Slashdot Mirror


Columbine Student on VG Violence

Sophia wrote in to mention some discussion of Video Game Violence on 1up.com this week. Brooks Brown had the experience of attending Columbine High School around the time of the now infamous shooting incident. Via his blog, Brown goes into a detailed discussion of Why Violence in Gaming is a Good Thing. From the article: "GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops. It's a story of a guy who got screwed trying to get back on top. It is, by nature, a story game. Postal 2 may let you kill anyone you want in bloody and disgusting ways - but that's not what it is about either. It is, by nature, a tech demo in the abilities of programmers and AI. it is WE - the gamers - who change what the game is about and determine what happens. It is the person playing who determines what the game contains." Jane Pinckard has a quick reaction to his post. More commentary on this subject is available via John Davison's Blog, who met Brown at a taping of a news program which was ostensibly to be about gaming in general. Instead he was ambushed about violence in games and ended up walking out.

87 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the days after the Littleton, Colorado massacre, the country went on a panicked hunt the oddballs in High School, a profoundly ignorant and unthinking response to a tragedy that left geeks, nerds, non-conformists and the alienated in an even worse situation than before. Stories all over the country embarked on witchunts that amounted to little more than Geek Profiling. All weekend, after Friday's column here, these voiceless kids -- invisible in media and on TV talk shows and powerless in their own schools -- have been e-mailing me with stories of what has happened to them in the past few days. Here are some of those stories in their own words, with gratitude and admiration for their courage in sending them. The big story out of Littleton isn't about violence on the Internet, or whether or not video games are turning out kids into killers. It's about the fact that for some of the best, brightest and most interesting kids, high school is a nightmare of exclusion, cruelty, warped values and anger.

    The big story never seemed to quite make it to the front pages or the TV talk shows. It wasn't whether the Net is a place for hate-mongers and bomb-makers, or whether video games are turning your kids into killers. It was the spotlight the Littleton, Colorado killings has put on the fact that for so many individualistic, intelligent, and vulnerable kids, high school is a Hellmouth of exclusion, cruelty, loneliness, inverted values and rage.

    From Buffy the Vampire Slayer to Todd Solondz's "Welcome To The Dollhouse," and a string of comically-bitter teen movies from Hollywood, pop culture has been trying to get this message out for years. For many kids - often the best and brightest -- school is a nightmare.

    People who are different are reviled as geeks, nerds, dorks. The lucky ones are excluded, the unfortunates are harassed, humiliated, sometimes assaulted literally as well as socially. Odd values - unthinking school spirit, proms, jocks - are exalted, while the best values - free thinking, non-conformity, curiousity - are ridiculed. Maybe the one positive legacy the Trenchcoat Mafia left was to ensure that this message got heard, by a society that seems desperate not to hear it.

    Minutes after the "Kids That Kill" column was posted on Slashdot Friday, and all through the weekend, I got a steady stream of e-mail from middle and high school kids all over the country -- especially from self-described oddballs. They were in trouble, or saw themselves that way to one degree or another in the hysteria sweeping the country after the shootings in Colorado.

    Many of these kids saw themselves as targets of a new hunt for oddballs -- suspects in a bizarre, systematic search for the strange and the alienated. Suddenly, in this tyranny of the normal, to be different wasn't just to feel unhappy, it was to be dangerous.

    Schools all over the country openly embraced Geek Profiling. One group calling itself the National School Safety Center issued a checklist of "dangerous signs" to watch for in kids: it included mood swings, a fondness for violent TV or video games, cursing, depression, anti-social behavior and attitudes. (I don't know about you, but I bat a thousand).

    The panic was fueled by a ceaseless bombardment of powerful, televised images of mourning and grief in Colorado, images that stir the emotions and demand some sort of response, even when it isn't clear what the problem is.

    The reliably blockheaded media response didn't help either. "Sixty Minutes" devoted a whole hour to a broadcast on screen violence and its impact on the young, heavily promoted by this tease: "Are video games turning your kids into killers?" The already embattled loners were besieged.

    "This is not a rational world. Can anybody help?" asked Jamie, head of an intense Dungeons and Dragons club in Minnesota, whose private school guidance counselor gave him a choice: give up the game or face counseling, possibly suspension. Suzanne Angelica (her online handle) was told to go home and leave her b

    1. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by CaptCommy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, I didn't realize there would be this many people feeling the same way I did.

    2. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by DarcSeed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Everything about that article rings true for me... high school was a nightmare for me too. I hated it. Now that I'm finally past it (and have been for the last 5 years) my mind is starting to forget the pain, but you don't really forget it. Just because you're different, no matter what that difference is, you are bad to them. And even if it weren't a hellhole trying to be in school, I wouldn't have wanted some of those people as my friends because they are so shallow and cruel. I really feel for those people quoted above... thankfully I never was singled out for dangerous behavior (I had a principal who valued brainiacs), but I realize I could have been.. and that is scary. High school is one seriously fucked up place. When is this country going to realize that!!?? It pisses me off so much that this kind of thing is blatantly still allowed in schools!

      --
      Best death? What, die from a naked lady avalanche?
    3. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by idonthack · · Score: 2, Informative

      From Andrew in Alaska: "To be honest, I sympathized much more with the shooters than the shootees. I am them. They are me. This is not to say I will end the lives of my classmates in a hail of bullets, but that their former situation bears a striking resemblance to my own. For the most part, the media are clueless. They're never experienced social rejection, or chosen non-conformity'Also, I would like to postulate that the kind of measures taken by school administration have a direct effect on school violence. School is generally an oppressive place; the parallels to fascist society are tantalizing. Following a school shooting, a week or two-week crackdown ensues, where students? constitutional rights are violated with impunity, at a greater rate than previous."

      Amazingly, we (yes, I am including myself) are the kind people that get ignored. People don't realize that in some schools, it's like Lord of the Flies. There are the "normal" people, and then the geeks, nerds, goths, dorks, weirdos, metalheads, skaters, and punks who get tramped on. And when we say stop, nobody listens - so some of us break. It's not that hard to see, but nobody's looking.
      ---
      LEEROY JENKINS!!!
      Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    4. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Nepharis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So true... I was lucky enough to go to a private high school (by my own choosing) where the teachers got to know all of their students. There was still the geek, goth and hippie crowds (all of which I considered myself a part of), and we/they were still picked upon by the jocks and preps, but we didn't care. There were enough of us that we essentially formed our own support groups. We also had the sympathy of the teachers, who over the years saw that the vast majority of intelligence lay in us. Indeed, we were lucky, moreso than we could realize at the time. Looking back now, I shudder to think what would have happened had I attended my public high school. I was never truly an outcast in middle school, I had friends in the "mainstream", etc., but I likely would have found my niche with the smart, free-thinking outcasts. Frustration, anger, and hate are very powerful emotions, ones that I have known. My reactions to such a situation could have possibly been disasterous, at least for my future. My greatest sympathies go out to the geeks, the gamers, the goths, and anyone who finds themselves downcast from the self-indulgent social circles abound in our schools. You have been given the bittersweet view from the outside. From your vantage point, you see the problems inherint in our systems, but feel powerless to induce change. Be strong. You time will come. ~nepharis

    5. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by dshaw858 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Dear Mr. Katz. I am 10. My parents took my computer away today, because of what they saw on television. They told me they just couldn't be around enough to make sure that I'm doing the right things on the Internet. My Mom and Dad told me they didn't want to be standing at my funeral some day because of things I was doing that they didn't know about. I am at my best friend's house, and am pretty bummed, because things are boring now. I hope I'll get it back."

      I'm not exaggerating or being sarcastic when I say that that statement brought tears to my eyes. I'm sixteen years old, and I know so very many parents who react like this. It really makes me think of the age-old statement of how people fear what they don't understand. Columbine was a tragedy, and just because us geeks don't play all-American sports (at least not all of us), and we don't (all) cheer at said games, it doesn't mean that we're not affected by killers.

      It's sad what the media sometimes portrays geeks and nerds as.

      - dshaw

    6. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Saiyajin18 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they tested the kids that shoot up their schools, they would probably find they are sociopathic or mentally ill in some other way. Perhaps violence in media inspired them to commit their crimes while young, but it was probably bound to happen at some point in their lives.

      And now for my story. I apologize in advance if it's tedious, but as someone who almost chose to commit these same acts, I feel it's applicable.

      I believe I may have mild sociopathic tendencies, which were aggravated by parents that, though decent, didn't pay much attention to anything I did, and by the "popular" students, who picked on me incessantly through my junior high years. I first fantasized about humiliating them. The longer it went on, the more it escalated. I planned to kill myself to escape the daily misery. A single thought kept me from trying: "They'll win." Then I fantasized about killing them, by many gruesome means.

      Mind you, while all this was happening, I wasn't a gamer, and my prior gaming experiences consisted of "Pitfall" and "Breakout" for the Atari 2600. I can't say for certain whether violent gaming (which was available, I just didn't have any new gaming systems) would have changed any of that. Knowing my personality at the time, it would have been more a release valve than anything.

      I had access to guns and knives. I had the rage, and probably the tendency to commit what would have been the first such incident (and by a female, no less!). What stopped me from carrying out these deeds I plotted? It wasn't my parents. It wasn't lack of exposure to violence, since I'd seen my fair share of violent movies. It was that same thought that kept me from taking my own life. "They'll win." I would have been villified, they would have been cherished. Those cruel bastards certainly didn't deserve glowing memorial praise. So I did my best to ignore them. Luckily, I moved to a distant town right before high school.

      We can't point the finger at any one cause of these crimes. In my case, a combination of factors contributed to a possible outburst, but there was just enough elements lacking that I kept my common sense and was able to overcome the impulse to act. Maybe I wasn't ill enough, maybe my parents were just good enough, maybe the torment didn't go far enough, or maybe I was just too afraid. I know for certain that the emotional torture I'd been put through all those years ago has permanently affected my mental state.

      I lay most of the blame for what I almost did on two parties: myself, for taking so much stock in what others thought of me, and all the ignorant adults and peers that saw the problem, but chose to ignore it for whatever reason.

      A postscript: shortly after I moved from that town, I saw in a local news broadcast that one of my harassers had been killed in a car accident. I smiled. Does that make me a bad person?

    7. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Queer+Boy · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I was lucky enough to go to a private high school (by my own choosing) where the teachers got to know all of their students.

      I went to a couple different boarding schools (moved) from 5th-Sophomore year. Strangely enough there tends to be less exclusion than at public schools. Sure there's always the kid or two that gets picked on but they're still your friend and they know that, they just happen to be the Cartman of the group.

      --
      Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
    8. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Comatose51 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Hey I was one of those kids and brought to the New York Times attention because of Slashdot! NYT Article

      6th paragraph down. That was us. What do you know? None of us shot anyone and ended up doing anything violent. Most of us graduated college fine. One of them ended up a computer science major with a degree from Yale and a rabid Slashdot reader, so maybe they should put a warning out for kids like us... Do we still have LAN parties and play shooters? Of course!

      --
      EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
    9. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by rm69990 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hey all. What we need to do is instead of just sitting on Slashdot discussing the problem, make the counsellors and principals and parents realize that this problem exists and make them pull their heads out of their asses. What I have done is taken the very first comment on this page (the one I am replying to right now), which was EXTREMELY insightful btw, and have made a nice PDF out of it. I am making an anonymous hotmail account and emailing this to my guidance councellor.

      I suggest everyone else do the same.

      I myself am sort of a mixture of some sort. I am friends with all of the "cool kids". I smoke pot with them. I get so drunk I can barely see straight.

      I also run Linux on my desktop at home and read Slashdot. So I know how things are on both sides of the fence.

      At school, the bigger kids used to pick on me. Then I would pick on the even weaker. I did this until shortly after I read a commentary similar to these ones about Columbine.

      Ever since that day, I'm the person who is always telling my own friends to fuck off and leave the nerdy kid ive never met before alone. Most of the people who pick on other kids do it to fit in (at least I did), so that they aren't put in the "geek's" shoes. They want to fit in with the other bullies.

      The thing that fucking pisses me off, is that the Teachers have the power to stop this, and they just don't care. They know little Johnny gets beat up every day at Lunch, yet they would rather run off for a smoke break instead of letting him work on homework in the classroom during Lunch, or even just watching him from afar. Some other kids beat the living shit out of another "geek" and get suspended for a few days. That little geek brings a pocket knife to school to try and be cool and fit in with the popular people, and he gets expelled and a letter sent home for it.

      Columbine, while being a complete and utter tragedy, was also a glowing oppurtunity. If only stories like this, and comments like the first one for this story, were posted on the front page of the newspaper, instead of fucking stupid articles like "Are Violent Video Games Going to Make Your Kid Kill?", maybe all of the bullies, teachers and principals would realize that those students died not only because of the two "crazy kids" but because of people like themselves. That the principals at Columbine, the teachers, the counsellors, the parents of the killers, are owed just as much blame as the killers themselves. That this mass murder was the fault of Society and not the fault of the "nerds". It could have made all of the difference in the world, even if it only saved one kid from being bullied. But instead of taking advantage of this oppurtunity, America (and Canada where I live, as well as numerous other countries) instead went on an all-out witch-hunt, while being so incredibly naive...and, well, downright fucking stupid....that they just made the problem worse.

      So I say everyone print off the first comment for this article and make sure as many people as possible see it.

    10. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by Bongo+Bill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This, I think, is fairly telling of a facet of geek culture that is not particularly well-acknowledged by its members.

      I'm a geek, and definitely rather nonconformist and antisocial. In high school - which, I might add, I enjoyed tremendously - in high school, I hung around with all the nerds - the higher-math crowd, the band geeks, the people who'd play D&D at lunch. I've seen a fair share of ostracization going on around me. But it never happened to me.

      I never had any problems with being threatened or intimidated - by anyone - for any reason, least of all for refusing to conform to the popular culture. Why would that be? I, who played violent video games and quietly kept to myself, the kid who barely cared about the sports teams and didn't go outside much - why was I not a victim of the oppression described above?

      It's simple. I didn't respond in kind to the sort of attitudes that the parent post likens to nazism and overused Orwellian clichés. I did not resent the culture that I chose not to follow. I did not patronize my classmates who were not as good at science or math. I did not envy them when their talents, talents that were useless in real life, gave them some degree of fame. I did not give the socialites a reason to think themselves better than me - they can't gloat if the only things they have are things that I don't want.

      But it was more than just that. All that accomplished was preventing me from blaming society for all my problems. Those who dislike the idea of popularity, who hate what about it that they perceive to be unfair, often do so because they cannot reap its benefits. They claim to loathe its superficiality, but they are exposed when they resent those who have it.

      I'm fairly antisocial. That's not to say I didn't have friends. I had plenty of friends. A good friend of mine was the student council president, and student council basically amounts to a popularity contest. Another good friend of mine lettered in three sports. Quite a few were Slashdot readers who didn't really do much. I dunno, I guess I'm just a likeable guy. But most of the time I, being the social equivalent of an oyster, didn't even know who these people were until I happened to overhear a conversation about them.

      The popular people - they didn't become popular by being assholes. Sure, there are some assholes - let them fool themselves into thinking they're respected. Ignore them and look for the ones who are actually worth knowing. Look beyond the cliques. Look beyond the role they perform in the byzantine machinations of high school culture. This isn't some touchy-feely let's-all-get-along milquetoast lecture, it's common sense.

      If you resent a person for playing football, how can you expect them to not resent you for playing Quake? If you can't look past a person's preoccupation with fashion, how can you expect them to look past your preoccupation with technology?

      If you want respect, earn it. Earn respect by showing respect. Sometimes you have to show it first.

      --
      ...but is it art?
    11. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by FLEB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Somehow I just can't see it all that maliciously. Mediocrity tends to be borne from mediocrity more than from malice or oppressive intent.

      I do agree that the effects you state may be a result of mediocre school education, but I think the cause is more that education systems are bein run too much from the top. Constituents want results, which are more often found from individual attention, but the pressure is applied via an impersonal top-down bureaucracy. The only way a bureaucracy can see results is to measure them. The only way to see results is with uniform methods and measures. Uniformity (in this situation) leads to mediocrity.

      Although the H.S. system as it is leads to fads, uniformity, and fear of reaction, I doubt that it's designed with a significant ear to the people benifited by normal perpetuation.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    12. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by aukset · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, sociopathy (an outdated term, psychopath is currently preferred) is a pretty valid phenomenon, but much too widely used and misunderstood. A psychopath is a person without a conscience. Thats it, really. They know the difference between right and wrong, but are emotionally divorced from those concepts. I believe approximately 1% of the population are psychopathic. Very few actually become violent criminals, and very few violent criminals are actually psychopathic. The public and the media falsely overuse psychopathy to explain acts of violence they do not understand. In the case of columbine, there is some evidence that one of the boys may have been psychopathic (I don't remember which), and manipulated the other into going through with their plans. It's very difficult to know after the fact, with the subjects being deceased. I don't believe it, personally. I highly doubt the GP is actually socio/psychopathic. A true psychopath would not have thought twice about exacting revenge. True psychopaths are also incredibly skilled at social camoflage and manipulation, and would (if they chose to) be able to fit right into the High School social structure. Anyway, the point is psychopathy is most probably a real condition, but is generally misunderstood and misused. It is not an attempt by psychologists to label these people as mentally ill, as psychopaty is considered untreatable. It is not a catch-all label for people who kill inexplicably. That it is used as such is a shame.

      --
      No sig now
    13. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by FLEB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anyone who sympathizes or identifies with the shooters does so because he or she harbors secret fantasies of being a psychopathic killer, not because he or she is a "geek."

      Why can't one be both a geek and a harborer of great secret fantasies? What's the big problem with great, secret fantasies? A bit better than bloody public realities, certainly. Perhaps (and this is the thesis of the whole situation) the great, secret fantasies are reactions to negative situations which breed the desire for revenge.

      Certainly, innocent people got caught in the crossfire, shot down for no reason other than being there. Even for the guilty, death is an unduly harsh sentence. Hence, society condemns and punishes this behavior. It is criminal.

      However, a believer in the concept of justice could say that some manner of justice should have been be meted out to the true adversaries of these goths, dorks, etc. Although the Columbine shooters wildly overstepped bounds with their vengeance, some can find real understanding, even sympathy, for the direction, if not the scope, of their actions.

      I would even question your contemptuous tone over sympathizers' "secret fantasies". To deny these fantasies is to deny the idea that "geeks" and "jocks" in such situations are adversaries. The natural goal of an adversary is to eliminate the conflict. If you are in a world without empathy, society, or law, then the best method may be to eliminate the enemy. In the real world, we are bound by these restrictions, but in the mind's eye, in the fantasy, we are free from such cares. Unbounded by consequence as fantasy is, then, is it so wrong and contemptible to let your thoughts wander to the most direct route of adversarial elimination, as long as it doesn't escape the world of fancy (as a school rampage in the real world is far too messy a method of meteing out justice).

      (So. I guess this means I'm most likely on a watch-list somewhere now, huh? BTW: Please forgive the obtuse language. I'm sleepy, and I get sort of rambling and flowery multisyllabic when I'm tired.)

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    14. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by terpl · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll preface by explaining who I am. I am thrity years old. Happily married five years. I am the CEO of a successful IT company. I have power, respect, and friends.

      But this comment stripped away fifteen years from me. Again I feel like the undersized freshman entering into a very different world.

      I get it. I was it. I am it.

      At my school I was met with a combination of revile and contempt. This emanated from both the population of the school and some of the teachers.

      Why? Because I had commited the cardinal sins.

      I wore black
      I listened to Bauhaus
      I played DnD
      Hell I even joined the drama club at one point.

      All of these were the equilvalent of my scarlet letter.

      Freak-Geek-Loser I've been them all.

      And now I am doubly damned because I play Video Games.

      (I even played EQ)

      To many people I am sure that I must be an abberation. Someone who was able to expose himself to all these negative influences yet somehow dresses himself. Goes to work. Pay way too much taxes (no seriously, damn my bill was crazy this year). Provide for my family and do all the other things I shouldn't be able to. Yet I do. I even thrive at it.

      In fact I would go so far to say that it has been my 'freakish' elements that have allowed to be a success. My passion for computers, video games, and all things good and holy to the /. crowd are what I have used to make myself a success.

      So why am I saying this?

      To give hope to those who stuck on year two of a five year tenure in hell.

      People joke about how those who were beaten up in HS go on to be the bullies boss in Post Grad. There's a lot of truth to that. It's not a god given right, but as soon as you leave HS it becomes rapidly apparent how pointless and trivial it was. How small that world is. The game is reset and the rules change.

      And general sticking peoples heads in a toilet is a less valuable skill than knowing computers.

      Your 5-10-15 year reunions can rapidly become a testament of how far ahead you have pulled against those were the kings of HS. Not all, but some.

      All of the cliches are true to a point:

      Success is the greatest revenge. Trust me.
      Don't let the bastards get you down.
      Don't drink the water they put something in it

      (well maybe not the last one)

      To my fellow brethen of geekdom I say this:

      Do what you love and tell those that would defy you to fuck off. They'll never understand until your company goes public.

    15. Re:Columbine? Jon Katz is calling! by ciroknight · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Personally, I think all teenagers, regardless of homes, economic situation, etc, will test positive for some psychological ailment, simply because the way that we've set up our neuroscience programs to detect such things; in adults.

      A teenager's mind is controlled on little more than assumptions and hormones, the mix of which is pretty much give or take given the kid. Now we might say that a well adjusted kid will be in one direction or another, but I come from a place where I've seen a very large spectrum of kids (and I still consider myself to be one, even at 18 years old *I'll be a kid until I'm not a teen/can drink, I'm going more for legal definition here for those pedants who like to pick and poke*). The "more adjusted" ones tend to do better in school, but in real life fumble in all kinds of unpredictable ways. Meanwhile the "broken" kids seem to do better in the real world because they based their assumptions more towards the real world, and less to one their parents, guardians, and teachers prefer.

      Now I'm not saying there's no such thing as mental illness in children, I'm just saying too often we give a label to something that isn't there. Because a kid doesn't like to read and would rather play legos and build things isn't a mental ailment, and yet is too often treated as one. Kids like this are branded throughout their school careers as being dead ends, tracked for vocational schooling and forgotten about when these same kids could grow up and be the best and brighest engineers if you'd give them access to the things they need to learn to do so.

      I was/am one of those kids, and I'm finding it very hard in college simply because I wasn't granted the same kind of access as children who were branded as "normal" and tracked for college. There's simply so much that I need to know still that I don't that I find myself feeling unprepared for college, even after being here for a year.

      Give a kid a tool and show them how to use it. Let it be up to the kid if he or she wants to use the tool; explain the consequences of its use, and the probable outcomes of its use and if the kid isn't a sociopath or mentally challenged in some way, the kid will use the tool in accordance to how he or she was taught, but not nessicarily identitically as taught. That's the beauty of us human machines.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
  2. *cough cough* Derrida *cough cough* by biryokumaru · · Score: 5, Funny
    Please! No more post modernism!

    *weeps*

    --
    When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    1. Re:*cough cough* Derrida *cough cough* by daniil · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll see your Derrida and raise you a Baudrillard!

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
  3. Postal 2 was about AI? by suresk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uhh, I'm pretty sure it was pretty much a 'kill everything that moves, and even if it doesn't move, kill it anyway just to be sure' kind of game. It was innovative in the ways you could kill people though. Very creative.

    Not that there is anything wrong with that.....

    The real danger is with racing games. Try racing an Audi S4 around in Project Gotham all day, then hopping into a real S4 to go to the grocery store. Dangerous stuff.

    1. Re:Postal 2 was about AI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The real danger is with racing games. Try racing an Audi S4 around in Project Gotham all day, then hopping into a real S4 to go to the grocery store. Dangerous stuff.

      Think of how I felt after I played Katamari Damacy...

    2. Re:Postal 2 was about AI? by dyefade · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The real danger is with racing games. Try racing an Audi S4 around in Project Gotham all day, then hopping into a real S4 to go to the grocery store. Dangerous stuff.

      That I agree with. I played Midtown Madness (can't remember which) for a few hours straight, then went straight out driving. It was such an effort to restrain myself at traffic lights, queues etc. That was the most I've ever been effected by a game I think.

      (Of course, I'm a rational guy, it was actually somewhat reassuring to have realised quickly and checked myself in time. I wonder about other people I know however, and worse, people I don't know.)

    3. Re:Postal 2 was about AI? by yotto · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not to "me too!" a comment, but Just yesterday I was driving by a parking lot and in the far corner your standard "crotch rocket" motorcycle was sitting all on its own. I couldn't help but think it was placed there specifically because it would trigger a mini-game.

      Luckily, I live in reality and was amused by that thought, not inexoribly drawn into it like a moth to a flame.

    4. Re:Postal 2 was about AI? by FriedTurkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      I know driving around in cool cars in videogames and then getting into my piece of shit car makes me so angry I want to shoot people too.

  4. Interesting Parallel With Drugs by DanielMarkham · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I'm not mistaken, all forms of drugs were legal up until around the turn of the century. People used to be able to medicate themselves as they chose. But after society perceived that drugs were causing harm to the youth, there was a big push for leglislation.
    If the political push continues against violence in video games (and I think it will), it will be interesting to see if this "war on game violence" plays out the same way. That would mean either some kind of certification to use games or perhaps some biometric age device hooked up to game players. I don't believe games harm anyone, btw, but in politics perception is everything.

    Can I Type What I Want In This Sig?

    1. Re:Interesting Parallel With Drugs by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The dangers that many drugs posed were not just to youth. Around the time that drugs first started being outlawed, drug use was much higher among adults than youth. For example, opiates were used extensively recreationally (not medicinally), often causing serious addiction problems and dangerous side effects.

      It's now (well, since roughly the 60s) that illegal drug use is so pervasive among youth. The legislation that's a reaction to that is not that drugs have been made illegal, but our efforts toward persecuting those who deal in or use drugs have been increased (the War on Drugs, it's called now).

    2. Re:Interesting Parallel With Drugs by PakProtector · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If I recall correctly, Opiates were first banned because there was fear and panic that 'drug crazed negroes' would rape white women. This was in San Fran, or one of those more westernly of the United States Cities.

      This was also what stirred the first (recorded) police increase of calibre size, as it was thought that anything below a .38 would not be enough to kill someone on Opium.

      Also, the reason Drug Use is pervasive amongst youth is because it is forbidden. You make something verbotten, and its appeal instantly skyrockets among teenagers, mainly because teenagers have a built in mechanism whereby the seek to break as many rules as they possibly can, due to the fact they need to explore and find the boundaries of what is acceptable behaviour, and more importantly, what they can get away with.

      Probably important to becoming a well-rounded adult.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

  5. The chicken or the egg... by sinfree · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have often thought that people who were likely to commit murder were attracted to violent video games, and NOT that violent video games created murderers. Perhaps we should find out what percentage of violent video game players DO NOT commit violent crimes... probably in the high 90 percentage count. Also, perhaps we should find out how many people who commit violent crimes didn't even play violent video games. For those who believe in the Bible... Cain slew Abel... and that was before violent video games, movies, or anything else of that nature.

    1. Re:The chicken or the egg... by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nearly all violent video game players don't commit violent crimes.

      What you really want is to compare the percentage of people who commit violent crimes out of two groups: those who play violent video games and those who don't. This sort of thing has been done with, say, television before, but it's nearly impossible to construct proper groups, so data is not useful.

      Really the problem, in my opinion, is that parents don't like they way their children behave and need a scapegoat. This isn't terribly surprising. The same thing happened in the 60s and 70s, but then the scapegoat was drugs. (I guess it's still one of the scapegoats now.)

    2. Re:The chicken or the egg... by bani · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A lot of violent criminals are also attracted to the bible, or are members of fundamentalist christian groups.

      In fact I would bet far more murders are committed claiming "god made me do it" than "GTA3 made me do it".

      But banning video games is fashionable, hip, cool, and trendy -- banning the bible is not.

    3. Re:The chicken or the egg... by bonehead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Such an approach, however, completely ignores one very important psychological aspect: Violent video games allow a person to blow off steam in a harmless, vicarious way.

      It could be argued that the more violent the behavior exhibitted during a video game, the less likely that person is to exhibit violent behavior in the real world. The more a person is able to submerse themselves in the game's environment, and accept it as a temporary "reality", the less likely they'll be to have much of an urge to perform similar acts out on the streets.

      All people, to one degree or another, build up certain levels of anger, hostility, and rage over time. It's important to have an outlet for these emotions that doesn't actually involve hurting other people.

      I don't remember the author, but there was one who stated something along the lines of "writing is the only thing that keeps me from going on a killing spree". I would suspect that many other authors, and lyricists, hold similar sentiments.

  6. My review of Grand Theft Auto by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, it's basically a game where you can drive around an ambulance and take people to the hospital, drive around a fire truck and put out fires, drive around a police car and catch criminals or drive a taxi and take people places. Of course, there's much more you can do, but I'm not into all that violent stuff.

    1. Re:My review of Grand Theft Auto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah but you can only do any of that once you've beaten the crap out of some poor civil service worker who was just trying to do their job.

      But seriously. GTA is about violence. Face it. We like killing things. Guns are fun! Acting out our fantasies in any way is usually fun. The point is maintaining the division between fantasy and reality which people these days are pretty crap at. For example, the male fantasy of women is percieved by women to be the ideal. Hence they end up with this stupid distorted fantasized body image.

      Killing things is fun, and as long as nobody actually dies it's fine. Can we all just grow up and admit it now please?

    2. Re:My review of Grand Theft Auto by miyako · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not really sure why the parent was modded funny, it should be interesting.
      I was never much into the GTA games, but last year I was given GTA:San Andreas as a gift. I have to admit that the game can be fun without indulging in gratuitious violence. As the parent mentioned, there are taxi, police, fire, and EMT missions to take on, there are delivery missions, collectibles, mini-games, races, stunts, etc. It's a very large game world with a lot of stuff to do, and gratuitious violence is only one part of it. A friend of mine had the game and had completed all the main missions without doing much of the sidequests, and I copied his game save onto my memory card and now have the entire game unlocked and I find that just driving around exploring the city and doing a lot of the non-violent sidequests and stuff is a lot of fun. Am I missing out on a lot of the game? maybe, but the game is friggen huge and as it was a gift, and didn't cost me anything I'm not going to complain.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
  7. I doubt video games cause violence by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If video games caused violence, we'd have terrible world wide child violence and regular school shootings by now. We don't. I belive this is all about children with psychological issues that, of course, may be influenced by video games, but so would they be by movies, TV and news by this theory.

    I believe a video game simulation is nothing compared to how convincing real events illustrating the true nature of gruesome human behavior, and we're basically fed with this daily through television. People call watching it educating.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  8. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops.

    Then I think there's something wrong in my version...

  9. Ah, but can he make a sweeping statement! by SerpentMage · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How people are actual killers and nut jobs? I mean this in all seriousness. It is probably a split percentage point. How many people can watch a movie with gore and walk home without thinking twice? Probably 99.x percent of the people on this planet.

    The problem with his blog entry is that he talking about the vast majority and not the absolute minority. And while I don't think that video games on their own create killing machines, they are an influence. That is the problem, the summation of all factors is what causes the problems!

    Here is the kicker, in his last statement he says the killers were "f'd up". Well, duh, yeah! However, they blended in since our society does not think twice about violence and that is a problem.

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
  10. Straight from the source. by Shky · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is all well and good, but I think it misses a crucial point - this.

    Right...?

    --
    CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
  11. Violence in VideoGames by cloudofstrife · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've always thought that if a kid can't tell the difference between a video game and the real world, and thinks it's okay to shoot people like in a video game, his parents need to step in very quickly and get him help and stop him from playing those games. I've been playing computer games from a young age, and I've never had the urge to actually take out a gun and shoot someone.

    1. Re:Violence in VideoGames by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny
      and I've never had the urge to actually take out a gun and shoot someone.

      What if you found a scroll of genocide?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  12. Pac-Man by JCY2K · · Score: 2, Funny

    Video games don't influence children; otherwise the 80s would have been full of teens sitting in the dark listening to techno and popping pills...

  13. I think they call this "rationalizing" by mark-t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People find ways of rationalizing whatever the heck they want to do, regardless of how good or bad it may actually be.

  14. Consider Civ III in the same vein. by Generalisimo+Zang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His observations on how it's not the game itself, but what you bring to the game, is right on the money.

    As an example, how many people have played Civilization III?

    So... what's it about?

    Is it about a brave tribe of people who are struggling to establish a civilization under your benevolent leadership, and advance their learning and culture while they peacefully expand, only to be constantly attacked by less enlightened and/or more warlike cultures?

    Or is it about a tribe of people who have fallen under your evil domination, who you will then guide forward through the ages in an orgy of conquest, until you stand astride the Earth as its sole Overlord?

    Or is it just a bunch of pixels being moved around by the in-game AI, and you're a video gamer with a few hours to kill, amusing yourself by trying to defeat the AI opponents in the game?

    It can be any one of those things, depending upon the imagination of the player.

    1. Re:Consider Civ III in the same vein. by Generalisimo+Zang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How would I put a "spin" on the mandatory back alley chainsaw assasination mission in GTA?

      I can think of two ways right off the bat:

      1) There is no chainsaw. There is no back alley. There were no assasinations. It's a game. None of it is real.

      or...

      3) You *are* the main character, and you *are* commiting horribly unspeakable crimes, but it's solely for the purpose of rising to the top of the criminal underworld as part of a long-running secret operation to completely dismantle the criminal organization afterwards, so that evil things like what you yourself are commiting will never again be possible. You selflessly commit chainsaw assasinations, in order to forever end the horrific practice of... chainsaw assasinations. ;)

      Either one of those two will do.

  15. RT Fucking A... by MsGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    Brooks Brown was the guy who was friends with Harris and Kleibold and warned the cops *a year before the shootings* that these guys were up to no good, that they were making bombs and planned to shoot up the school. If anyone has the right to make a comment about the connection (or lack thereof) between First Person Shooters and the Columbine Incident, it's Brown.

    I don't know if I entirely agree with him...I noticed that I was getting a bit desensitized to real-world violence (on the news, in the movie "Fahrenheit 9/11") after a few years of avidly playing Unreal Tournament, and put down for a while. However, he has definitely the right to say what he has to say, and by dint of what he's experience he's earned the right to say it with some level of authoritativeness.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
  16. Re:This makes the author an expert? by FleaPlus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From Brown's blog:

    For those of you who don't know me - i went to columbine, i was friends with both killers and the killed, had reported the killers to the police, the cops did nothing, etc.

    From Davison's blog:

    Today I got a note from Brooks Brown, who if you can cast your mind back all the way to 1999 was the Columbine student who warned police deputies that Eric Harris was building pipe bombs and had threatened to kill him. "I was that guy on the show with you," he said. "Wondered a few things - first, wanted to say nice job, and it was fucked up what they did. They actually edited the show's content so my points weren't let in."

    I'm not sure if that necessarily makes him an expert, but it's enough to make me interested in his thoughts on the topic.

  17. Choice quote by evanh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "If we don't take action, we end up at the mercy of unscrupulous media outlets in control of the message. They do exactly what the games they deplore do: make viewers watch by titilating them with sensationalistic violence. The difference is, games are entertainment; the news is not supposed to be."

  18. Someone spells it out... by holiggan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Well, he sure spells it out: the fault is mainly the PARENTS. And I agree.

    If you leave your kid all day around games/movies/music/newspaper/TV, and you don't spend the time educating him, telling him about right or wrong, loving him, that sort of "old fashioned" stuff, well, maybe he will grow up with a skewed view of life.

    The thing is that parents (even bad ones) are voters, so it's hard from the policital point of view to say "hey, you're bad parents! you're to blame!". It's much "safer" to blame "those darn videogames and rock music!" because videogames and songs don't vote!

    Anyway, maybe we as a society should start paying a bit more atention to parenting. After all, to put it in Scott Adam's words, we need a license to drive/fish/whatever but to be a parent we only need a couple of organs. And maybe between all the people that have those organs there are some who can't take care of themselves, let alone a child...

    --
    "A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
  19. He's 100% right by tansey · · Score: 3, Funny

    I mean we all remember those famous Technical Demos:

    - Mortal Kombat characters executing fatalities to demonstrate advancments in sprite scripting technology.

    - Serious Sam's technical display of hugely explorable levels and efficient creation (and removal) of hundreds of agents simultaneously.

    - The Playboy series of games which push the boundaries of graphics and strive for photorealism.

    - Duke Nukem feeding strippers money and getting them to take their clothes off displayed revolutionary bounce-physics.

  20. GTA:SA by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't most of GTA:Sa(quite far into it) about a guy trying to go straight and stop drug dealers?

    Shocking really.. who would of thought you that? I've only ever used a prostitute once just to see WTF it was that happened, then I couldn't careless.

    --
    I like muppets.
  21. Mod Parent Up by B1ackDragon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please, very informative, though a little off. It was a fear of Chinese that lead to banning of smoked opium. The 'Drug crazed negroes' would lead to the banning of cocaine. Also:

    1937 saw the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act. Harry J. Anslinger (Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner) testified in hearings on the subject that the hemp plant needed to be banned because it had a violent "effect on the degenerate races," notably Mexican immigrants.

    Here's a nice section of a wikipedia article: War On Drugs, 20th Century

    --
    The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
  22. a LOT higher than 90%, IMHO by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I like to think it's a lot higher than 90%.

    E.g., World Of Warcraft currently has some 2 million subscribers. If a whole 10% of them were that influenceable, you'd have some 200,000 people running around with swords trying to slash their class mates.

    In reality, we have, what? Maybe 10-20 people who were anywhere near (debatably) influenced by games, out of maybe that many millions of gamers. We're not even talking one percent, we're talking maybe 1 in a million.

    And were games the real reason there? Or is it just another scapegoat? We have people who got bullied _daily_, and eventually one of them breaks under stress and goes homicidal. Happens every day among non-gamers too. E.g., since "Postal 2" is mentioned, the term "to go postal" has to do with, you know, post office employees and pre-dates video games.

    But games make an easy scapegoat and a very visible straw man. Blaming everything on one simple bogeyman (games, jews in 1930's Germany, world conspiracies, etc) is _easy_. It lets one ignore the more complex _real_ problems.

    We're all suddenly no longer to blame for failed parenting, the massive cultural failure in which being smart in school is _uncool_, for the social factors involved, etc. Nosiree, bob, it's the games that are to blame.

    I find it sad.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  23. GTA-BS by Mulletproof · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops. It's a story of a guy who got screwed trying to get back on top."

    So it's about a guy who got screwed and is trying to get back on top... On top of what again? The criminal world? By enacting all sorts of violent mischief? Who just happens to fuck hookers and kill cops along the way?

    Now don't get me wrong, I love videogames, but the line this guy is trying to rationalize is so thin as not to even exist. It's as if the author is trying to explain away the fact that the game is putting you in direct control of a quasi-gansta whose missions are to almost exclusively commit acts of violence against rivals and society at large. I mean, let's not sugar coat this here. You can't divorse the two concepts, as well as the fact that it becomes more than "just a story" when you have user interaction. You're programming your brain with tactics, responces and behaviors in order to operate in that environment. I'll be the first to say most pleas of Videogame violence is way too overrated, but I'll also be up there in saying that it's not as harmless as some of the developers would have you believe. For most well adjusted people, it probably IS harmeless. But for a developing child? You have to be fucking kidding me. There's a reason sesame street exists and it's to program kids. Or, conversly, you can program them with GTA. Both purposely or inadvertantly will do the same thing, and to try and totally absolve yourself of the potential impact you're making on anybody playing is rationalist idiocy.

    And yes, the parents have the biggest role in that development. But I wish these devs would call their games for what they are instead of trying to hide behind this conjured BS.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:GTA-BS by maxpublic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ultimately what we have to remember is that there isn't a single shred of evidence that videogames contribute to violent behavior. Not one little bit.

      There is, however, a great deal of evidence that indicates that parents play a huge role in whether or not their children grow up to be good citizens or nasty little fucks. Reams of evidence, in fact. A veritable mountain of evidence.

      If you want to have a real effect on whether or not kids are going to turn into worthless pieces of shit, it isn't videogames that should be regulated - but who gets to be a parent in the first place.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
  24. It isn't the video games... by gillbates · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's the fact that mankind has an inborn propensity for violence. The problem isn't violent video games, but that we haven't addressed the fundamentally violent nature of mankind.

    Lenin and Hitler killed millions before the first video game had been invented; our violent nature is as old as recorded history.

    Instead of blaming a scapegoat (video games), parents would be better off recognizing this fundamental trait (propensity for violence) of human nature and teaching their children to overcome it. After all, keeping the kids away from violent video games won't keep the bullies from bullying, nor will it keep them from getting angry... The ability to take revenge isn't limited to those who have played violent video games.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  25. Yep by t_allardyce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think hes right on - video games are fast becoming world sims, and story aside, its you who controls the character. GTA has such great re-playability because you can just walk around doing whatever you like, i think the future of GTA is to just get rid of the story line all together and concentrate on making it a good world simulator, this is a place where you can do things you couldn't or wouldn't want to do in real life, you can drive around fast and shoot people with no consequences, when the game gets to the point where you feel the same sensations as real life then why would you feel the need to shoot someone in real life? you wouldn't.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  26. driving games vs. reality by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Informative
    Try racing an Audi S4 around in Project Gotham all day, then hopping into a real S4 to go to the grocery store. Dangerous stuff.

    If you own an Audi, join the Audi Club North America and come to one of the driver education events (actually, the DE events are open to any make/model, except trucks, including SUVs). I'd claim it was a plug, except it's not- I'm a volunteer, the club is a non-profit organization, and the chapter that I volunteer with donates a fair amount of money at the end of the year to charity.

    Most people come to club driving schools thinking they know how to drive- especially the hot-shots who like to drive "hard" and have done all sorts of "performance modifications". Most leave realizing they knew nothing- and that half their "performance modifications" just served to cover up bad driving. They also realize that driving "hard" isn't best (smooth is key!) and that you should at any time (well, most of the time) be doing ONE thing- changing your speed (braking or accelerating) OR turning.

    As the owner of a much older Audi which has performance exceeding a stock S4 biturbo (same weight and about 20-30 more HP) and no traction control...one of the blessings of all wheel drive vehicle is that under power, they understeer (plow) very much like FWD vehicles. Not exactly the same, but very similar.

    What does this mean? That your first gut reaction (letting up off the gas) is usually the correct one; it puts weight back on the front of the car, and takes it off the rear; as a result, it lessens or corrects the understeer; just be careful you don't overdo it, or you'll induce oversteer.

    In many high performance RWD vehicles (especially the 911, which became infamous with the turbo version, because peole weren't used to the lag, which would kick in mid-corner), lifting in the beginnings of a slide will spin the car very nicely. Also- understeering into something generally means you hit whatever you were avoiding reasonably head on. Spinning means you have about a 1 in 10 chance or less of hitting something head-on, and side (and especially rear) impacts are extremely dangerous compared to hitting something head on. Virtually every passive and active safety device in your vehicle is designed to work in a frontal collision.

    Now remember kids, this advice is worth what it cost you- nothing. So don't be a dick and jump in your car and play Speed Racer on the street. Don't even do it after going to a driving school. Knowledge of how to drive, and practicing it at a track, is best applied in keeping your vehicle within BOTH your limits and its limits, and making correct reactions instinctual in emergencies.

    I know there are a huge number of young people on slashdot, so bear this in mind- most of you crash because you don't understand your limits or your vehicle's limits. Compound that with the typical teenager car (many of you drive hand-me-downs or very used vehicles, which have -very- low limits), and you have a recipe for disaster.

  27. Violent Games Mask the Real Problem by reporter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Blaming violent games for the violence in American society has very limited merit. Violent games are simply one stimulus among an array of pro-aggression stimuli that floods the American child as he grows into adulthood.

    In Japan, many kids play violent video games and see softporn pictures on the television. You will commonly see bared breats during the prime time on the television. Yet, the rate of violent crime, including violence (i.e. rape) against women, is much lower than that rate in the USA.

    Similar comments apply to Western Europe. (I do not have statistics for Eastern Europe.)

    What in American society is spurring the violence? American society encourages competition. It, in itself, is a form of aggression. In American society, if you lose your job, you just might suffer malnutrition because welfare-based food stamps have a finite duration. If you cannot find a job during that duration or before the expiration of unemployment benefits, you are screwed.

    The Europeans take a kindler, gentler approach. They accept a lower standard of living in exchange for lowering the level of aggressive competition. The Europeans give cradle-to-grave entitlements to anyone with European citizenship.

    Japan appears on the surface to be pure capitalism, but the Japanese also practice European-style paternalism. Companies are not allowed to fail, thus throwing millions out of work. Banks continue to lend money even to companies that surely should go bankrupt. Major companies in Japan avoid laying off workers. All this paternalism breeds inefficiency. The average Japanese worker is, in fact, less productive than the aggressive American worker. There are some exceptions: e.g. Toyota blue-collar workers.

    Which society is best? Less aggressive society with a lower standard of living or a more aggressive society with a higher standard of living? There is no clearcut answer. The choice is one of tradeoffs.

    As I drive to my brokerage to check on the high return of my mutual funds and other investments, I always pass by a prison. America has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. America is one of the few industrialized nations to continue to liberally practice capital punishment.

    In Silicon Valley, if you refuse to work 13 hours per day on minimal pay, the American multinational conglomerate or startup will fire you and hire an H-1B worker from China or India. You either compete or die.

    1. Re:Violent Games Mask the Real Problem by Demona · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You have got to be fucking pulling my leg. Competition has been a fact of life since before homo sapiens, and it always will be in a universe of finite resources. Funny thing, however -- cooperation is just as much a fact of life, and one does not exclude the other.

      --
      Fuck Slashdot
    2. Re:Violent Games Mask the Real Problem by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There's a difference between competition and killing people that aren't winning.

      It seems to me that America tends to kill people. And that's probably why there's a high crime rate- people will usually prefer to do criminal acts to try to avoid dying.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    3. Re:Violent Games Mask the Real Problem by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny
      As I drive to my brokerage to check on the high return of my mutual funds and other investments

      You had me until this sentence:

      1. Nobody willingly visits their broker. It's like dropping in on an Amway salesman and asking "what's new?"
      2. Ever hear of this thing called the intarweb that you're using right now that also has realtime portfolio management?
      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:Violent Games Mask the Real Problem by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny
      Oh, and:

      3. 1999 called and wants its "high return of mutual funds" back. Actually, so do I.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  28. Freedom to do what? by blibbler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    His main point seems to be that modern games give people the freedom to do whatever they want, and it is the gamers that choose to cause violence. This is of course, bullshit.
    Of the three games he focuses on, I have only played GTA, but while that games does allow you to do many things, the majority of the things it lets you do are violent. Where is the option to bring peace between the clans through negotiation? Where is the option to join the police, and help deal with the clan warfare through proper authorities? Going further, where is the option to help out the poor and homeless at the soup kitchen? Where is the option to move out to the suburbs, and get a real job, have some kids? Where is the option to travel to other countries, learn new languages, trek across the Andes?

    While its true that fucking a hooker, then killing her to get the money back is not part of the main game of GTA3, and was only discovered by some sicko, there is no option to give her some of the hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars that you end up with up with to sponsor her through college.

    I like GTA, and I don't think that violent video-games necessarily cause people to be violent, however it is very naïve to say that games like GTA are completely neutral, and it is games that make them violent

  29. Re:tetris anyone by spir0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    tetris is about blocks being created and it is the player's job to destroy them all. if you let them procreate, you lose.

    death is everywhere.

    if you let it.

    --
    The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
  30. Empathy for the perp. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand the empathy for the victim-villians of the piece, but I wonder just how many of the geeks who identified with the Columbine shooters would be willing to treat the 9/11 perps with the same consideration. I heard a lot of introspection about bullying and alienation in high schools after the Columbine massacre: if anyone dares put any historical or political context around 9/11, they are shouted down.

    1. Re:Empathy for the perp. by modecx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if anyone dares put any historical or political context around 9/11, they are shouted down.

      Totally. People all too often can't put themselves into someone else's shoes--either they don't care, or they don't want to know the truth as someone else sees it--so it's come as no suprise to me, though it is still depressing.

      *sigh*

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    2. Re:Empathy for the perp. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
      if anyone dares put any historical or political context around 9/11, they are shouted down.

      It is just sad you are true. Anyone that looks into the recent (as in 30 years) history of the US will understand at least some of the antipathy against the US. Just the fact the US has a history of wanting to influence other country's politics will have set some major antisympathy...

      The really sad thing IMO is that Osama got what he wanted: the US full of fear - NO, it was not about those people, it was about the fear... and he succeeded.

      Oh, and why hasn't he been captured yet? His kidneys are disfunct - how can he keep evading the US troups?
    3. Re:Empathy for the perp. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      why hasn't he been captured yet? His kidneys are disfunct - how can he keep evading the US troups?

      Simple; the people in charge of the US don't *want* him to be captured. (Witness pulling out of Afghanistan when we knew he was still there.)

      The reason for this is simple: control. Right now, the US is one of the most paranoid places in the world, and this paranoia is being fed by the White House, because it gives them power.

      Want to pass blatantly unconstitutional laws? Say the "T" word, and watch your opponents' political power crumble.

      Want to run a police state? Have Federal agents armed with machine guns "patrol" major cities, and tell the sheeple that it's necessary to keep them safe.

      If Bin Laden had been captured, people might ask "why do we need all of this?" Bush/Cheney need a bogeyman to keep the sheeple properly afraid, so that the real terrorists (the ones in the White House) can maintain their power hold.

    4. Re:Empathy for the perp. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sympathy for the 9/11 perps? About as much sympathy I have for Terry McNichols, Timothy McVeigh (why were they both "Mic"s? Odd coincidence), the "Unabomber", et al.

      The "Columbine Duo" are more along the lines of postal workers, etc.

      There's a difference between "I'm tired of this shit and I'm not going to take it anymore" to "fuck [your favorite corporate, government or other organization]. 'We' will eventually burn them all down. I am just a martyr for 'The Cause'"

      The first part is tragically pathetic, and perhaps highlight some of the darker sides of whatever socio-economic situation they come from. See the movie "Falling Down" for a good example.

      The second group is not tragically pathetic. They should be viewed with the same feelings as 'man-eating' tigers, etc., and actively sought out and destroyed (not incarcerated). Either version of "The Jackal" is probably good for this.

    5. Re:Empathy for the perp. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Right now, the US is one of the most paranoid places in the world,

      The US Govment is one of the most paranoid organizations in the world right now, not the rest of the US. You can still walk down some of the busiest streets in the world with a backpack on your back, and people will just leave you the hell alone, rather than having a jack-booted counter-terrorist force assault you for no other reason than "you looked like a terrorist, oh, and sorry about your book bag".

      The last time I went into a major downtown area, there were no federales with machine guns. But drive down the road in Mexico, and you're bound to come to a federales checkpoint, and they are indeed armed visibly with M-16's.

    6. Re:Empathy for the perp. by FLEB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not worldly in any sense, but I would probably agree that the US is nowhere near as paranoid as many nations. However, I do think that the rate of paranoia in the last few years is probably a fair contender.

      Even if the general populus isn't paranoid, a paranoid government with laws driven by paranoia can enable a paranoid minority of the populous to stir up heavily disproportionate difficulties for people who might just happen to look suspicious. Instead of a ludicrous "tip" being met with a deserved "screw off, you paranoid freak", it may be met with damaging gung-ho investigation.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
  31. Takes One to Know One by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe after living in the real world for a few more years, Brown will realize that life isn't "about" anything. That a storyline doesn't redeem gratuitous violence. Now, I don't know any more than he does whether videogaming influences kids to be more violent. Though the few days I played GTA were followed by a couple of incidents here in NYC when I came closer than I have in decades to taking up the common offers to get into a serious fight, with a jerk in a bar. But since such a risk is such a threat to profitable videogame companies' profits and owners, I'm starting to wonder why they don't fund scientific studies by reputable researchers to come up with some numbers.

    If they'd started such a study 10 years ago, we'd already have a decade of developmental psychology to study, with actual data on subsequent violence (or its lack) by the people being studied. Such a study is, of course, incumbent on those who'd make a claim that violent games "cause" violent acts, or violent people. But the industry would do itself a favor by clearing the air with such a study. Of course, if they perhaps have such a study already, though unpublished, that shows that there is a cause/effect, they'd be in serious trouble. Although suppressing such studies in the tobacco business just put off the inevitable, with much higher cost to those liable, as well as those unwittingly damaged.

    Just hearing from a person who grew up in the Columbine environment, which fostered such a violent event, doesn't convince me. He might be more sensitive to violence, having seen it played out, but he isn't any more expert in child psychology itself. In fact, his closeness to the event could just as easily influence him to engage in denial, that he's that similar to the killers, or capable of it himself, with their common background. Especially when he believes that children's choices are entirely their own responsibility.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  32. More of a commentary media by Crashmarik · · Score: 2, Interesting

    350,000 jobs created in march of 2004 The New York Times reports Bonds down on employment news.

    Elections Go well in afghanistan country is enjoying the best economic growth it has ever had, reporting Opium traffic on rise and taliban still holding out.

    20/20 Stages Explosions in cars auto companys are filleted by lawyers.

    I don't really want to go into the media's coverage of aids and environmental except to point out that because of them (by and large) our policy on these issues might better have been framed by hysterical children.

    I can go on this is just things off the top of my head. My point is that the media is by far doing greater violence to the body politic than video games. There is no real standard of liability for reporters and if you look at shield laws in most states if they use anonymous sources they can just make up whatever they want. A prime example is the sacramento bee where a reporter had been doing queen for a day sob stories about people for 20 years. The problem most of the people didn't actually exist.

    Just things to think about when you see the News Media gathering to bang the drum on an issue.

  33. Re:Postal 2...a "tech" demo? by shaitand · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The sad thing is, that you genuinely believe that if the graphics engine is not a tech breakthrough then obviously the game has no breakthough technology...

    The AI was the tech breakthrough, it had nothing to do with graphics.

  34. Re:Violence is Good (for sales) by servognome · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And it totally misses the point. Even if games don't "force" people do to anything, they can still be dangerous if they encourage certain behavior, or make certain behavior seem better than it actually is.

    Games provide an outlet where there are no consequences; as such they can reveal underlying desires or curiosity in people. I've found the games people play and how they play them is more a reflection of the player, and not so much influenced by the game.
    For example in GTA getting enjoyment from going around and shooting people randomly is more driven by some feelings already existing in the player. Doing so makes the game harder, as you keep having cops show up to stop you. You have the freedom to do so, but it's up to the player to decide whether it's fun or not.

    Games may give you a non-violent choice, but they make the violent choice more fun! Who doesn't want to have fun?

    Once again the "fun" lays in the hands of the player. RPGs often give you the choice between good and evil paths. I have more fun following the noble path. While somebody else may have more fun slaughtering the serfs in the fields and taking their possessions. The game hasn't changed, the player has.
    Many stealth-action games let you bust in and kill everybody, but you also have the option to sneak in and accomplish your mission. Some people enjoy the gunfight, other people enjoy the tension of stealth.

    I'm really surprised at people who try to make the sale of games to minors an issue of free speech. Restricting the sale of cigarettes and booze and porn to minors is not a violation of free speech, and neither is restricting the sale of computer games.

    I agree. Restriction of games is not the same as banning. It just gives parents a tool to help parent their children.

    And, like the tobacco industry or the auto industry, they'll keep claiming that "there's no evidence our product kills people" because they don't want to know.

    The problem with your analogy is that the auto or tobacco industry issues are based in basic science. The impact of games is much more difficult to quantify, since it is only part of a number of psychological influences.

    --
    D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  35. Cops and Robbers by hughcharlesparker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Computer games are just the latest incarnation of the human desire to _play_ at violence. It's fine to play cops and robbers so long as you know when you're the bad guys.

  36. What about catharsis? by Generalisimo+Zang · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I worked at a company doing QA work for a while. Long hours (like 80 hour weeks). Low pay. 30 people crammed into workspaces that more ideally fit 10 or 15 people max.

    After a while, crammed in with the same people in close proximity for 6 days out of 7 for weeks on end, the rough edges of everyone's personality starts to grate on your nerves.

    Then we started setting up LAN games of Ghost Recon: Desert Seige during the lunch hours. It was great.

    For an hour a day, I wasn't a sardined-in cog in a corporate machine... but I was ZANG, mighty hunter of the eviiil otherpeople, ownz0ring each game map with my trusty sniper rifle, or M60 machine gun... striking terror into those unfortunate or foolish enough to be in my path. Lots of adrenaline, and shouting back and forth between sections of the cubes.

    Then the lunch hour would end, and it'd be back to checking out a few hundred more entries in the database searching for dupes, and wading through a couple dozen more non-sensical blathering emails from clueless upper management posers.

    But, after the massive adrenaline rush and mental escape provided by each day's LAN game, things went smoother.

    Personally, I think that there would have been a lot more problems and breakdowns in the work group structure if there HADN'T been the "release" of video-game violence every day at lunch time.

    Same thing with kids and video-game violence. Better that the local 16-year-olds be all at home playing at being imaginary thugs in GTA, than be hanging out bored in front of the 7-11 at 10 at night looking for something to do.

  37. Re:tetris anyone by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...
    - "Yes, we're looking for a game that doesn't have any violence."
    "Easy enough. I've got lots of games without violence. Anything in particular you want?"
    - "The game can't have any violence at all."
    "Ok."
    - "I mean nothing."
    "Well, Crash Team racing doesn't have any violence in it."
    - "Yes it does. You can hit each other's cars."
    "Uhm.. ok...so, no conflict at all you mean?"
    - "Yes."
    "Hmm... Here, try Bust A Move. It's a very good game with no conflict."
    - "We've tried it before. It's too violent."
    "...Too violent? There isn't any violence in the game at all."
    - "You shoot things and monsters fall out."
    "Ok...here, try Intelligent Cube. Great game, no monsters and no shooting."
    - "You can fall off the edge and the moving blocks can kill the character. Too violent."
    "Uh...ok...uhm...well, there are a lot of racing games without violence."
    - "Racing games have competition. The game can't have any competition." ...

    An excerpt from The Acts of Gord

  38. weirdos by infonography · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If I had not found PUNK rock in 79 I would likely have wound up more then I did and may have done a Columbine.

    Your point about "The killers at Columbine weren't geeks, nerds, goths, dorks, weirdos, metalheads, skaters, or punks." is true. But I don't buy your conclusion. The groups you point to have found outlets for their frustrations. "I'm a homicidal maniac," says Wednesday Addams in The Addams Family Movie, explaining why she apparently didn't dress up for Halloween. "They look like everybody else."

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    1. Re:weirdos by infonography · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "My point is that is that if you identify with the Columbine killers, it's because you're a homicidal maniac"

      Again you miss the point, I can only wonder sometimes at this culture. We are disconnected from nature to such a degree that we think killing in general is a bad thing. I am not talking Human killing, I am talking killing anything even a fly or ant. We as a culture in general meaning Western Judeo-Christian has come to the insane conclusion that killing is so wrong even the thought is sinful. Now devoid of understanding of the warning signs that other animals in nature display we blunder into these problems. Rattlesnakes have their rattles, telling you - HEY, back off or I will strike, Cats arch their back, pull back their ears and hiss. If you reach for a Cat in such a state your get a nice deep scratch or bite. And being a utter idiot you damn well deserved it.

      I can only surmise that the shooters at Columbine had been doing the human equivalent of arching their back and it had been ignored.

      a homicidal maniac is bad terminology. I was working concert security when a Friend of mine who wasn't working security hit one of the security crew (also a friend). The guy was 6'6" and really drunk. He proceeded to threaten other staff with a knife. If a cop had seen this, he would have tazered or shot him. I merely yelled at him to put the damn knife away and cool down. Which he did.

      For whatever reason, he was showing signs of the 'Don't come near me, I am dangerous now' I have learned to understand the signs of violence. I have also come to see that most people are actually trained to be ignorant of what's happening around them. You cannot push people into corners and then ignore them until they try and step out of the corner. In Japan they have a saying "The nail that sticks out, gets hammered down.". But Humans are not nails. Humans are predators, and if you ask a biologist, we as a species, are technically Super Predators. Mr Hyde lurks under the surface of each one of us. In Sin City, Mickey Rourke played Marv, one comment from a narrator was 'In another time he would have been a great general or hero' (I'm pulling from memory). In this world he was a misfit.

      You paint with too broad a brush and in the wrong colors.

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  39. Re:Strawman Argument by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 2, Informative
    Can you explain why the American rate of violent crime is an order of magnitude greater than the European rate or the Japanese rate? Try to formulate a cogent response without trying to create a strawman argment that you then proceed to crush in order to whore some karma points.

    Europe and Japan are mostly homogenious in race and culture.

    The vast majority of violent crime in the US takes place within very small geographic areas, amongst minority groups with high incidences of out-of-wedlock births to single women, and a gutter-culture that encourages violence.

  40. Thanks Slashdot by Comatose51 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, I think I need to thank Slashdot. It gave us a voice when we didn't have one. A stupid local journalist decided to write an article on us because his daugther, who went to our school, told him about us. Did he ever interviewed us? NOPE. He just made it all up from hearsay. Then one of us posted the experience on Slashdot and got the NYT Times and Katz' attention. The article was a vindication for us. We really had nowhere to go. Some of us were applying to colleges at the time and didn't want the world to know who we were. Who knows how colleges would have reacted. People just knew there was EvilCON and the article let them know we weren't psycho without revealing exactly who each member was. It's a bit hard to explain but thanks /.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  41. school is a prison by sedyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html/

    This article is pretty good. In the context of Columbine, it states, what I believe to be, a partial why of the situation. Other than the obvious fact the shooters were fucked up. Then again, save self-defense, what human being that shoots another isn't fucked up?

    --
    Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
  42. It starts early. by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I didn't experience quite the hell spoken of here in High School. I got my dose of it starting in Kindergarden.

    It starts pretty simply. Some kids are bigger that others, and they discover they can use this to get what they want. Honest children who understand that violence is wrong, or at least that their parents don't want them to be violent, get beat up by the kids that don't.

    Elementary School was stacked against me the moment I entered it. I was smarter than most, deeper thinking, moral, criticizing of others (best way to piss people off), and utterly different. I was the only kid in my school with utterly curly hair, and I was also something of a crybaby. You couldn't have done a better job of setting me up for trouble if you had designed me with torment in mind.

    In any case, my only friends were outcasts like myself. The worst part about it is the downward spiral it leads you into. No one includes you in the games, or the sports. So, you begin to detest the activities you're excluded from. Finally, you end up being skilless and unathletic not because you never wanted to exercise or play with a ball, but because no one would let you.

    Because you can't play basketball or tag properly, you get made fun of more and excluded more. So, you get worse at the game, and then get made fun of even more. A vicious cycle if ever there was any.

    After fourth grade, I was pulled out of public school and homeschooled by my parents, something I fully intend on doing with my own children whenever I have any. My friends at college may sometimes use me as an example of how homeschooling leads to being anti-social, but that's hardly true. My older sister was homeschooled as long as I was, but wasn't ostracized the way I was. Social butterfly is a phrase that comes to mind for her. What made me anti-social was my experience with the society of my own kind giving me an obvious "you're not welcome here".

    I was homeschooled through high school, though I took a couple science and language courses at the local public High School because having dangerous chemicals around the house wasn't my parents idea of safety.

    I was probably spared much of the hell that permeated the air around me because I had been out of the system for so long. My actual interest in learning and talent for it got me on the good side of every teacher I took a class from, which probably played a large factor in the relatively light attacks made against me.

    Perhaps the reality simply was that I was being excluded, but I didn't notice because I had already been actively excluding myself from the public school system anyway.

    In that regard I was an anomaly. I had no interest in being a part of the system, and that cut off most anything they could do to me, aside from hurl random insults. Without interest in the system, excluding me was worthless (and trying to include me would have been a victory for outcasts everywhere), and with a home base of supportive friends also set apart from the system, ostracizing me simply maintained my disinterest without hurting me.

    Without a typical social life, I spent most of my time reaching out to my outcast friends. However, after all of elementary school and middle school to screw them up, the kinds of problems they had weren't curable by the reappearance of a fellow outcast.

    One by one, I watched and reached and cried as I saw all of my outcast friends descend into depths of darkness that many of them remain in to this day, even after years of graduating.

    When Columbine happened, my mother said, "Where were their parents?" My parents watched me play video games, plenty of violent ones at that. They also watched my sister who'd never taken a single karate lesson best me despite the fact I had a black belt because I was utterly against actually hurting anyone. They knew what was up.

    Both the government and its extremities and parents these days are concerned with finding a scapegoat for their failures, and not fixing themselves. How else

    --
    Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
  43. I don't know about you, but... by MonkeyOfRage · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ever since Space Invaders, I can't stop running from house to house firing straight up into the air.

  44. When I was at school... by mantidae · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... the caretaker had a dog.
    Kids picked on that dog for months, while the caretakers weren't watching.

    One day the dog, up until that time friendly and well-behaved, went psycho, and started randomly baring its teeth and snarling, even attacking the kids.
    Its behaviour had changed suddenly and instantly.

    I've seen the same thing happen with school kids.

    Humans are pack animals - we have a psychologically profound requirement for love from our own pack.

    Constant harrasment from our peers deeply violates our psyches, and makes young humans with still-forming minds, extremely unhealthy.

    I guess all here already know all of this.
    Its deeply shameful and absurd that so many teachers lack this basic knowledge.

  45. Geez by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Those stories from those kids are terrifying.

    I was a geek in high school. I'm sure many here were. Y'know what? Any isolation I felt - and yes, there was quite a bit in the first few years - was largely my own fault. I had people try really hard to be nice, to include me, etc and I just didn't know how to respond. I mostly got confused, or thought they were trying to tease / mock me. In my defense, that's because that used to be a problem, but I think mostly because of my lack of social skills rather than any geekyness. I was one of those people who wakes up one day and says "huh. People. Who would'a thought."

    One I learned some utterly minimal social skills, things improved a lot. This frequently meant walking home talking about coding / maths with a couple of friends, though that's not all I did. Anyway ... the point is, I never, *EVER* saw any trouble or hostility from the "mainstream" once I reached high school. The worst I got was a bit of teasing every now and then, and even that was pretty tame and only during the first two years. We have a term here - "Year 9s are animals." It's kinda expected. After that, any distance from them was mostly because I just didn't "get" their interests - which at the time mostly seemed to involve getting so drunk they threw up. Yay. Not.

    Having come from that, and reading stories like this, is terrifying. I've never heard of anything even remotely like this here (Western Australia). It makes me even more frightened that before about the increasing American media influence and cultural influence* here - because it makes me even more inclined to believe the place, collectively, is insane, though obviously most of it's citizens are just fine.

    Pass the cluebat.

    * Yes, I know I'm responding to an American article on a website largely full of Americans. I wouldn't call either of these the mainstream American, though.

  46. Here sits one of many Columbine casualties by iq+in+binary · · Score: 2, Informative

    And there were many. I was in a Colorado Public School system during the then rampant and still ongoing Columbine McCarthyism. I can still remember the day it happened. I remember chatting with the school resource officer trying to find out what exactly was happening. The greatest horror of the day was not the event itself, but the complete lack of intel as far as what was happening. Rumours of the school being leveled by a bomb, dozens of bullet-ridden bodies lying in the parking lot. Theories of organized efforts to shoot-up several schools at the same time, with Columbine being used to trigger lock-down and make for cornered targets.

    I was even a proponent of instituting calm. Made specific efforts to hush the fear of the same happening at our school, making sure that everyone knew that the situation is isolated; no helicopters would be flying into our school after taking off from Columbine. Asking the teachers and counselors if I should aid in the ensuing lock-down.

    I didn't go to school the next day. Coincidentally, the most changed that day. April 21st carried more repercussions for the alternatively clothed students of the US than any other. All across the country, Principals came on the PA system urging students to report any students who exert qualities they may think to be "violent or psychotic." Without investigation or inquiry, the reports of hundreds of thousands of students were acted upon. In one day, the Colorado School systems saw more suspensions and expulsions than the decade previous in total. This fact was not realized for QUITE some time due to lack of referrals or reports, it was by hall passes and hourly absence roles that suspensions and expulsions were tallied in the federal investigation made in late May. I dodged the first wave of cleansings by merely missing a day of school.

    The months that ensued didn't heal any wounds. The years past since the event aren't letting them heal either. In naught but a week, the media had managed to engineer quite an affective scape-goat out of the "Trench Coat Mafia." They actually managed to make a scapegoat out of practically every counter-culture icon at the time. "Insane Clown Posse," "Doom," "Marilyn Manson," "Anarchist's Cookbook," "Internet Chatrooms (which at the time were counterculture). The political "Hot wording" of the event to gain votes had managed to do the same to every new counterculture icon for quite some time. "Grand Theft Auto," "Mortal Kombat," "Dungeons and Dragons," "Pagans," "Wiccans." In one fell swoop all the kids congress critters thought were little freaks in highschool are now conveniently oppressed to the convenience of their children's "Safety."

    And unbeknownst to anyone was the legal rampage that was the bills coming to vote. Measures that betray almost every fiber of meaning in the words "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" were being passed by the dozen. Public Schools were given almost complete and total control over the children that were enrolled there. You see, it used to be that the parents were brought in for a meeting when children were suspended. It used to be that the parents were urged to get counseling for their children, and that counselors names were given. Today, children are assigned counseling and expelled or suspended if they don't agree to it. It used to be there was a group decision between both vice principal, counselor and usually the principle himself when suspension was involved. Now suspensions are handed out by a single person.

    Through middle school, specifically 7th grade after Columbine all the way through 8th grade; I had managed to get suspended 11 times. Were it not for the hard work of one very passionate counselor I would have been expelled after the first occasion. There are many good teachers and counselors that kept me afloat for quite some time, but to no avail. They had all the heart they needed to make a difference, they just couldn't put a dent in the negative influence that was society in general. Here you are, not able to af

    --
    Of all the Universal Constants, here's one I know: Nice guys finish last ;)