'd be beating one another over the head with baseball bats (sort of like a cricket bat, but shaped differently and not as heavy). Take away baseball, and we'll use farming tools on one another. And so forth to infinity, until we're using fists and teeth.

      I don't claim to know why we're such a violent people. Maybe it's because we're a relatively young nation yet. Maybe it's because we founded our nation by making war against what was at the time the world's most powerful military force, and expanded it by committing near-genocide against the people who lived here before us. Whatever the reason, the United States has, since its inception in 1776, been one of the most violent nations on the planet. There's no simple way to end this culture of violence.

      As for the general sexual repression you speak of, I think that's slowly changing, but it'll be quite a few years yet before the last of the Puritans dies off and takes their 16th-century sexual morality with them. We did make quite a bit of progress back in the 60's with "Free Love" and "Make Love, Not War" and all that *grin*

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
  78. "Home invasion" by Vintermann · · Score: 1

    What kind of word is that? Some sort of newspeak? It's not a word where I come from, nor a legal concept.

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    1. Re:"Home invasion" by cranos · · Score: 1

      Its legal speak for a violent break and enter. It carries harsher penalties than a break and enter where no one is home.

  79. Some Guys Dressed Up Like... by marktaw.com · · Score: 3, Funny

    Some guys dressed up like characters from America's Army flew halfway around the world and killed several thousand Iraqi's.

    Oh wait...

  80. Obligatory Simpsons Quote by Zorilla · · Score: 1, Funny

    I often see video games come up in studies that find "evidence" that video games increase aggressive tendancies in children. What about football, soccer, and sports in general? People tend to get pretty worked up and violent over those things.

    (Bart and Milhouse turn on game console)

    (Hockey playing kid in video game scores a goal)

    Dad 1: Your kid sucks!
    Dad 2: Bring - it - on!
    Hockey Game Voice: It's HOCKEY DAD! Nooo one's fiighting!
    Bart: Hockey Dad rules! Feel the awesome wrath of Chuck Stadowski!

    (Dads start fighting and each other)

    Kid: Dad! Stop! It's only assault! Don't make it murder.

    (Dad 1 kills Dad 2 and police arrest him while he celebrates)

    Hockey Game Voice: You are a big man! BIG MAN!

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  81. Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by edo-01 · · Score: 5, Informative
    These guys have been causing problems in Sydney for years. I am referring to the Lebanese gangs here, not the Lebanese community at large who are probably as concerned about this as the rest of the population.

    The Flemington Markets (where the victim worked) have always attracted a criminal element, as silly as it sounds more than a few of the produce stall vendors there have a connection to organised crime (note that in this city "organised" crime is way down the ladder in severity from the American Mob.)

    I live in out in the midst of all this, and have seen first hand the way these guys operate. Make eye contact and they will literally go berserker on you. I watched three carloads of these guys stomp the living shit out of a scrawny 19 or 20 year old guy because he told them to "fuck off" after they threw fireworks at his girlfriend. I've seen brawls outside my apartment that could be called small riots and I've been attacked myself after one of these macho dickheads sexually assaulted my girlfriend in front of me. One new years eve I was in a crowd at Darling Harbor counting down at midnight, right on the stroke of midnight a gang of these guys linked arms, charged the crowd and just started wailing on anyone they could catch. Minutes later they'd fled. It's not politically correct to identify a gang by it's ethnicity but a large degree of their behavior arises out of environmental factors, especially their treatment of women and their gang-culture of machismo-on-steroids violence. Drive by shootings are a new phenomenon in this country and nearly all of them in this city are internecine warfare between rival groups of Lebanese and Arab young men, typically over the drug trade. In 1998 a police station was shot up with a fully automatic weapon.

    Which brings me to my point that if they were dressed in paramilitary gear it was probably more to do with that than any exposure to Counterstrike. This wasn't some random assault by kids "corrupted" by some computer game, it was more than likely a gang reprisal where the assailants were known to the victim.

    The rise of Lebanese gangs in Sydney

    Sydney police besieged in their own station by Lebanese gang

    Serial gang rapes in Sydney

    Bilal Skaf, the leader of the rapists converted to radical Islam in jail and has openly avowed his support of Al Qaeda and sent death threats to the judge and witnesses at his trial.

    1. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by phrasebook · · Score: 1

      Bringing all that shit together really gives me a bad taste about Sydney. Fortunately I live toward the north and to be honest, I haven't really ever seen or experienced any of what you describe. Did have some trouble at Parramatta one night though, and a few times riding the trains, although those are so bad that I mostly drive now. You forgot to mention the road rage incidents too; I read of a few that involved a gun being pulled. Stuff being politically correct; these people stink.

    2. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by ttys00 · · Score: 1

      Parent is spot on. I used to live in Westmead (near Parramatta in Sydney), and got attacked while walking home from Australia Day celebrations by a carload of Lebanese guys my age. I was sober, minding my own business, and 200m from my door so I was able to run away without getting too hurt.

      Suburbs like Auburn, Lakemba and Liverpool are much, much worse. Things are also bad when visiting soccer teams from Middle Eastern countries lose - the local supporters go crazy. Its always males aged 10-40 as well, never women.

      And people wonder why some segments of the Australian population want to limit immigration from some countries.

    3. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by Renraku · · Score: 1

      And your nation or city can't do anything about them? All they'd have to do is get a few pictures, I'm sure most of the gang members are in some kind of databse already.

      Thats when you send an undercover officer to ask one of them for a light, and when the guy tries to stab the officer, he gets shot and is the 'official' step into the investigation that gets the rest of the gang hauled off / killed.

      Society is no place for packs people of that calibur. If they want to act like that, shoot them, or send them to the middle of the tropical rain forest.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    4. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonder how much less likely to fuck with the random citizen would these pricks be if they thought he/she might be armed.

    5. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      My family moved from Lakema to country Victoria when I was very young, a lucky escape I suspect...

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    6. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by urbaer · · Score: 1

      And your nation or city can't do anything about them?
      I don't know about Sydney, but in Melbourne the police have been cracking down on organised crime, though thankfully (in a sense) the members of the gangs haven't killed any non-gang members yet (AFAIK). So the police (in the past) have allowed them to kill each other, presumably on the basis that there will be less criminals on the street. Generally if you stay out of certain cafes and pizza shops you're fine, because the gangs know that killing a 'civilian' will cause the police to bust things up.

    7. Re:Shooter was a member of a Lebanese gang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonder if she'd go meet a shady character in a non-public place to receive marijuana if she could've just bought it at a coffeeshop.

  82. We need the next new medium by Nice2Cats · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The latest medium is alway the evil one: Before computers and the Internet, television was blamed for everything, and before that, radio. You just don't see "it's television's fault" anymore, now it's always something somebody saw in a compter game or read on the Internet. Remember when they caught Saddam's sons and had all the articles pointing out how one of them had picked up torture tips on the Internet? If he had been reading them in books, nobody would have even bothered mentioning it.

    So what we obviously need is the next medium so we have something new to blame all violence on. I suggest iPods: All that music all the time, the glare of the white headphones, and now the thousands and thousands of pornographic images that teenagers carry around with them everywhere just have to have a bad influence. When will Australia finally live up to its moral responsibilty and ban them? And now that Bush has been reelected, shouldn't Ashcroft finally do something to save American's children from Apple's murderous grip?

    I always thought Steve Jobs is smiling just a little to brightly when he holds up those things...

  83. But.... by Jaysyn · · Score: 4, Funny

    If they ban Counterstrike, then the terrorists have won, literally!!

    Jaysyn

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  84. quite true. by cryptor3 · · Score: 1

    Absolutely true on the logic point. I admit that the point does sort of masquerade as a logical argument when it's really not.

    I just found it equally deceptive that the parent poster was using the emotional nature of the Port Arthur event to elicit an illogical anti-gun response.

  85. A couple og days ago by ^DA · · Score: 0

    Some days ago two men, one of them wearing a G.W. Bush mask, held up a taxi here in Norway. The other guy was wearing a Saddam mask :)

  86. oh of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    naturally, this people died because of a video game, not because of FREELY AVAILABLE FIREARMS...

    "Gun's don't kill people, people kill people" Well, people WITH guns kill a great deal more people than people without guns - the only logical conclusion to be inferred from the statistic is that gun owners are bad people..

    besides which, how did they decide to blame it on Counter-Strike, rather than on, say, that S.W.A.T. movie that came out a while back? Was there an animated grafitti tag sprayed across the corpse?

    1. Re:oh of course... by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 1

      Uh, actually, they have extremely harsh gun control lawas in Australia. The Knee-jerk response of wanting to ban guns is just as silly and unproductive as the knee-jerk reaction of blaming violent video games.

      --

      The Digital Sorceress
  87. CS outfits?? by mlk · · Score: 1

    Like army suits???

    --
    Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  88. Bush by yodaj007 · · Score: 1

    Is it Bush's fault if I dress up as Bush and rob a bank? I just want to idolize my hero.

    --
    These aren't the sigs you're looking for.
  89. Of course FPS is NOT to blame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let me give you an example. Suppose some japanese game had its screens translated to english with bad grammar. Would you have geeks start spouting that bad grammar? I don't think.....oh wait...

  90. Unusual tactic by ewe2 · · Score: 1

    I've heard of guerilla advertising, but isn't this going a bit far for the Half Life sequel?

    At least it will force CS off the radar for a change. :)

    --
    insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
  91. Hax? by Cougem · · Score: 1

    In court? Were they wallhacking or something?

  92. Sudden urge by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

    They're right! Video games *are* brainwashing your kids! Why, I have this sudden urge to run around in a darkened room and munch lots of little white pills while listening to repetitive electronic music!

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
    1. Re:Sudden urge by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, be glad that you didn't play Minesweeper ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  93. Blame the Sims! by cra · · Score: 1

    This should mean that every murder that cannot be linked to a specific game could be linked to "The Sims", then. So instead of banning GTA, CS and so on th prevent the few murders committed because of those games, we'd only have to ban "The Sims", and every other murder would not happen, since noone is playing "The Sims" anymore.

    --
    This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for higher security.
  94. Ooooh I got an idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know those bank robbers dressed as presidents? Well ... let's blame the presidents too!

  95. Ironic by mode80 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else find it ironic that the ad displayed in the article (for me at least) was for a Playstation 2?

    --
    "The most common element isn't hydrogen. It's stupidity." - Frank Zappa
  96. Did you guys' sword ban ever pass? by caveat · · Score: 1

    I remember a big flap a little while back over the rise in sword attacks down under; IIRC there was serious talk of legislation to ban swords, something along the lines of "there's no place for people just being able to go out there and buy these things" - sure, GUN crime might be down, but if Oz is such a non-violent utopia, why so people even need to discuss laws like that one? Lord knows if I tried running amuck with my katana here in PA, it's pretty good odds somebody would whip out a legally concealed handgun and stop me pretty fast.

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
  97. Guns Dont Kill People... by Robmonster · · Score: 0

    but people who kill people sure do seem to like guns a lot...

    --
    I have no sig yet I must scream.
  98. Simple, Bring back tortue and Executions!!! nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  99. Details by presearch · · Score: 2, Funny

    In a strange twist, it was reported that the man killed was dressed like Gordon Freeman.

    1. Re:Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      counter-strikekilledthefreeman

  100. BAN THE SIMS!!! by Glove+d'OJ · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... according to a recent (clearly ficitonal) report, over 90% of *all* of last year's crimes, including murder, rape, petty larceny, and letting your dog poop in the park were committed by people dressed up like those in the (not so) popular video game The Sims (tm)

    On an odd side note, I shudder to ask, but is there a Sims Jail Edition coming out?

    ---

    wwjd? jwrtfm!

  101. Rich with Irony by aborchers · · Score: 1

    When I went to the site, there was a PS2 advert in the article!

    --
    Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
  102. You got it backwards by bigmouth_strikes · · Score: 1

    > they think that violence can be blamed on videogames

    >as if before videogames, there were no violence

    Just because some violence can be explained by violent video games, doesn't mean that video games is the root of all violence. I don't know how you came up with that logic, it's like saying "You can't blame deaths on smoking, as if people weren't dying before there were smokes."

    It's not about personal accountability, noone's even suggesting they aren't accountable for this. It's all about influences and getting used to violence.

    Scientific studies have shown that people watching a lot of television violence before the age of 18 are more prone to be violent against their surroundings as an adult. Is there causality ?

    Is it so hard to imagine that watching violence for hours day in and day out, year in year out would affect you ? If you've seen a Trekkie convention you know that too much TV can alter a person's view of reality.

    --
    Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
    1. Re:You got it backwards by Taladar · · Score: 1
      If you've seen a Trekkie convention you know that too much TV can alter a person's view of reality.
      Disclaimer: I am no Trekkie or LARP-Player or something like that but I know some LARP-Players in RL.

      Most Roleplayers I know are above average in their skill to distinguish reality and fiction. They might wear strange costumes but they are aware they are costumes and would laugh at the thought of doing any of the things they do to other characters to a real person (like steal, murder,...)
  103. Psycho(o) Tests by SeanDuggan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem with almost all of these tests is that they generally only catch sociopaths, not psychopaths owing to that most of them can be gamed fairly readily and the nature of psychopathology is such that they're well suited to fooling evaluators. But nevertheless, we always want to feel that there's some foolproof way to detect menaces to our life and health, so we'll always want to believe in such tests. Just witness the recent email forward that contained a quick psycho test.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  104. Dressed as what? by Komarosu · · Score: 4, Funny

    two men dressed as characters from 'Counter Strike'

    They're called Special Forces in some countries and Terrorists in others, unless they're talking about the Chickens, then thats just bizzar.

    --

    "What do you mean you have no ice? Do you expect me to drink this coffee hot?" - Random Customer, Clerks
  105. Legal Shortcuts by LighthouseJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This crap happens because it's easier to blame video games than kids.

    Take the legal drinking age for your locality, that's set in place because it's easy to test and find out if someone is of a certain age, just math. In an ideal world, a persons habits and character would determine if they should drink. If someone will drink responsibly at age 16, why make them wait till 18 or 21? Likewise, there are people that are over the legal drinking age that are still too immature and let alcohol run their lives but by law, they can still buy alcohol. All anyone can do is give them an AA flyer and ask them to take time out of their schedule to remember the next meeting, physically drive to the meeting and suffer through the awkwardness of admitting you're an alcoholic.

    The legal system blames the video games because it's easy to convince parents video games are bad because parents aren't going to blame their own kids for violence they may create, they'd rather blame something or someone that cannot defend themselves. To make headway in hedging violent video games to kids, it's easy to slap a violence rating on a game and make every retailer ask for ID to anyone buying the game than it is to perform intense psychological tests to see if that person understands the difference between reality and fantasy, and if they will or will not take cues from videogames.

    When I'm a parent, I know my kid is going to be exposed to things I wouldn't, but I'm going to make sure they can put the things into the right perspective and let them make good decisions for themselves.

    1. Re:Legal Shortcuts by Taladar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In most cases where kids commit violence the parents are to blame (at least partially) and its easier to blame the games than to blame themselves.

    2. Re:Legal Shortcuts by LighthouseJ · · Score: 1

      I fully agree with that.

      The poor parents are the ones that just toss video games at their kids to shut them up so they leave the parents alone.

      All kids take cues from whatever they look up to, and if kids spend more time with video games than parents, they will look up to video game characters. When the kids are caught comitting vandalism (imitating San Andreas for example by spray painting walls), the parents are outraged. According to the bad parents, the parents and their kids aren't to blame, it's the software publishers fault that their kids imitate fantasy.

    3. Re:Legal Shortcuts by jonnystiph · · Score: 1

      If someone will drink responsibly at age 16, why make them wait till 18 or 21?

      That is a very interesting question, one of which I have given a lot of thought. I started drinking when I was 14-15 years old. Was I responsible...well there was little I could, not old enough to drive, sex was just becoming a possibility, so the amount of real "trouble" I could find was rather limited. I continued this way until about 23-25 years old.

      I found something out along the way. By the time I was 18-25 old enough to do stupid things, like drink and drive/fight/make drunken bad decisions, I was well versed in being drunk. I knew that I was not capable of preforming these actions will intoxicated from years of trial and error at a younger age.

      So the point I am driving at, perhaps the real key is introducing these substances at a younger age, (when the child feel's ready) and by the time you are old enough to make "monumentally" bad decisions, you have made enough silly ones to understand that your thoughts and actions are impaired and too wait until another time.

      I say this from watching other people around me make silly "intoxicated" mistakes, because they fail to realize they are under the influence and in-capable of making rational decisions. Now I am nearing 30 and rarely drink at all. I have long since ridded myself of the need to "party". I got it out of my system early on and am free to seek more challenging activities. The only thing in all of this that worries me, is I really hope I didn't brain my damage.

      --

      If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank

    4. Re:Legal Shortcuts by yourmom16 · · Score: 1
      ... I really hope I didn't brain my damage.

      You did.

      --
      "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
  106. The funny part is by diablobsb · · Score: 1

    seeing a Doom3 ad below this story...
    Cs is so..... 2002ish...
    when will we see shooters dressed as imps and demons?

    --
    I for one, welcome our new hot grits... PROFIT!
  107. Therapy Producing More Problems by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    Part of the problem is that all of us are a bit crazy, neuroses if nothing else. Probably quoting way out of context, but Jung said, "show me a sane man and I'll cure him." Adding to the problem is that most neuroses are exacerbated by stress. There've been cases of people with OCD whose obsession started to become a fear of finding they were totally crazy. Lastly, some people go to a psychologist wanting something to be found wrong with them, whether they're looking for sympathy, obsessed with the medical field, or simply dissatisfied with who they are and wanting an excuse to say that there's a medical reason they're not who they want to be.

    ^_^ That said, psychologists have to make a living somehow, so I'm sure it's profitable to make sure they keep finding problems. So long as they "solve" the old ones, they can probably get away with it...

    Lastly, as to your assertation of psychologists having more mental problems, I do seem to remember seeing some study along those lines. From personal anecdote, I know at least two people who went into psychology because they learned they were not psychologically normal and wanted to find out why and what can be done for it. Too, they may simply be more self-aware of the problems in their makeup (or blind to them and able to rationalize them away) due to their training. However, I'd wager that most of them have come to terms with their problems and are handling them constructively.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  108. Psych Records by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1

    I'm not so much worried about the government as industry. Alcoholism and depression are already coinsidered valid reasons to not hire / release a person. Heck, it wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was considered a valid mental health issue to fire a person over. Lastly, there's still a great social stigma associated with mental health problems, so people would probably be unwilling to fight the firing.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:Psych Records by mr_snarf · · Score: 1
      Alcoholism and depression are already coinsidered valid reasons to not hire / release a person
      Interesting thing there. Depression is more and more being considered a mental disease, as an attempt to have it accepted and lose the social stigma that has been attached to it. (I recently saw something on the news where they casually mentioned a member of some cricket team wasn't playing due to a bout of depression, as though they were talking about an ankle injury).

      The interesting thing is that depression is becomming a medical problem. As a medical problem, it allows you to take time off work as if you were sick, and get special consideration for university marks etc. However, as it becomes more of an official medical condition, shouldn't we take the good with the bad? I'm sure other medical conditions prevent people from getting a job...

      Just something to think about, I dont' think its a valid reason to not hire something, just want to see if there is a nother point of view.

      (I'm still recovering from depression)
      --
      printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
    2. Re:Psych Records by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This may be off topic, but in the US, there are federal laws -the ADA (American with Disabilities Act) - that prevent, or at least limit people from being fired or discriminated against in the hiring process if they have a mental disorder that might intermittently or temporarily hinder or limit their ability to work.

      In the event that a disorder *completely* prevents the person from performing their job duties, thats a bit of murky territory as far as I can tell.

      But depression and other related mood disorders are definately covered and some (bipolar disorder for example) have been held up in some courts as both a physical and mental disability.

      For the record IANAADAS (I Am Not An ADA Specialist), or a shrink or lawyer for that matter. I just have been researching and speaking to ADA specialists for personal reasons.

      My apologies if I've strayed wildly off-topic.

  109. Dressed as Counterstrike chars. that means... by FauxReal · · Score: 1

    They were dressed as either the Navy Seals, French GIGN, German GSG or UK SAS. All are well established government agencies of high esteem. Wouldn't it be possible that these guys were wannabes? Don't those crazy (and not crazy) militia guys try hard to get thier gear cause it's good? I'd think there would be cheap similar looking knockoffs too.

    Or, did these guys tag the walls with a "NO CAMPING" stencil on the way out?

  110. What about the guns? by Motie · · Score: 1

    Should everyone in every movie, TV show, poster, book and billboard who used a gun be blamed for giving them the idea to use guns in their crime?

    Forget the game manufacturers; forget the gun companies; let's go after the screenwriters!

  111. Link To Counter Strike CONFIRMED by b3x · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the police report, the victims family commented that one of the suspects started firing at the victim through a wall, as if they could see through it. while the other suspect just sat behind a crate in the living room.

    1. Re:Link To Counter Strike CONFIRMED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol

      these wallhackers MUST be stopped at ALL costs

      p.s. get rid of the people on my side who are shooting each other :)

  112. Australian Gun Laws by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I thought they pretty much made all guns illegal in that country.

    Its nice to see more proof that when you ban guns, you only effect honest and responsible citizens.

    Criminals don't really care.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  113. mavav? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is there a chapter of "mothers against videogame addiction and violence" over there?
    http://www.mavav.org/

  114. Can't be by lee+n.+field · · Score: 1

    This story must be bogus. Australia has Gun Control now, and is perfectly safe.

  115. Hey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not a crook.

    -Nixon

  116. My crazy genius friend by gosand · · Score: 1
    The test was accurate, and unchangeable. If you were a sick person at 8, you were going to be just as screwy at 18 or 28. It looked at your world view.

    Come on. Many certifiable people (Unabomber?) are very intelligent. It is not difficult to pass one of these tests.

    I have a friend who is VERY bright. He got his civil engineering degree and worked in oil fields for several years. He decided he wanted to make more money, so he went back to school. He is currently getting his law degree. I think he is concentrating on Intellectual Property. If I had to pick one person that I know who would do something insane, it would be him. He has the intelligence for truly scary things. He made meth just to see if he could do it. I know he has made several types of small bombs. He has always just been very inquisitive, and as far as I know he has never hurt anyone. But he once told me that if he wanted to kill someone, he was sure he could do it and get away with it without anyone finding out.

    But on the other hand, he is one of those people that could do something totally brilliant to help society. I just can't figure him out, but I think that deep down he is a good guy, just too smart for his own good. He is someone who could end up in jail, or extremely successful in life. No test is going to be able to tell which.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  117. I only have two questions here... by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    1) Was it Howard or Richard Alston who paid these two to do it, and
    2) How much were they paid? ;-)

  118. Socio/psycho by IncohereD · · Score: 1

    The problem with almost all of these tests is that they generally only catch sociopaths, not psychopaths...

    The problem with this distinction (which I had always made as well), is that apparently sociopath is synonymous with psychopath. Apparently sociopath is just a new term to distance the medical condition from the nasty 'psycho' slang. IANAP, however.

    1. Re:Socio/psycho by F34nor · · Score: 1

      I got my BS in psych.

      A Sociopath cannot or does not see a difference between right or wrong so has no limits on his or her actions.

      A Psychopath is psychotic which means that they cannot tell what reality is.

      So the Psychopath might kill because he thinks that they are brain sucking zombies etc. where the sociopath kills because he just couldn't give less of a shit for anything let alone human life. E.g. He got in my way so I whacked him. Sociopath would make great Mafia killers, clean methodical smart realistic just utterly uncaring. Psychopaths are just fractured from reality. Not that these terms mean anything anymore the DSM calls them something else now.

  119. Re:Are games a problem? Yes. by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

    The difference between a game and news, which is always brought up by opponents to this kind of comparison, is that the news is passive. Something bad happened to someone else, no matter how gory or evil it may be. A game, though, requires that the player carry out the action themselves.

    That is the key point here. People always try to make unfair comparisons to make whatever point they feel like.

    --
    Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
  120. Online version by TheOrquithVagrant · · Score: 3, Informative

    There's an online Hartman Value Profile test/calculator at:
    http://www.qis.net/~jschmitz/hvp/test1.html

    1. Re:Online version by Morosoph · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Extremely interesting. But in section two: I love what I do, and I love nature, but I don't see the two being especially well interrelated. It's a bit like trying to rank libertarians against greens.

      I feel that it's really asking me "do I believe in god?".

      I seem to have scored okay, though, but I feel that many with still more developed traits will do worse. For example, a physicist might score worse than a cultist who saw design in the universe.

    2. Re:Online version by Chrontius · · Score: 1

      Just to warn you all, the test results render *really bad* under Safari. Use firefox, if you can.

    3. Re:Online version by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Good tests ask the same question in as many ways as possible. Real precision comes from comparing the subtlety of the answers to the same question.

    4. Re:Online version by hesiod · · Score: 1

      I was looking for one of those, but I don't think it's very accurate. Some of those things are near-impossible to sort, and some of them are basically the same or don't apply at all.

      And more importantly, it said my Attitude Index was "50 - 53 ..... Very Well Developed (dynamic, positive)."

      Geez, I'm one of the most cynical/negative, passive-aggressive people I know.

      Some of the others were closer, but everything it Part I was rated between Above-Average Development and Very Well-Developed. Certainly not true, when reading the descriptions.

      Just about everything in part II was "needs significant development," which may be true. It goes on to tell me I have bad internal conflicts and problems with my internal concentration. Basically that my view of 'self' is pretty fucked up, which is true. Then in classic psychiatrist form, it totally contradictl itself:

      AI: 50 - 53 ..... Very Well Developed (dynamic, positive)

      It just told me I was negative and introverted in 10 points, but I'm positive and dynamic.

      Crazy...

    5. Re:Online version by oakbox · · Score: 1

      There isn't really a good 'automatic' interpretation of what the results mean. (Actually, there is, but the Non Disclosure Agreement I had to sign forbids me from mentioning that there IS a good expert system). I can tell you that 18 statements are broken down into 2 groups of nines are broken into 3 groups of 3.

      The 3 'Axis' looked at by the tests are 'Intrinsic', 'Extrinisic', and 'Systemic'. And then it looks at the combinations. "I-E", "I-I", "I-S", "E-I","E-E","E-S" ...

      You get information from the test by seeing how the candidate's ordering of the 18 statements varies from the 'Real' ordering of the 18 statements. You see which statements were moved, how far, and in what direction. Based on that, you can tell which parts of a person's value system is unbalanced. The unbalance might be very minimal (you're mostly normal, move along), the unbalance might be substantial but symmetric (your values might be off the norm, but they are structured in a sensible logical way), the unbalance might be substantial and unstructured (which probably means that you don't see the appropriate relationships between action and results).

      Because the test is divided into three areas, the results talk about balance, symmetry, and values in all of the areas and how those areas relate with each other. AND THAT'S JUST SCRATCHING THE SURFACE of what information you can get out of these things. Hartman won a Nobel Prize for this work (I think in '73) and the people who specialize in this work (Axiological Theory) are still discovering things that the tests are saying. It's fascinating stuff, but super complex. I've been programming a system around this for 3 years and I still don't *understand* a lot of this information.

      Oh! I just remembered that there was a piece about Hartman on the radio program This American Life in the spring of 2003, I think.

      --
      Not just answers, the correct questions.
    6. Re:Online version by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I got frustrated with that stupid test. Why don't they have some kind of control where I can drag the things up and down? The second page is really horrible HTML and hard to read, too. Do you know if there's a non-lame HVP somewhere?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Online version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh, it says I got +7 and -107 for Part I, and +18, -64 for Part II.. seriously.
      well, wtf does this mean? can someone tell me?
      I don't have a clue what all these silly numbers are about, but uhm.. I guess I didn't really get the test anyway, I mean how am I supposed to rate 'the most positive statement to me'? How do I know if I answered hoenstly and what does positive statement mean? heh.

    8. Re:Online version by kubrick · · Score: 1

      You get information from the test by seeing how the candidate's ordering of the 18 statements varies from the 'Real' ordering of the 18 statements. You see which statements were moved, how far, and in what direction. Based on that, you can tell which parts of a person's value system is unbalanced.

      Who defines 'balanced', and how (in other words, what's 'Real')? I'm a bit concerned that people sometimes take the results of these tests as gospel, when I think that no measuring tool or set of statistics can really define a person, or predict with great certainty what they will do in certain situations.

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  121. imagine that. by LabRat404 · · Score: 1

    I suppose if I dressed up as George Bush and shot a few minoritied in the US they would point the finger at Bush, ya think? very irrational logic.

    --
    1001100 1100101 1100001 1110110 1100101 1001101 1111001 1000010 1101001 1110100 1110011 1000001 1101100 1101111 110111
  122. of course you can't be born a murderer by vena · · Score: 3, Insightful

    you have to kill somebody first.

  123. Are you kidding me? by http101 · · Score: 1

    I go to work dressed like "Patriot" from Quake III Arena and no one has a problem with it. Just because you're dressed like a particular type of person doesn't mean you have to do that type of work. Just ask any Fry's Electronics employee! :-D

    --
    -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
  124. Terminology by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    I am not a psychologist either, although I have played one on stage and psychology has long been a hobby for me.
    I'll admit to not being entirely in tune with what the current terminology is. A lot of my base work was done with older psychology books, wherein I always saw the distinction being made that sociopaths understood the human condition and could feel remorse, but chose shouldered past such crippling emotions to wreak havoc. In comparison, a psychopath genuinely cannot comprehend emotions like remorse and compassion except as an outside observer. {cocks head off to one side} Although even within the distinction of psychopath, they sometimes distinguished from psychopaths who committed anti-social acts because they simply saw nothing wrong with it (killing a parent to hasten an inheritance or drowning a fellow child playmate to see what a drowning victim looks like) and those who claim to commit them because they feel alienated from society due to their condition.

    And I seem to remember they're using yet another term for psychopaths these days to distance themself from the use of "psychopath" in the media to depict everything from an abusive husband to serial killers. Heck if I can remember what it is though. *shrug* Basically, they wanted to change the term because the word psychopath is associated with "cold-blooded murderer" in our society whereas psychopaths sometimes cause their damage in areas such as love and finances, never resorting to violence. And, for that matter, psychopaths are useful in some situations, such as covert agents. Someone able to lie, cheat, and kill without remorse is handy if they're loyal to you. And psychopaths are generally very rational people who will be loyal so long as the situation benefits them.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:Terminology by jackbird · · Score: 1

      Actually, both terms are deprecated. The DSM-IV contains no reference to either word. Antisocial Personality Disorder is the current terminology.

  125. right weapons by thetman456 · · Score: 1

    I hope they used a good gun. Nothing angers me more than newbies killin people with a Mac-10.

  126. The media again... by Analog+Anomaly · · Score: 0

    'Computer characters' shot man November 4, 2004 A COURT has been told two men dressed as characters from a computer game shot a man dead in front of his family during a home invasion in Sydney. Twenty-one-year-old Sophear Em is standing trial in the New South Wales Supreme Court charged with the shooting murder of Josef Logozzo at his Cecil Hills home on January 7, 2002. He has also pleaded not guilty to assaulting Mr Logozzo, a wholesale fruit distributor at Flemington markets, and shooting his wife, Marianne. Crown Prosecutor James Bennett SC, told the court Mr Em and another man invaded the Logozzos' home shortly after midnight, dressed as characters from the computer game Counter Strike. During the invasion, Mr Logozzo was shot in the chest and his wife in the hand. oh come on.. seeing as how the counter-strike characters are modeled after real people. IE SAS, GIGN, ETC. how can you say 'computer character' hello... retard.. also.. given the abundant lack of anything aside from circumstantial evidance. how can you say that they were dressed up specificly to resemble counter-strike models? they could have decided to dress up as a member of the SAS GIGN, or some terrorist faction that just happens to be featured in several games. that's just as stupid as if someone were to dress up in a trench coat and sunglasses and shoot someone. next thing you know the media will be like "holy shit the matrix is a bad influence." come on, these people are profoundly distrubed in the first place. I'm really sick of the media placing blame where it doesn't belong and causing more trouble than needed.

  127. More Information.. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

    Here's another article:

    Sophear Em was so fascinated with the game Counter-Strike that he and an accomplice dressed in black fatigues, balaclava and ski goggles to emulate characters from the game.

    --
    Not All Who Wander Are Lost
  128. Need more details by SiW · · Score: 1

    I must know whether to make an amusing "Terrorists win" or "Counter-Terrorists win" post.

  129. So, what if they really were dressed as CS chars? by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

    Everyone's putting down the notion of blaming video games as a kneejerk reaction, which is fine.

    But hypothetically speaking, what would you think if something like this happened, and they really DID dress like characters in the game. I mean not "happen to be the same" dressed as, but "we dressed the same on purpose" dressed as.

    That's the more interesting conversation.

  130. The legal system doesn't blame jack . . . by Goobermunch · · Score: 1

    The legal system doesn't blame video games. Politicians blame video games. Society blames video games. Murderers blame video games. The legal system generally says, you did the crime, you're going to do the time. In a court of law, it's utterly irrelevant that someone plays video games or dressed up like pikachu before going on a six-state killing spree.

    What matters is what did the defendant do, and what was his or her mental state at the time.

    --AC

  131. Request by robyannetta · · Score: 1

    The next time one of you freaks decides to go on a shooting spree killing a few people (and lets hope you don't), please do it in a rented Pac-Man suit.

    This way, when religious groups make the video game connection, people will finally stop listening to them.

    --
    - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
  132. Right on! by PeanutGallery · · Score: 1

    I mean, no it doesn't absolve them of one ounce of being freaks, but to say media has no effect on the way we think is a massive and dangerous understatement.

    Think about it, your brain only contains the stuff you fill it with. (well "duh" right) Like in Supersize Me, you reap the rammifications of what you decide (emphasis on "you decide") to take into your body. Its that whole garbage-in-garbage-out scenereo played out on a biological host.

    Even so, who decided what went in to their deranged little minds to start with? They did! So again, even on that level, they are still responsible.

    All in all, not a good scapegoat. For my screwups, I'll stick to blaming cosmic rays!

    --
    -- Just another unsolicited opinion... from the Peanut Gallery.
  133. Anecdotes Aweigh by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > Until you KNOW someone who has been convicted of manslaughter and has become a ward of the state in a juvenile detention facility, you DO NOT KNOW how violent video games can affect a young person.

    And oddly, even after seeing it, you don't either. Why do you think no scientist who cares a bit about reputation bases a study or theory on one case? It's because it's not a good sample. There could be a thousand other pieces of the puzzle that you don't know about your friend's brother, and in opposition to him I can present a dozen of my college friends who spent countless hours fragging and never a single one of them did anything violent either as kids or as adults.

    > At one point in time I would have agreed with your theory, but after seeing my best friend's little brother be convicted, it kind of changes your view on these things.

    Perhaps it changes your view, but that's because you're allowing personal bias to stand in your way. If violent video games had a strong causative effect on juvenile violence, and the number of kids playing violent games has gone up, then there'd be a rise in juvenile violence. But the FBI, the department charged with maintaining statistics on such things, has reported that the number of incidents of juvenile violence in the U.S. has fallen every year for the last thirty years, which more than covers the "violent video games" era. Your best friend's brother is an outlier, or something else contributed to his fall.

    > Of course, this is /., so no actual expertise or experience is needed to wax philosophical...

    You took the words right out of my mouth.

    Virg

  134. Deep Thoughts by KillaKen187 · · Score: 1

    I can only wonder what the house looked like. It could have been a nice 2 story house with a basement and a hole exposing the sewer tunnel that leads to the street outside of the bricked in front yard... Maybe like this house :)

  135. Irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do we get so upset about violence and murder? If we believe evolution is true, then it is all survival of the fittest. Seriously, if evolution is true, then morality is an illusion (albeit one that has evolved to help ensure our survival as a specie). These men were obviously more fit in this circumstance, thus they deserve to live. They are helping preserve our specie by weeding out the weak. Their offspring will now dominate and the future will be held by the strong. Reality itself commends them for their actions.

  136. the Bobo doll study from the parent post...mod up! by Mad_Rain · · Score: 1

    You're spot on with the Bobo doll study comments, but I'd like to add one thing about the catharsis: One of the big reasons that catharsis is not recommended any more in the treatment of people with anger problems (for example, something like: "if you get angry, instead of hitting your kids, go hit a pillow until you don't feel angry anymore") is that people become habituated to that stimulus - they require something a little more to have the same effect (so the pillow becomes something harder, or they hit the pillow more, and pretty soon they'll escalate up from there to stabbing someone to a knife. Maybe an exaggeration, but you get the idea).

    So I guess that the lesson is to learn better ways to handle violence than with violence pointed in another direction.

    --
    "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
  137. They were using a Hax! by zaqattack911 · · Score: 1

    For sure they were running aimbots.
    Obviously not l33t murderers like myself :)

    Sorry I joke even in the worst scenarios.

  138. Let's blame... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    those who cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

    I suppose it's terribly politically incorrect to blame people for their own actions. Where they minorities? Or perhaps they were just poor, or somehow oppressed in another way?

    At least with Deer Hunter people don't get in trouble for reenacting that game.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  139. Government sactioned by chamblah · · Score: 1
    I don't think that this young lady killed anyone in a war or any other government sactioned event.

    And I don't think she was influence by the Blood Raven console game either.

    I also don't belive that these two folks were trying to pretend that they were playing the latest GTA game or involved in any government sanctioned event (wars).

    People have bene killing other folks for a long time and will be killing each other for eons to come.

  140. Lebanese? by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

    Isn't Sophear a cambodian name?

  141. First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Blame australia for stripping the citizens of their weapons (firearms).

  142. It's possible by freakmn · · Score: 1

    I've played the game, and I had to look up on the internet what in the world he is saying there. I assumed frag monkey until I did some research. I believe that it is difficult to understand, since that is not a well-known phrase.

    --
    warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
  143. Computer game shooters by jskline · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't sweat this. Nice read though if your into courtroom and crime drama.

    Fact is that more and more criminals are using disguises to make it difficult to identify them. This is nothing new. Whether it be characters from a movie or TV show, political figures, or from a computer game. I suspect the idea of using famous people as a mask might have originating in a movie or two, but you can't discount the human intellect in the first place. :-)

    Lets hope that the paranoid around us don't decide that all computer games, and movies are bad because it makes people do bad things. If thats true, we better end life... period. Sheesh;... Art imitating life... or life imitating art... Which way to go... which way to go.

    --
    All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
  144. Yeah? by stealth.c · · Score: 1

    I read it in 1984, too.

    And George W Bush wants all Americans subjected to psychological assessments and regulation, especially children.

    And yet the evangelicals who would normally sand up against this kind of fascism think he's some kind of saint, and they all turn out on election day and put him back in office.

    Seriously. What the FUCK?

  145. So to get a game banned... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

    all we need to do is dress up like a character from the game and do Bad Things?

    I guess theres some value in anime 'cosplay' after all...

    Now, where can I get a pokemon costume...

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  146. Probably not... by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1
    considering that Clue(tm) has been made into a computer game... a [comically] violent computer game.

    In said computer game every time someone makes an accusation that [person] killed [victim] in [Room] with [weapon], You would get a FMV of that person through the victim's eyes in the darkened room having the instrument of death being used, while flashes of lightning illuminated the scene. (High resolution cgi movies too...)

    My wife had to turn off the FMV sequences because she found them too disturbing...I laughed at her the entire time, considering that she is the same person that loves playing Hitman and screwing with the "ragdoll physics" while saying, "die...Die...DIEEEEEEEEEEHAHHAHAHHA!"

    if I die before I wake...

  147. except... by kaiborg · · Score: 1

    That doesn't mean to say there is or isn't a connection, and there are no conclusive studies that some people who are a little socially eclipsed that are affected by continuous and sporting presentation of killing.

    except of course albert bandura's respected research and conclusion of the Social Learning Theory which CLEARLY shows a correlated trend between kids who watch violence and kids who become violent.

    http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/bandur a. htm

    gamers that play violent video games are pretty quick to jump up against the idea that watching violence correlates to making violence, only because they see themselves as nonviolent people. of course, we must ask the question--do crazy people know theyre crazy? do schizophrenics know the things they audibly and visually hallucinate arent real? do serial killers think that killing is wrong? of course not, if they had apathy they wouldnt do it. its a fact, social environments mold people. they influence how people run through the events in their daily lives. a person that grows up in poverty does not act the same way a president's son would in any given situation. the same way a person that has played violent video games for 10 years doesnt act the same way someone else does who hasnt.

    of course there are other variables that factor into these kinds of killings, otherwise every gamer on the street would run around with steak knives stabbing people (or guns, shooting people, if they could get ahold of them), but to say the two dont correlate after the countless studies that have proved it is just igorance.

  148. n00b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "During the invasion, Mr Logozzo was shot in the chest and his wife in the hand."

    n00bs

  149. I'm surprised they managed to pull off the caper. by RoboOp · · Score: 1

    ...without one of them shooting the other for following too closely.

    --
    "First you get the Linux, then you get the power, THEN you get the women"
  150. guns more guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THis proves we need more guns.
    Big bad black fat guns that shoot armour piercing
    projectiles at 5000fps.
    Whooooooosh !

    Got to be prepared.

    The neighbours have been playing Counter Strike.

    Oh , no , they wont fool me, as long as I have my GUNS !

    And the pastor has been looking at me funny ...
    He might be posessed by a demon from DooooooooM.

    Killlllll them alll

    Guns will solve all those voices talking to me.

    Bud, would you like to look down the barrel of MY GUN ?

  151. Hostage down! by Laconian · · Score: 1

    no text here, move along preeze

  152. GG evanglists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is it that if someone invaded a home and shot someone to death claiming they did it because God told them to does not prompt those god damned evangelists to scream 'ban religion'

  153. Maybe they were going for style? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NT (not twisted)

  154. They never focus on the GOOD stories about games by A3gis · · Score: 1

    Note well how the mainstream media only ever focuses on the BAD game-related new items (no matter how loosely they can relate them). What about the GOOD counter-strike worshipping stories, like those guys in france who dress up as the characters from the game and raid real terrorists on real airlines etc? Honestly, who throws a shoe?

  155. I can see the virtual headlines now: by Giranan · · Score: 1

    Two men dressed as international terrorists shoot and kill two residents of 'Sim'burbia.

  156. LOL by space_jake · · Score: 0

    terrorists win!

  157. Let the blaming begin... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    OKay... they're a couple of criminal thugs that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They certainly took it upon themselves to make the wrong choices in life that led to them being criminals. These criminals are solely to blame for their crime.

  158. accurate and unchangeable by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

    There is no such thing as an accurate and unchangeable psychological test. Thankfully, people aren't that simple.

    First, a negative may very obviously later turn into a positive. People go crazy, they aren't generally born crazy (though they sometimes are with some conditions). A lot can happen to you after you're eight, and it's far from impossible that your core ideas, thinking patterns and values could be affected in adverse ways.

    Second, a positive may sometimes turn in to a negative in later life. I don't accept that if you have psychological problems they can not be addressed. Sometimes (usually) this will require professional treatment, but there are going to be cases where it does not. There are also going to be cases where you simply "get better".

    Third, almost no test of something not directly observable is perfectly accurate. Psychological tests are renowned for being difficult to design and carry out accurately. They're also renowned for people's tendency to want to belive them despite known inaccuracies and problems. IQ tests (which actually measure one thing: your IQ, a number that describes how good you are at an IQ test, not your intelligence) are a great example of this problem in action.

    Fourth, many (even most) psychological tests are easily gamed if you understand what the test is for and how it works. Doing so is also a lot of fun :-) . Don't put that past an eight year old - especially the sort they want to identify and "catch".

    Finally, I think it is ethically unacceptable to write somebody off based on a test that can not be 100% accurate, on results that may change in future, and for a condition that may be correctable anyway.

    It looks to me like the Hartman Value Profile has entered the realm of pop psychology. It's something poeople want to have, so they'll believe it. Pop psychology is dangerous, though, because people tend to belive in these things in very black and white terms, with little room for considerations of the issues and inaccuracies involved.

    Of course, none of this in any way argues that the test doesn't work - I know too little about it for that, and the chances are it's as effective as any other psychological test - somewhat, if the results are interpreted and explained by someone who understands the test and all the issues involved. My argument is merely that it'd be very stupid to rely on it for anything important.

    If some company wants to use it to select sales people, that seems reasonable enough. They're no doubt willing to simply accept the risks of being gamed, and the risks of inaccuracies and misinterpretations. Of course, it's also very likely they just don't understand how psychological testing works and have been "sold" it as some sort of magic selection tool. *sigh*. Business is full of that sort of thing - just read any management book from your local bookshop to get an idea of how full.

    I will research this particular test further, as I'm now interested in determining what the full situation is. Unfortunately, Google appears to be flooded with information from firms offering services based upon these ideas, and I don't have access to any online journal services from home.

    In closing, simply let me caution you against believing any psychological test to be accurate as a stand-alone evaluation. Many are useful as guides, and many can when properly conducted produce information that can be interpreted in informative ways, but it's not likely that a given test will really be able to tell you some aspect of someone's personality "out of the box". People aren't that simple, and neither is psychology.

    (NOTE: I am not a trained psychologist, though I have completed some formal and casual study in the area. It's a fascinating area, and well worth reading about - but make sure you get proper study materials, not the reams of pop psych crap.)

    1. Re:accurate and unchangeable by oakbox · · Score: 1

      It looks to me like the Hartman Value Profile has entered the realm of pop psychology. It's something poeople want to have, so they'll believe it.

      I find just the opposite to be true. No one wants to believe that there are things about yourself that you cannot change.

      Fourth, many (even most) psychological tests are easily gamed if you understand what the test is for and how it works.

      This is a qualitative call and is called the 'transparency' of a test. Can you see through the test to see how your answers are going to affect the outcome? There are several different strategies for making a test less transparent. In the case of the HVP, there is actually a calculation possible which measures whether or not you are telling the truth. The only way to game it is to be a) intimately familiar with the instrument (something that takes a lot of time and planning) or b) lift someone else's statement order that you want to be 'like'.

      In closing, simply let me caution you against believing any psychological test to be accurate as a stand-alone evaluation.

      I agree with that, no test is 100% accurate. (the Hartman is actually two separate tests) Mostly, you are happy to get a test validated to the point where it is in the 80th percentile range. That's why psychologists (real ones, anyway) usually give a battery of tests that slightly overlap in some of the traits being measured. This gives a higher overal confidence in the scores and also gives a greater chance that 'gaming' is weeded out. You may be able to see through one or two tests, but (again) unless you are intimately familiar with all of the instruments and the models behind them, your gaming will show up to a trained observer.

      There are a lot of trash tests out there. And there's a lot of places where they can fall down:
      - Transparency: any single test probably fails here due to (possible) familiarity of the subject with what the test is measuring. After you know what INTP means the Meyers-Briggs test results become less reliable.
      - Based on a faulty model: Is it based on intrinsic traits described by Jung, is it more behavioural and based on Skinner, or axiological as in the HVP? Did the test designer just make something up?
      - Bad math: Is the test properly validated with the correct population? Is the instrument even measuring what you THINK it's measuring?
      - Social desirability: The very wording used in a test may have cultural weights that don't make the jump from one language to another or even one REGION to another. In the case of the HVP, once you read about it some more you will see that the Hartman institute is VERY touchy about changes to wording. Social desirability is answering a test how you think you are 'supposed' to answer a test. Well designed tests take this into account.

      Caution and prudence are necessary, I wouldn't trust just one test by itself 100%. But I could probably trust it 70% :) And if you are running a company where only 1 in 3 candidates you hire fit into your culture and make good employees, that 70% starts looking mighty attractive. Psychological testing hasn't really caught on in the states, it's easier to fire people if they don't work out. Here in the Netherlands (and for much of Europe) it's a different story all together. It's very expensive to a company to let someone go. That's why I think companies are looking for ANY advantage they can get in the hiring process.

      --
      Not just answers, the correct questions.
    2. Re:accurate and unchangeable by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

      I find just the opposite to be true. No one wants to believe that there are things about yourself that you cannot change.

      Good point. I should've been clearer - the /tester/ usually has this belief, in that they want to believe they can test other people and get some easy, accurate answer. Few will have the same belief when viewing the test as a subject.

      Of course, most who run the test will also have sat it, but we all know how good people are at distorting results to suit themselves, conveniently forgetting things, etc.

      As for the rest of your comment - thanks for the interesting discussion. You reminded me of how much I've forgotten :-( and how much I'm going to enjoy returning to Uni next year. Your classification of the possible failing points is particularly interesting.

      I also agree that the use of a set of tests, so long as you understand what they actually mean and the caveats involved in their interpretation, can definitely be useful in the right context. As you say, hiring is one viable option. My fear is only that many people who are arranging such programs won't have a sufficient knowledge of what the tests actually mean and what their limitations are.

      Viewting things as a potential job candidate I find the idea of personalty tests somewhat disconcerting, as they can not measure what really matters - my job performance and attitude.

      As a potential employer, however, I can see the attraction and the fact that they can be a useful preselection tool with proper application.

  159. Addition by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

    I've now had a very quick look at some of the tests offered online.

    My god.

    At least as interpreted by the online services (rarely known for good test design and conduct - *lol*) it's so full of social context as to be downright scary.

    "A uniform"

    What the fuck. How many different meanings can "a uniform" have to someone? To have authority, to have authority force something upon you, to have power, to have someone in power use it on you, to be restricted or restrained in choice, a role or task, to be performing a role or task, menial labour, low paying employment, etc etc etc .

    It is possible that the test takes that into account, or that the question is there as a dummy / control, etc. I'm going to hope so.

    This sort of issue is also very common in IQ tests. Most are packed full of cultural and social context, as well as requiring significant language skills. They test language, education, and cultural knowledge much more than intelligence. If you understand this, they're still useful, but most people don't and treat them as intelligence tests.

  160. IQ tests by oakbox · · Score: 1

    IQ is just a number, but there are areas of intelligence. Spatial, logical, mathematical, and verbal intelligence are all areas addressed by a reasonable IQ test. There is also the question of speed. Some people take longer but get to the same (or better) answer for problems. All of these are factors and not easily addressed by the shorthand of a single number.

    --
    Not just answers, the correct questions.
  161. In Response... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  162. Thats wierd... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Usually they get auto-kicked after killing 2 hosties, now the whole team has no money! N00bz!

  163. Agreed by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Most decent intellgence tests (well, decent as far as intellgence tests go, anyway) do produce a set of scores for different areas. Most also provide a single "big number" because that is, in the end, what people want. Recent events have shown just how interested people are in thinking about subtle issues with no single clear answer.

    The desire for a single number reflects the rather interesting fallacy that people have some single attribute, "intelligence". There really isn't any such single, clearly defined thing - there are many different sorts of intelligence, and they no more distill down to one thing in a person than they do in a test.

  164. MOD PARENT UP by notwrong · · Score: 1
    That link is a perfect rebuttal to the unsupported assertion made above about gun crime increasing since the change in laws.


    Just the facts ma'am.

  165. dressed up??? by torrents · · Score: 1

    it's my understanding that many crazy people, even those who have never played cs are dressed like characters from counter strike

    --
    Get your torrents...
  166. Rumpole in Australian Law by Magickcat · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the Australian police tactical response group are Counterstrike fans too as well as "Cops" fans.

    Australian members of the legal bar are dressed just as the characters of "Rumpole of the Bailey". It would be therefore safe to assume, that the entire Australian legal system is based upon the BBC series.

    --

    Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

  167. Australian gun laws are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They banned EVERY firearm in the country. Even the olympic teams firearms were banned.

  168. In Melbourne... by microsnot · · Score: 1

    In Melbourne, we just have psycho's dressed up as police officers doing the shooting, and killing. I want to see a picture of their counter strike outfits. I hope they spent some money and got their stuff from a surplus/disposal shop and didn't try to make it themselves. What kind of guns did they use? Reminds me of the quote - "Guns don't kill people, video games do" - Max Payne 2

  169. counter strike fps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crown Prosecutor James Bennett SC, told the court Mr Em and another man invaded the Logozzos' home shortly after midnight, dressed as characters from the computer game Counter Strike.

    So ... got screenshot?

  170. Guns banned? by OverkillTASF · · Score: 1

    Wait, I thought all guns were banned in Australia? That didn't fix this problem? Guess they better make like the EU and Germany and start banning simulations of shooting people such as Counter-Strike and Lasertag!

  171. Hey by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    Left is the right side, else you would end up flaying alive all the pedestrians with your whip.

    Just because London had the first decent road system for horse drawn carriages.

    The taxi-cab was coined after the cabriolet carraige released in Paris 1800.

    And that is irrelevant I know, but GTA london was on the left... and I actually got more confused playing GTA between left and right that driving in Germany, which I had a few close calls.

    Now I drive on the right, which they say make syou more calm (our chemical-sided imbalance probably) but I do not see evidence of that in Brussels drivers.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  172. Counter-Strike? by O-SUSHi · · Score: 1

    Terrorists win.

    --
    Remember children, all generalizations are wrong.
  173. Re:This is like the recent Melbourne gangland murd by kubrick · · Score: 1

    From most reports, they're actually fans of the Scorsese crime films and The Sopranos. Think we'll see those banned instead?

    --
    deus does not exist but if he does
  174. I call BS by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    Unless they've really twisted psychology terms since I read up on them, psychopath has never had anything to do with being psychotic apart from having a common word root. (Which implies that psychologists are psychotic, right?)

    Not all psychopaths are clean, methodical, and rational. The basic disorder is simply a lack of ability to relate to others. A psychopath might be the methodical hitman. It might be the truck driver who carves up prostitutes at his stops. It can be the child who drowns his playmate to find out what drowning looks like. The only way in which a certain methodicalness is a characteristic is that, to learn to blend in with humanity, they generally have to learn how to appear normal on a rule-based system.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:I call BS by F34nor · · Score: 1

      I said Sociopaths were clean and methodical. I said Psychopaths were the ones out in left field.

  175. Follow-up making only slightly more sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There must be a joke here somewhere about Marathon, Half-Life, and Have Blue, but I have no idea what it is. Or maybe it's just an ironic situation.

    Marathon = Game which Half-Life basically copied/cloned (in a good way).
    Have Blue = Administrator of the biggest Marathon forum.

  176. But how? by sheaman · · Score: 1

    How do you dress up as a character from CS? Unless it was the Elite Krew, of course.

  177. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that true? The GWB bit?

  178. I can see it now... by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

    A kid walks into a gun shop, and starts stepping back and forth in an odd pattern. After being stopped by a puzzled clerk, the frustrated kid complains, "dammit, I looked up this cheat code for unlimited weapons but its not working! Maybe I'm doing something wrong...up up down down left right left right...."