Slashdot Mirror


'Games as Porn' Bill Passes Utah House

The state bill which attempts to equate gaming with pornography has passed the vote in the Utah house of representatives. GameDailyBiz reports: "Even though there's still no evidence of a direct link between video game violence and acts of violence committed in real-life, Hogue suggested that playing violent games leads to 'automatic learning of aggressive behavior,' and that violent games have played a role in school shootings. 'Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not,' he said, referring to the Columbine massacre."

215 comments

  1. "Maybe not?" by Zardus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone should have gotten up and made a rebuttal of "Or maybe yes." and then there'd be a deadlock as the opposing side tries to come up with an actual argument.

    --
    You can mod your friends, you can mod your nose, but you can't mod your friend's nose.
    1. Re:"Maybe not?" by pantropik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These idiots who think they can save the world by denying people the right to look at the "wrong" things would be comical if they didn't so often succeed in getting idiotic laws passed. Humans enjoy ritualized violence, whether it's playing tackle football, boxing, hunting, video games, movies ... that's not going to change until humans either evolve away from it or become extinct.

      Taking away access to this stuff in no way takes away the innate human desire for it, and pretending otherwise is just willful stupidity. Before kids had XBoxes they had cap guns. Before they had cap guns they had toy spears and sharp rocks. It's not the behaviors that have changed, just the tools and implementation. As for the Columbine kids, I'd argue that he's got it all wrong. The kids sought out and surrounded themselves with violent imagery because that's what spoke to their hearts and minds, in the same way another child might seek out beautiful landscape paintings or elegant progamming code or slapstick comedy or politics or religion or who knows what else. If he honestly thinks that some bright-eyed, angelic child with no evil or violence in her heart can pick up a copy of GTA and turn into a murderous freak, he's even stupider than I give him credit for already. I'd also argue that if they hadn't had access to violent imagery they'd have probably been more inclined to create their own (torturing animals, etc.).

      Just because kids are imitative enough to use what they've seen in games or movies as templates for their own acts of violent stupidity doesn't mean they wouldn't have come up with something else on their own if they hadn't had something to imitate. I love action movies, murder mysteries, violent video games. I've committed virtual murder who knows how many times and loved it. I still remember blowing bodies all to pieces in Soldier of Fortune, sniping brains all over the walls and gleefully mutilating corpses. But you know what else? The thought of gleefully or even accidentally hurting an actual person or animal is repulsive to me, just as it is to any healthy human being no matter how many slasher flicks they've watched or virtual corpses they've dismembered. The notion that the majority of us shouldn't be able to do a thing because a tiny, dysfunctional minority might not be able to handle it is absurd.

    2. Re:"Maybe not?" by BlastQuake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By the same token, maybe Utah should ban football, or televised sports containing any body contact. Violence in sports likely has the same impact as violence in games, then again my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt. I an imagine what kind of uproar that would cause, "What do you mean we can't watch the superbowl?"

      --
      "What use is power to the Keeps of Balance?" -Disnt of Nightmare LpMud
    3. Re:"Maybe not?" by Trailwalker · · Score: 1

      Mormons have not always been shy about violence:

      Mountain Meadows Massacre

      Thier early history was very violent. They were not always the victims as they claimed.

    4. Re:"Maybe not?" by ZB+Mowrey · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The notion that the majority of us shouldn't be able to do a thing because a tiny, dysfunctional minority might not be able to handle it is absurd.

      First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they went after the potheads, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a pothead. Next, they went after the protesters, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a protester. After that, they tried to crack down on unwholesome music, but I wasn't a musician so I said nothing. Now, they've gone after games and I have no excuse on which to base my arguments.

      (with apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller.)

      And yes, I realize the seriousness of the original context... but I couldn't help mentioning the similarity.

      --

      Self-referential sigs are rarely entertaining.

    5. Re:"Maybe not?" by swilde23 · · Score: 1

      ...and somehow everyone in Utah is a Mormon. I don't see how your post has anything to do with the topic at hand. This is a discussion about politics... not religion.

      That being said... from what I read about this bill, it's a mistake. The simple fact that Gayle Ruzicka is behind it should clue you to that.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand this sig, and those that beat up people who do.
    6. Re:"Maybe not?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while it is true that the human brain craves 'entertainment' violence, there have long been those who seek the path to enlightenment. some have fared well in this. so violence is something that humans gan learn to think past, it's just a much more difficult path to walk.

    7. Re:"Maybe not?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > "that's not going to change until humans either evolve away from [enjoying ritualized violence]"

      Surely you mean "that's not going to change until humans are 'intelligently designed' away from enjoying ritualised violence"?

    8. Re:"Maybe not?" by Weh · · Score: 1

      go here if you are interested in the link between killing and violent games:

      http://www.killology.com/

    9. Re:"Maybe not?" by Soul-Burn666 · · Score: 1

      First they came for the communists, and I did try to understand the rational behind it and indeed that "communism" was more of a dictatorship than welfare and the common good.
      Then they went after the potheads, and I did speak up even though I am not a pothead, because downsides of the "war on drugs" far more than what it tries to achieve (think prohibition).
      Next, they went after the protesters, and I did speak because the right to protest is sealed in the constitiution as a human right (at least where I live).
      After that, they tried to crack down on unwholesome music, and I laughed at their faces.
      Now, they've gone after games and I have the same excuses as in the previous cases, violent people will be attracted to violent games just as non-violent people won't be or will be just for good clean virtual fun.

      --
      ^_^
    10. Re:"Maybe not?" by kryonD · · Score: 1

      "This is a discussion about politics... not religion."

      No, this is a discusiion about politics in Utah, which invariable involves religion whether the minority who beleives in seperation of church and state likes it or not. Just look at every bill Sen. Chris Buttars has sponsored and gotten through if you have any doubts. There are only two parties in Utah, LDS hardliners and Democrats....they just call themselves Republicans because it's convenient.

      Also remember this is the same state that gives Bush a 60% approval rating even though the rest of the country is in the 40% range.

      --
      I've dirtied my hands writing poetry, for the sake of seduction; that is, for the sake of a useful cause. --Dostoevsky
    11. Re:"Maybe not?" by Alsee · · Score: 1

      First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they went after the potheads, and I didn't.... uhhhh.... heay man, got any potato chips in the house?

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    12. Re:"Maybe not?" by Mike570 · · Score: 1

      By the same token, maybe Utah should ban football, or televised sports...

      and polygamy...Oh, wait.

  2. Yes they would have. by Lithgon · · Score: 1

    They would still commit the violent acts even though they do not play video games. They wouldn't use the ideas of violence from the games (aka: GTA).

    1. Re:Yes they would have. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And look at the rest of the world. Kids all over the world play just as many violent video games as American kids, and there is about one punchout every year at my local school and that's it (Australia). Maybe the issue that should be faced about Columbine is how the children got access to those guns?

    2. Re:Yes they would have. by Derkec · · Score: 1

      That's part of the question, but the kids also tried to build bombs. Fortunately, those didn't work as planned. On of the kids, forgive me that I don't remember which, was pretty clearly a sociopath. Pyscologists that reviewed writting and other information seemed pretty convinced that this kids was destined to be a mass murderer. The other kid, was pretty much dominated by him. One of the researchers commented that we may have been lucky he struck when he did. An older adult sociopath, might have been more effecient and competent at killing people.

      Coming back to point. The statement of "Maybe not." is flat out wrong. There was going to be murder and the video games had nothing to do with it.

  3. ban school by Mahou · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would these same kids have done this anyway without being made to go to school? Maybe not.

    --
    if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
    ...te?
    1. Re:ban school by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Would these same kids have done this thing if their mothers had aborted them as fetuses before birth? Definitly not!

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    2. Re:ban school by Mahou · · Score: 1

      Would these same kids have done this thing if they didn't live in a society that places so little value on human life? Not likely!

      --
      if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
      ...te?
    3. Re:ban school by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Remember that the entire discussion is whether a fetus constitutes human life.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    4. Re:ban school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bzzt! Wrong! You missed it by one word: 'individual' human life

    5. Re:ban school by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Where's the difference? You mean body parts count as human life but not as individual human life?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:ban school by Mahou · · Score: 1

      what? are you implying a parasitic worm lodged in my colon would inherently cease to be an individual? an embryo is a homo sapien and it is certainly alive. it's DNA is unique and it's cells are easily understood as being its own and not of the mother, therefore it is an individual. geez where did all the logic go?

      --
      if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
      ...te?
    7. Re:ban school by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I thought the entire discussion was whether tossing out a completly untestable hypothetical and ending it with a "maybe not" was an aacceptable argument.

      Its complete fallacy. Would they have done it without violent video games? well fuck lets go get a time machine and test that one out.

      May as well go back and test out aborting them... its an equally valid argument.

      And its not about whether a fetus is a human life on abortion either. Its about whether a fetus deserves protection of "basic human rights". _I_ would argue that basic "rights" shouldn't be afforded to anything that can't pass a turing test (yes, I realise I am arguing that there is no moral problem with infanticide, and I mean that too)

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    8. Re:ban school by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I have always felt the problem here is one of terms.

      "Human Life" What do we mean by that? I mean... if I scrape skin cells off my arm, live ones that is, is that not human life? If I culture my own skin cells in a petri dish, they have 46 chromosomes. Are they not human life?

      Are they not every bit as much human life as a fetus? I am not aware of it ever having been written that All living things with 46 chromosomes are endowed by their creator certain inalienable human rights.

      Simply I think we need to recognize that "human rights" are endowed by social contract. "In the wild" one has no rights, because there is nothing but the laws of physics to restrict you. Once you enter into society, in order to live with others, we make concessions, including ceeding to everyone else their own right to make their own decisions for themselevs.

      A fetus has no mental capacity, cannot pass a turing test, in short, is not a member of society. Hence, has no rights. An injury to it, should be considered no different than any other injury to its hosts body, until such time as it is born and learns enough language to pass a turing test (thus raising the specter of internal consciousness)

      I see human rights as ONLY arising from the intersection of that specter of consciousness and the needs of the people around to live in peace with eachother.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    9. Re:ban school by Mahou · · Score: 1

      but that definition doesn't include retards, people in comas, or people under the age of (let's say around) 5 years old.

      no, a skin cell is not human life because it is only part of an organism, and are not needed to keep that complex organisation of living cells alive. i think it's kind of retarded to compare a couple of non-essential living cells of an organism to a whole fetus, or even to just a zygote or embryo as they are the whole living organism. if you were made up of those skin cells scraped off into a petri dish then, yes that would be the same and that would be wrong, but you're not. you are composed of many more cells. billions and billions.

      i don't really see it as a human rights issue. maybe i'm just jealous though--if i can't go around killing people less intelligent than i am, then people shouldn't be able to use the "fetuses are dumb" excuse.

      --
      if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
      ...te?
    10. Re:ban school by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > but that definition doesn't include retards, people in
      > comas, or people under the age of (let's say around) 5
      > years old.

      Yah pretty much. However I would argue something closer to 2 or 3, have to cut it off somewhere and the beginings of learning language seem like a good cut off.

      Coma? Well a person in a comma can recover. So I think we should generally let them. However, if their prognosis is that they wont recover or will be nearly brain dead.... then may as well call a spade a damned shovel and let them finish dieing.

      Retards? Functional retards are one thing, but if they really just arn't ever going to be anything more than a burden on society, then I say treat them as pets. If their fammily wants them, or someone wants to adopt them, then fine. Certainly outlaw all manners of abusing them. However, otherwise, put them down.

      Im all about valuing sentient beings, human, alien, or computer. However, it is not life (a mere chemical/biological process), its society. We all have to live together and share the worlds resources. Its simple social contract.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  4. Make sure to RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because after R'ing TFA, it doesn't seem to bad of an idea. I see nothing wrong with puting 'M' games behind the counter and deny access to them except 'consenting' adults.

    1. Re:Make sure to RTFA... by pantropik · · Score: 1

      If the kids are anything like I was that'll just make the games even more appealing. They must be really good if they're hidden away back there ...

    2. Re:Make sure to RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Because after R'ing TFA, it doesn't seem too bad of an idea. I see nothing wrong with puting 'M' games behind the counter and deny access to them except 'consenting' adults.

      Sure, and while you're at it lets move everything behind the counter that offends jesus:

      Customer: "I'd ... I'd ... I'd like 'GTA: San Andreas' please?
      Clerk: Sure kid, want that ribbed for your pleasure?

      IT'S A FUCKING GAME NOT A SHOTGUN!!!

    3. Re:Make sure to RTFA... by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Here's the problem: As far as I've been able to find out, the law does not say anything as specific as "you can't sell games rated 'M' by the ESRB to minors" or "you can't display M-rated games"...or anything else specific. From my reading, it adds "inappropriate violence" to their pornography statute. In other words, it's so vague that even Super Smash Brothers Melee could activate the new clause depending on how "appropriate" you find it for Link to shoot an arrow at Jigglypuff...

    4. Re:Make sure to RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are a number of problems with this benign scenario:

            1) Unprecedented. Violent Movies or Music do not have the same restrictions. Other than dumping millions of dollars into legislatures all over the country, how are they any different?

            2) Limited Access means limited sales which means limited green lights from suits who work for game companies. If M games are limited like this they are less likely to get made in the first place.

              It's a very round about way of doing it, but in the end this amounts to censorship of material that isn't "indecent" (or at least shouldn't be classified as such).

    5. Re:Make sure to RTFA... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      The "ban" on porn is already on shaky legal ground because they had to find some loopholes to exempt it from the First Amendment. Allowing them to stuff random material into that loophole means allowing them to undermine the First Amendment. There's a reason the First Amendment exists.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  5. Number of good things to come out of Utah: by IgLou · · Score: 2, Funny
    Still at zero... That's meant in jest for those that can't take a joke.

    Like this is a surprise, it's Utah which according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah :
    Approximately 60% of state residents are adherents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    Tell me no one saw this coming.
    --

    Oops, how did this get here?
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    1. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Maybe all those Latter-day Saints should watch a movie about what are real man of Christ would do!
      Orgazmo

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    2. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by n9uxu8 · · Score: 1

      Schlock Mercenary...a good thing that has come out of Utah.

      Uhm...that's all I have so far....

      Dave

    3. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by mctk · · Score: 1
      I take exception with your "joke." Truth is, Utah is a well of culture:

      Donny & Marie Osmond? Check!
      Roseanne Arnold? Check!
      Senator Orrin Hatch? But of course!

      --
      Paul Grosfield - the quicker picker upper.
    4. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      One of the guys who created Doom was a Mormon.

    5. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by swalker42 · · Score: 1

      Approximately 60% of state residents are adherents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

      But I'll bet that 50% of the adherents play GTA. Or Halo. Or Splinter Cell. Or...

      --
      You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means
    6. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Note "was" in the past tense. He must have escaped!

      //Operation Mormon Freedom, anyone?

    7. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Maddox :)

    8. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by plover · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I-15 came out of Utah. That's a good thing, or else a lot of people would still be stuck there.

      --
      John
    9. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by rts008 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know how much "jest" it will take to erase all of the questions I have, but don't really want answered!

      To explain that, I had a contract job in Provo, and we stayed in the suburbs of Salt Lake City at a motel (hotel?-don't remember) and I still can't get past the brochure in the room we stayed at BRAGGING about SLC (Salt Lake City) being settled by 167 men, 8 women, 23 (I think it was 23- could be wrong, but I'm sure about the 167 men and 8 women), and mention of livestock that settled SLC. How did they come up with men having so many wives? How did that work with 167 men and 8 women- time shares? WTF??!!??

      Go ahead and mod me "off topic" and "flamebait"- my karma can stand it, but how can this *inbred* culture have anything mainstream to say to the rest of the USA that has any relevance?

      Apologies to those that had no choice in their birth, but that brochure still *scares* me when I actually think about it!

      BTW, the whole work experience there was like working in a foreign country that happened to use English as the "national language", and yes, I have worked in many diff countries- Utah was no big difference than those countries except for transportation issues (no customs to go through).

      I wish I could remember the exact motel/hotel we stayed at so I could document the specific brochure, but maybe someone has ran across this and can provide relevant links or sources. (My visit was in the late '90's...97-98 I think)

      Scary state, considering it is part of the USA.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    10. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by kuviaq · · Score: 1

      In fact, there is a great deal of good things that have come out of Utah, many of which the slashdot crowd uses on a daily basis. http://www.cs.utah.edu/school/history.shtml

    11. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the 40% that just got to eat a big /morm?on/ shit sandwich?

    12. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the parent isn't flamebait. It's true.

      I currently live in Utah, and as soon as I'm done with school it's back to Oregon for me.

    13. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious. You do realize that many, many other groups of pioneers followed the original expeditionary group that blazed the trail for them, don't you?

    14. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scary state, considering it is part of the USA.

      All the "red" states are pretty scary. So are the "blue" ones for that matter. If you vote for either of the two majors, you're a pretty scary person.

    15. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bob_Robertson, is that you? ;)

    16. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      nevermind, he IS a Mormon. Sandy Peterson, I think.

    17. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yer just pissed because nobody here will pump your gas for you so you're stuck walking.

    18. Re:Number of good things to come out of Utah: by sesshomaru · · Score: 1
      Yes, Sandy Peterson, also the creator of the pen and paper RPG The Call of Cthulhu .

      Ia Ia Cthulhu phtagn

      I imagine life as a Mormon is tough for him...

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  6. Yes, a whole new category of criminal by sauge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The dreaded "gamer." Three kids go on a shooting spree and so the 1,000,000+ who play are all lining up at gun stores.

    This is a law brought to you by the people who want intelligent design taught in school.

    It also an example of why people are disgusted with legislators around the country.

    1. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Most gamers can vote last time I checked.....

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by nomadic · · Score: 1

      It also an example of why people are disgusted with legislators around the country.

      If people were so disgusted they'd vote them out of office. I don't think they care, especially in Utah. Most people there probably support such legislation.

    3. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Average age of a "gamer" was 28 last I checked.

    4. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this is a law brought to you by people who think that the native americans are decended from ancient european jews.

    5. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Well most 28 year olds can vote in democratic countries... and the US...

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    6. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by Gordigor · · Score: 0

      No they don't, most people here don't vote... That's how we get the people in the legislature. BTW for everyone that thinks Utah is wierd, have you checked out lately what they do in Kansas?

    7. Re:Yes, a whole new category of criminal by cobras2 · · Score: 1

      >This is a law brought to you by the people who want intelligent design taught in school.

      Stop bunching people together, you're as bad as they are.

      Here's what I say: Evolution is incorrect.
      I also say I have been playing computer games since I was 6 years old, starting with Hard Hat Mack and its contemporaries on an Apple IIe (it was a bit old when we got it) all the way up through GTA, Vice City, San Andreas, HalfLife 1/2, Diablo II, etc etc etc...

      You don't have to be stupid or reactionary to disagree with evolution.

      --
      Early bird may get the worm.. but the second mouse gets the cheese.
  7. What about war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to start a big flame war or anything, but doesn't invading other countries kind of encourage aggressive behavior?

    It seems that it isn't a question of aggressive behavior per se, it is where the aggresive behavior comes from that matters. In other words it is bullshit.

    1. Re:What about war? by FSWKU · · Score: 1

      But you see, that's WAR. That's meant to show everyone not to screw with us. Horrific violence is ok as long as you don't have a controller in your hand. [/sarcasm] Now, back to reality. Why the hell do people get all bent out of shape over virtual violence, when you can see PLENTY of the real thing just by turning on CNN every night? "Oh my! Won't someone please think of the children!?!?!?!?!?!" If you don't let your kids play violent games, you shouldn't let them watch the evening news either.

      Or here's an idea. Actually spend time with your kids instead of using video games or the TV as a damn babysitter! Not only will you be able to bond with them, you will also know if they can handle certain imagery or not. If they don't understand something, you will be there to explain it to them! Wow! Parental Involvement....What a concept!

      --
      "So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
    2. Re:What about war? by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

      Do you really, truly think that young children and teenagers turn on CNN and read the newspaper and as a result relate America's foreign policies to their own actions in any concievable way? I've yet to ever hear a child say "If American can bully other countries, why can't I bully other kids?". And I'm fairly certain I never will hear any kids say it. I'm sorry, but that is, to be blunt, an idiotic theory, if that's what you're actually trying to say.

    3. Re:What about war? by some+guy+on+slashdot · · Score: 1

      I dunno. I hear statements like "Either you're with us, or you're with the terrorists," coming out of this war all the time. I'm pretty sure kids can understand that. If nothing else, the people at the top have been watering down the issues to where children can understand them, even when their audience is the adult population.

      Then we have the talk shows, where people jaw about how bad their political opponents are and how much they're like the terrorists. Don't tell me a kid has never heard his parents repeat Rush Limbaugh. There are people out there teaching anti-Islamic hatred in the name of preventing terrorism. There are people who are using the war to scare people into buying guns. There's a government that, whenever confronted with their mistakes or their misdeeds, wonder how they could be expected to be virtuous or diligent when there's a war going on.

      I think, considering all that, there's just a teensy weensy tiny probability that it might have more of a role in raising violent children than video games do.

    4. Re:What about war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marilyn Manson attempted that same rebuttal when they said it was his fault they shot up the school, so they stopped going after him because clearly he had too many logical arguments to put forth, and so now gamers are to blame. I say we gamers either come up with strong counter-arguments until they become discouraged and go after someone else for this....or we could go raid some gunshops and go on bloody masscres of Utah, I'm kinda strapped for time though (4am, been playing counter-strike all night, need to write a 4 page paper on a book I haven't read for 1:30 tomorrow) so personally I'm saying we stick with the latter.

  8. Confusion by Xiroth · · Score: 1
    OK, regardless of whether or not this is a good idea, maybe someone should let this guy know what the bill is about.
    "Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not,"

    Maybe he was trying to outlaw violence in movies and got his media mixed up?

  9. A Bold Positive Step by Shihar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think this is a bold and positive step. Unfortunately, I believe that they have left a loop hole that needs to be immediately covered. Namely, while we can protect our children from violent video games, there are still now laws in place to protect our children from violent books. There are literally thousands of mystery books out there teaching our children how to be perfect killers. There are thousands of books glorifying war, death conflict, and even sexual perversion. I think must act immediately to step up an American Censorship board to keep violent books out of the hands of our children. I believe that all books containing 'adult content' should be separated out from books safe for children. Further, schools should have an absolute ban on violent and mature books.

    If we don't act now, school shootings will continue to rise, the violent murders will continue to increase, and our children will continue to live shorter and shorter lives in this terrible and violent world.

    1. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Xymor · · Score: 1

      Man, your point is serious. If this bill passes, and all children are limited to boring games, they might start reading and it would be disastrous.

      we can only hope it won't come to it.

    2. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Worse yet, they might start reading The Holy Bible, with it's sordid tales of lust, murder, incest, homosexual rape, etc.... just imagine what kind of ideas they would get out of such obviously subversive literature!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re:A Bold Positive Step by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the genocide!

      What, you think when Moses and his merry men got to the Promised Land of Caanan it was just sitting there empty, waiting for them to mosey on in and set up a country?

    4. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since the USA and Europe have gone to great pains to resurrect that religious fundamentalist genocidal ethnic homeland from thousands of years ago that Moses is supposed to have started, we'd better ban the evening news lest we hear about how the Bush administration is trying to force the democratically elected government in the region to reject the principles of Martin Luther King and embrace racial segregation.

    5. Re:A Bold Positive Step by rts008 · · Score: 1

      "If we don't act now, school shootings will continue to rise, the violent murders will continue to increase, and our children will continue to live shorter and shorter lives in this terrible and violent world."

      You forgot the part about banning school could stop this from happening, I mean after all, if they don't get these "ideas", then it can't happen, right?

      I'm also in favor of non violent book burnings, gov't controlled speech (after all, if you want free speech, you MUST be against gov't., right?), and non-violent revolution to obtain world peace, and as to the problem of school shootings, maybe we should institute a policy of handing out machineguns and grenade launchers to the hall monitors/faculty in schools- that would cut down on school related violence/shootings! (apply sarcasm filter heavily!)

      Unfortunatly, my "utopia" cannot come to pass in this present day, as this would further decrease Hollywood's revenue stream, and would negate centuries of writings and decades of movies, not to mention the fact of millenia of legends and folk hero myths.
      Blank the past/present out totally and embrace the new future where all is politically correct and easy to swallow by the masses and push it to their subconcious as being the "good/lawbiding people" by all media (newspapers and TV) and we will be fine. (sarcasm filter should be applied here!)

      No worries, we are progressing at the proper pace:(
      http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/)

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    6. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the plus side, it does show how capital punishment can come back to bite you in the ass.

    7. Re:A Bold Positive Step by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      ...just imagine what kind of ideas they would get out of such obviously subversive literature!

      We don't have to imagine anything. It's all there on the news every day. The bible could be just as accurately called "The Never Ending Story". It's pretty sad how little things have really changed since the time the old testament was written. And, on that subject, I see the same thing right here on good old slashdot. These kind of stories pop up over and over, and I see the same comments come up everytime. Almost word for word. It's as if it was the first time anybody ever heard of it. I could cut and paste comments I made two years ago, and it might get modded up(or down as the case may be) like it's never been said before. We know how to deal with this. Why aren't we doing it?

      --
      What?
    8. Re:A Bold Positive Step by xRizen · · Score: 1

      Where do you think we got the term "mosey"? :P

    9. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Karem+Lore · · Score: 1
      Not that I am religious at all, but moses never made it into the promised land due to their sins. He didn't sanctify faith in God at the stone of Meribah and so ended up wandering the wilderness for 40 years until he died.

      karem

      --
      When all is said and done, nothing changes...
    10. Re:A Bold Positive Step by squoozer · · Score: 1

      You joke but the British Library (and I presume other libraries) has a special room that the general public is not allowed access to which contains all the very disturbing works that have been published over the years. Most of them are S&M and that sort of thing and many are technically illegal under current laws. The library has to keep them because they are legally bound to keep a copy of every book published in the UK.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    11. Re:A Bold Positive Step by toriver · · Score: 1

      That just lets Moses off the hook - Joshua got to order the actual massacring.

    12. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It might be interesting to rewrite those more-sordid chunkc of the bible such that it's set as a completely modern tale, but without changing anything BUT the setting... and see how quickly it gets tagged as unwholesome, violent, pornographic, etc.

      Of course the people most in need of enlightenment would just be horrified by our "perversion of the holy word", and wouldn't learn a thing. :/

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You forgot the point that school shootings dramatically reduce the number of available 12-16 year old girls those Olde Fashioned 40+ year old Morman men wish to marry! We cannot allow male teenage gamers to continue to slaughter the nubile young brides-to-be the good men of Utah are fixin to hook up with!

      [serious note]
      Doesn't the Utah legislature have more pressing behaviour they need to outlaw and eliminate?

    14. Re:A Bold Positive Step by Susceptor · · Score: 1

      come now, everyone knows that the Bible is the literal truth right? If god did it it has to be good right?

      --
      Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)
    15. Re:A Bold Positive Step by TrevX · · Score: 1

      Agreed. If they want to start getting serious about banning violent content then they should lead by example and ban the Bible. Of course there are many passages in the Bible that are not violent, but there are also many games out there where violence is not the main focus, either.

      Somehow I can see those religious nuts having a double-standard on this particular issue, however.
       
      Trev

      --
      I support the right to arm bears.
  10. Misleading headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Damn it, where's my porn?

  11. Taking Bets by Shihar · · Score: 1

    Who wants to take bets on how many morons miss the knee deep sarcasim of the above post and think it is the real thing?

    1. Re:Taking Bets by Kelson · · Score: 1

      Who wants to take bets on how many morons miss the knee deep sarcasim of the above post and think it is the real thing?

      Sad to say, there's no idea so dumb that some folks haven't tried it.

    2. Re:Taking Bets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Who wants to take bets on how many morons miss the knee deep sarcasim of the above post and think it is the real thing?

      They're Mormons, and they're not allowed to bet.

    3. Re:Taking Bets by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Ironically, I thought it said 'mormons' when I first read that post.

    4. Re:Taking Bets by kinzillah · · Score: 1

      haha. So did I!

      --
      Douglas P. Price
  12. Before everyone freaks out... by ChePibe · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. If you're not in Utah, don't worry. This isn't going to affect you. So pipe down already and focus on preventing it in your own backyard.

    2. If you are in Utah, don't worry. I'm in Utah now, and guess one of the two will happen:

    a. It won't pass the Senate, as legislative sessions here are remarkably short anyways (just a bill to get a little attention). It will simply die with time.

    b. If it does pass the Senate, my money is on a "pocket" veto, pretty much just ignoring the bill. The Utah senate this year is farily tied up as it is.

    In any case, here's the text for the bill and the ammendment for those interested. It'd be nice if the submitters included this information when they sent in an article on pending legislation.

    1. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by slycrel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thanks for the links, I hadn't found the actual legislation yet.

      I live in Utah and this is the first I've heard of this.

      The slashdot summary is a bit misleading. I found this nice sum-up description after following the "previous coverage" link in the article. You can also confirm this using the links the parent poster has supplied.

      "The bill states that "inappropriate violence" would include video games with material patently offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community, as long as it didn't have "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors." Those that legitimately used violence to further a game's plot (such as games based on historical wars) would be exempt, however."

      This appears to also only be for interactive video and video games after the ammendment, originally it was for just about any violent material.

      After reading up, I can understand (I think) their reasons why they are trying to pass this law. While they seem to have a reasonable basis, I can't think of any reasonable implementation that wouldn't be misused. Not that my opinion matters much.

      But then, Orrin Hatch actually is supposed to represent me, and I disagree with most of what he does nowadays. (And yes, I voted) Sucks to be me.

    2. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      1. If you're not in Utah, don't worry. This isn't going to affect you. So pipe down already and focus on preventing it in your own backyard.


      I don't know that that's necessarily true. Much as I'd like it too, Utah doesn't live in a vacuum with respect to the rest of the United States. Sucessful legislation in one state percolates into the other states. Stupid crap like this only emboldens the pro-censorship people. Also, video game manufacturers might try to change content so they'll be able to sell in Utah. I doubt they'd bother for such a small state like Utah, but if this kind of thing spreads that could easily be the case.

      I don't know if it will pass in Utah, as I know little about politics their. But my hope is if it did, the Federal courts would knock down the law fairly quickly.

      --
      AccountKiller
    3. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by slashdotnickname · · Score: 1

      So pipe down already and focus on preventing it in your own backyard.

      No, I will not pipe down.

      The Utah is in the U.S., and the U.S. is my backyard. If the U.S. wants to promote the principles of freedom around the world (whether it should or not is another debate) it must at least be an example of such freedom itself first.

      So everytime some backwards hillbillies come along and try limiting that freedom with their warped version of morality, I will grab a fucking megaphone and pipe up.

    4. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Unordained · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you don't live in Utah, are you going to tell the people of Utah that they're not allowed nor entitled to censor themselves if they want to? You would oppress them? You tyrant!

      [/tongue-in-cheek]

      Admittedly, we know democracy doesn't actually work that way (in that it's not "all the people of Utah" but just representatives elected by a relative majority, and not necessarily acting according to the will of the people) ... but in theory, the lawmakers are representatives of the people, and the people have the right to places limits on themselves if they want to. (Although I'd very much prefer it be by consensus, and if consensus can't be reached, that there be automatic secession of those who disagree, so they can continue to live free, if separate.)

    5. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Vellmont · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Yeah, but if you don't live in Utah, are you going to tell the people of Utah that they're not allowed nor entitled to censor themselves if they want to?

      As a citizen of the United States that still has a first amendment, yes, I'm quite prepared to tell some people of Utah that they can't censor other people in Utah. If one individual wants to censor themself (whatever that means) that's entirely different.

      --
      AccountKiller
    6. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Utah and this is the first I've heard of this.

      Might I suggest you print out some flyers that reads "Orrin Hatch thinks people who play games are sick twisted monsters", take them to the nearest couple of Wal-Marts, and tape them to the games display cases when nobody is looking (disclaimer: the camera is probably always looking)? This will probably be the only way to educate the average person about what bullshit their leaders believe.

    7. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > If one individual wants to censor themself (whatever that
      > means) that's entirely different.

      Actually theres a term for that... its called shutting the fuck up. :)

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    8. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by B4L1STA · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the funny thing is the house and the senate here are in a stalemate. The house is refusing to pass any bill sponsored by a senator and vice versa. The session ends in a week... if the deadlock continues, NO bills at all are going to get passed and $300 million is going to go unspent (at least until the governor calls a special session).

    9. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the bill. It's dirty. It should be outlawed.

    10. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      1. If you're not in Utah, don't worry. This isn't going to affect you.

      Yeah, until one of these types win a seat in the U.S. senate or house. Then it bcomes a natioanl problem. Just think of people like Senator Hatch. We should never let these kind of people have so much power. For example, if the people of Utah want to let the RIAA wreck their computers, great, but we need a way to protect the rest of us from them.

      --
      What?
    11. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Yeah, dirty, dirty bill!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  13. Well I Don't Know by SerpentMage · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am not going to say "video game = go on killing spree". However, what I am going to say is that when I went to high school in early to late 80's the idea of gun violence did not cross our mind. I do realize that not all high schools are equal and that some gun violence did exist.

    However, what disturbs me about many youth is that they do not think twice about getting a hand gun. I grew up in the country or cottage country to be exact and guns were common things. Though guns were used to go hunting for bear, deer or moose. I can't remember anybody in my circle in friends saying, "Hey look at this hand gun". It was more like, "Hey did you see the bear I shot!"

    What I want to say is that I think we should consider the message we are saying with shooter and violent games. I am not so sure it is totally innocent!

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    1. Re:Well I Don't Know by C0rinthian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Guns appear to have been a normal part of your life from childhood. You were raised around them, and were obviously trained in their proper use. (As were your peeers) You think that might have had some impact on how you and your peers viewed guns? Probably more of an impact than the lack of 'shooter' games?

      I'm suprised that people target games which feature gun violence, but ignore the glorified violence in other media. (Movies, pop music, etc)

    2. Re:Well I Don't Know by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Bingo! Give this guy a cupie doll, he hit the nail on the head...

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    3. Re:Well I Don't Know by donscarletti · · Score: 1

      Well, I went to high school and was a few years behind Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris (at a different school), I grew up in a rural area where guns were common and the only handgun I saw or heard about that was not safely holstered at police officers hips, belonged to a teacher who only took it out on weekends to shoot at his pistol club. I had a lot of outsider friends but none of them liked guns, talked about guns, had guns or wanted guns, only the redneck farmboys had them. I think the type of people who want to shoot up their school are very few in number today as they have always been.

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    4. Re:Well I Don't Know by ACME+Septic · · Score: 1

      However, what I am going to say is that when I went to high school in early to late 80's the idea of gun violence did not cross our mind.

      1. You didn't have 24 hour cable news to broadcast these events.
      2. You didn't have the web, global news websites, and blogging.

      These two things makes it (a) seem like their is more violence than before, because it is covered more than it was before, and (b) perhaps give way to copycat violence.

      As has been said a million times over -- humans have been violent since the beginning. We only recently got video games. Give me a break.

    5. Re:Well I Don't Know by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      I agree with you wrt to other media such as movies. Where I would disagree is pop music, I think more appropriate would be rap. Again, I am not saying "video games = shooting spree", but I do think the attitude among many that video games have NO effect is wrong!

      I would say movies give the ideas, video games let you live out the ideas virtually, and then well the next step is... Not for everybody I say, but for some...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    6. Re:Well I Don't Know by sjames · · Score: 1

      When I was in school, handguns and rifles were easier to get, and many of us had rifles. We watched Robocop, Terminator, and Lethal Weapon. We listened to music with lyrics like "Raise an army of rabid rats, beat your neighbor with a bat!". We did not have a problem with guns or knives in school (some students HAD knives, but they were not used).

      There is an elephant in the room here. We hear all about video games, TV, and movies. What we don't hear about is the clear message of zero tolerance (you are an interchangable part, mess up and we'll toss you out and get another), school officials who don't care if the students live or die (as long as they don't die on school property), parents who are too busy trying for food, clothing, and shelter to do much in the way of providing guidance, and a corporate world that sees them as nothing more than cheap labor and revenue streams.

      However, since fixing those might require actual effort and concern, not to mention failing to maximize stockholder value, we'll just ban a bunch of stuff and build more jails (another up and coming source of cheap labor).

    7. Re:Well I Don't Know by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1

      Ah, were that I had mod points. Well, +1 in spirit.

  14. Automatic Aggressive Behavior... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    You know in the old days of politics that some people would get so angry during the debates to get up and whack their opponents to death with their cane. Yet their was no bill to outlaw politicians who inspire such violent behavior. I wonder why?

    1. Re:Automatic Aggressive Behavior... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yargh, it's going to drive me insane not remembering who that was. Anyone have the name?

    2. Re:Automatic Aggressive Behavior... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of this incident when I wrote my comment. There's always the Roman Senators who killed Caeser. Politics is always more interesting when blood is flying.

    3. Re:Automatic Aggressive Behavior... by darkhitman · · Score: 1

      Well... that was during the 1840s, I recall. The Civil War was about to happen and pressures were pretty high.

      Although, it'd be nice if, say, someone just ... you know, accidentally ran over all of the senators supporting this bill. A terrible tragedy, yes, but at the same time we'd be ridding the world of dangers to society. And then we can hire some hookers and beat them up, and jack a car.

      Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go to a gun shop and buy a gun to go shoot up my school. Wait, I play Guild Wars. Make that a sword.

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
    4. Re:Automatic Aggressive Behavior... by darkhitman · · Score: 1

      1840s, 1850s, what's the difference? I was thinking of that incident as well.

      Rome's a little different. Killing was politics.

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
  15. Absolutely though inconclusively! by nmaster64 · · Score: 1
    Are video games definitly and most certainly the cause of violence in adolescents?

    "Absolutely Maybe!"

    1. Re:Absolutely though inconclusively! by basneder · · Score: 1

      Stop it sir.

      "I am not a fan of facts"

  16. Try to remember... by maxpublic · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Try to remember that this nonsense is coming from the great state of Utah, one of the most backwards and repressed places in the entire First World. What exactly did you expect from a political entity which, Constitution be damned, is essentially controlled by the Mormon church?

    Max

    --
    My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    1. Re:Try to remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

    2. Re:Try to remember... by Gordigor · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As someone who has lived here all my life, let me tell you there are far more repressive places that Utah...which suprises me. For example, ever try to by a beer in Pennsylvania? You can't even get one at the grocery store!!! Please do not lump all people from Utah as backwards or repressed.

    3. Re:Try to remember... by artificialj · · Score: 0

      I would so trade my video games for 4 wives.

    4. Re:Try to remember... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Utah outlawed that years ago. So now you have the repressiveness of the Morman Church without the polygamy.

    5. Re:Try to remember... by artificialj · · Score: 0

      please don't crush my dreams

  17. Re:Score so far by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

    Yup. Repeal the 2nd Amendment, so that the biggest and most brutish among us can rule over the more civilized. Great plan, that.

    --
    Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
  18. Re:Score so far by Ruprecht+the+Monkeyb · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Why should your inability to raise non-psychopathic children result in my not being able to own a firearm for self-defense?

  19. Games are now porn! by Kirby · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's super convenient. Now I only have one hobby!

    --
    -- Kate
  20. NO NO NO NO NO. by Rod+Beauvex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Call this a knee-jerk reaction stemming from childhood wounds, but I beleive many school shootings don't happen becasue of violent video games. These kids were screwed up for other reasons. I blame bad parenting, either being abusive and / or negligent to their child. Next I blame the school administrations. I have been to seven different schools, and 5 of them all did the same thing. Say student A and his buddies start irritating student B. Administration tells studen B to ignore it. Student B will only ignore it so long before reacting. 99 times out of a 100, student B will get in trouble for reacting, but student A will get off with nothing. This pisses of Student B. Eventually studen B gets more and more pissed. Mabey we should see what's going on inside the schools?

    1. Re:NO NO NO NO NO. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      School shootings are not about deranged kids killing other kids. Rather, they are loud, messy suicides.

      That's what these idiots who want to ban stuff don't get. Kids are tribal, and like any tribe, will attempt to eliminate nonconformists (kids who are different, or foreign, or whatever). And the kids who feel bullied will WANT to strike back, whether they actually act on it or not. And this goes on whether they have violent games and porn or not. But lack of an outlet for these feelings (and violent games are one such outlet) means that the mainstream kids' desire to "purify the tribe" and the outcasts' desire to "strike back" have nowhere to GO but at each other.

      I swear there's a stupid gene that gets turned on as soon as people have kids, that makes them forget how much it sucked to be a kid...

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:NO NO NO NO NO. by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1
      I swear there's a stupid gene that gets turned on as soon as people have kids, that makes them forget how much it sucked to be a kid...

      Please god, let that not be true. As someone who plans to have kids some day, I hope that I can continue to be intelligent and rational.

      Unfortunately, my experience thus far leaves me with little hope...

    3. Re:NO NO NO NO NO. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, it's pretty consistent... tho I would hope that if a person goes into parenting with the problem firmly in mind, they might at least have SOME memory of what being a kid was like.

      I've also noticed that even people who don't have kids often forget this, as they go thru the "I'm an adult now, so I know everything better than kids do" stage. I don't have kids, but I was old enough to be a grandparent before I really understood the issue. Maybe it's just having enough life experience to gain perspective that lets a person have these insights.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  21. Surprising by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe this'll spur them to get around to cleaning up that little polygamy "problem" over there. May I present exhibit a: Google Results 1 - 100 of about 94,300 for mormon wife underaged

    1. Re:Surprising by Alsee · · Score: 1

      What? No link?

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    2. Re:Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first result is your post.

  22. Re:And you would have gotten away with it... by vertinox · · Score: 1

    There are literally thousands of mystery books out there teaching our children how to be perfect killers.

    If these books teach nothing else, if that lady named Jessica Fletcher shows up in your town, you should hold off on your murder plans ;)

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  23. Outrageous, or not far from the mark? by Vellmont · · Score: 1

    I know you're trying to make a point that one form of content is about the same as another. But really there are people out their that would completely agree with your ideas. It's this same attitude that puts some neo-nazi guy in jail in Austria for making a speech 16 years ago that the holocaust didn't happen. Some people truly believe that ideas themselves are dangerous, and need to be controlled. A scary thought in a country who was founded in direct opposition to this idea.

    --
    AccountKiller
  24. Just one more shameful bill from the Utah Leg. by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    In other news, they're working on a bill requiring teachers to say that evolution is just one among many theories. They're working on a bill to ban gay/straight alliance clubs from high schools. They've decided that Utah's future economic growth depends heavily on new roads, but not at all on education.

    Every morning, my local public radio station does a legislative summary from the non-partisan League of Women Voters. A good day is one when I only have four or five stomach-clenching moments of impotent rage. Our legislators are not reasonable, not competent, and not listening to anything but the "still small voice" that they think is the Holy Spirit talking directly into their miniscule brains.

    Good response letter from the Salt Lake City Weekly: (scroll down to "Gamers Know Reality"). At least a few of us still have some sense. Just nowhere near a voting majority.

    --

    You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    1. Re:Just one more shameful bill from the Utah Leg. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, they're working on a bill requiring teachers to say that evolution is just one among many theories.

      Yeah, except that evolution *is* one among many theories, just like gravity or electromagnetism, or anything else in science. It just so happens that its currently the best theory we have and it is overwhelmingly supported by the data.

      The problem is not teachers saying that evolution is a theory. The problem is teachers saying that ID is a scientific theory, which is not true because it cannot be falsified.

  25. This is stupid. by Dastardly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rep. Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem) pointed out that HB 257 is the most narrowly defined legislation of these kinds of violent games bills. "I think it is worth a try," she said. "Otherwise we give up and say the court will always determine our values."

    And, Dastardly said, "It is worth a try to keep these bills from being passed otherwise we give up and say the politicians will always determine our values."

    1. Re:This is stupid. by ACME+Septic · · Score: 2, Informative

      You want to know what's stupid? Lorie Fowlke wants to limit access to fake guns, while leaving open full access to real guns! (I think George Carlin had a joke about this.)

      FWIW, I am in favor of having access to both real and virtual guns. I just like to point out the lunacy of elected officials.

      Also, her page says elsewhere about "Family," "I will do all I can to pass and support legislation that protects the traditional family from government encroachment. I will fight for what is right against any government agency that uses its power inappropriately or illegally to interfere with the rights of the family."

      Like the rights to parent our children without government interference?

      Give me a fucking break.

    2. Re:This is stupid. by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Values Legislation
      noun: Deciding that you dislike the way other people want to live their lives and that you dislike the way they raise their kids, so therefore you get the nice young men in blue uniforms to force your prefferences on them at gunpoint.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  26. Asylum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not worry. You can always request for asylum in Canada.

  27. This is why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I think that in any free nation, a rationale should be a mandatory part of any proposed law. It's impossible to argue against media bluster and knee-jerk reactions, but strip them away and lay the claims bare, and it becomes much easier to evaluate them sensibly. It also has the nice side-effect that you can come back to a law in twenty years' time and just look at the rationale to see if the law is still necessary.

  28. ban bullies by Shawn+is+an+Asshole · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would these same kids have done this anyway without being picked on daily at school? Maybe not.

    --
    "It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
    1. Re:ban bullies by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Therefore we should ban schools, as they are obviously dangerous!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  29. Re:Score so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why should your inability to raise non-psychopathic children result in my not being able to own a firearm for self-defense?

    Maybe you should consider moving to a civilized country like Canada, England, Australia, or New Zealand, where you wouldn't need to own a firearm for self-defense, because we don't have gangs of psychopathic children with guns roaming the streets.

    I know I'm probably going to get modded up for saying this, but man, America is so fucked up right now.

  30. Re:Score so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, this is a great plan. Lets ban anything that might hurt us, live in cages and eat antibiotics with every meal, completely emancipated from the demon called Personal Responsibility.

  31. Don't worry... by urbanriot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The "gaming generation" will be in power in about ten to twenty years and we can undo the damage done by these ignorant good old boys. Unfortunately, until then we're forced to suffer.

    1. Re:Don't worry... by bh_doc · · Score: 1

      Don't bet on it. The 'good ol boys' are going to be doing their damnedest to stay right where they are for as long as they have ready access to a defibrillator. Or at the very least pass their power on to younger 'good ol boys', but then not much has changed. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

      I reckon it may be longer than 10 to 20 years until sanity returns, but by then, our definition of sanity will have moved on aswell, and we'll still be left complaining about the stupidity legislators and ultimate futility of their laws.

  32. Yeah, forget the news by Dekortage · · Score: 1

    Kids would be much less prone to violence if we made them watch the news instead of playing video games. I'm sure the Iraq war wouldn't inspire anyone to violence.

    --
    $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    1. Re:Yeah, forget the news by ficken · · Score: 1

      If the parents would make sure that their kids know the separation of whats real and whats entertainment, then there would be no problems.

      And yes, I agree - maybe if the kids saw the dead bodies hanging outside of Fallujah then suddenly violence wouldn't be cool. If parents tell their kids that these people died horrible deaths, and how their families are suffering. Then again, the same parents that bitch about violence in computer games are usually the same ones that bitch about violence on TV.

      --
      Victory shall be mine!
  33. Re:Score so far by Entropy · · Score: 1

    Hi.

    I'm not going to assume you're an American. But can we suppose for argument's sake that you are?

    Okay, here is my argument: (and yes, I know it rests on the assumption that you're a leftist since you wish to repeal the second amendment - but I figure thats a safe assumption.)

    Do you trust Bush with a monopoly on firearms?

    --
    The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
  34. Troll much? by Fluffy+the+attack+ki · · Score: 1

    Not that I disagree, mind you, but that was rather off-topic and flamebait.

    1. Re:Troll much? by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

      It was a direct response to the post I was replying to.

      --
      Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
    2. Re:Troll much? by Fluffy+the+attack+ki · · Score: 1

      *looks* Oh, my appologies. Somehow missed that it was a reply. >_>

  35. How to stop the 'fad'. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all one big sum; Violent games, television, movies and life equals violent children.
    In order to break the 'fashion' one must have their parents like the 'hip' things like guns. Once parents like violence it automatically become 'un-cool' in children's eyes. The more parents forbid violent video games the more they will want to play them. Just my two cents.

    1. Re:How to stop the 'fad'. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      So once the gun-toting psychopath teenagers of today start getting older, their offspring will find violence 'un-cool' and turn into another generation of Hippies.

  36. So, uh... by Sippan · · Score: 1

    For those of us too lazy^H^H^H^Hbusy to read the article... what's this got to do with pornography...?

    --
    Frog blast the vent core.
  37. Re:Score so far by east+coast · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, repealing the 2nd ammendment and banning firearms would be death at the polls

    Aye, because firearms bans are working so well elsewhere.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  38. WE ALREADY TOOK CARE OF THAT by colman77 · · Score: 1

    Don't worry, man, we've got you covered. BANNED BOOKS[upenn.edu] Did you really think we'd actually let LITERATURE fall into the hands of those unpredictable teens?!

  39. Pot meet Kettle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to point out that Columbine occurred in a "gun-free zone".

          When was the last time you ever heard of a mass killing at a gun show?

          Laws that ban inanimate objects are asinine pandering and don't ever work in a free society that values individual privacy. Drugs, Games, Porn and Guns all fall under this umbrella.

  40. I am actually against gun control laws by superwiz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But it does seem hypocrical to ban the games which might have precipitated the shooting and to allow semi-automatic weapons that definately assisted in the shooting. How can you ban games that let people shoot in fantasy but not the weapons that let people shoot in reality?

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    1. Re:I am actually against gun control laws by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

      For the same reason you don't ban gasoline, fire extinguishers, or commercial aircraft.

      Even if you do not believe that each human being has the natural right to self-ownership, and thus the natural right to defend that self-ownership, in every case, the benefits of the objects in question far outweigh the actions of a few evil individuals who use examples of those objects to assist in their evil acts.

      --
      Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
    2. Re:I am actually against gun control laws by superwiz · · Score: 1

      I think you mised the point there, buddy. I was mocking the idea that video games are more conducive to the spread of violence than guns used that are used to commit the violence. I think both should be legal. But when it comes to deciding what is responsible for MORE violence -- video games or guns, you'd have to go with guns since it is possible to have a shotout without a video game but is is not possible to have a shootout without a firearm. And as long as guns are legal (which, again, I think they should be for essentially the reasons you outlined -- people should have the right to protect themselves) it is illogical to ban any use or ownership of video games.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  41. Mod parent UP - INFORMATIVE by ChePibe · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the info! Would explain the lack of a senate sponsor on the bill.

    It's dead in the water, no hope for it.

  42. Wrong question! by Mishotaki · · Score: 1

    "Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos?"
    no the question is: " would the same kids would have done this if the guns they used were locked away from them?"

    you give a kid a gun... you show him how to shoot it... you show him how to load it... you show him where you put it....

    aren't you helping that kid killing other people by showing him how to do it?
    if the gun was locked out, he wouldn't have done it.....

    1. Re:Wrong question! by Chrontius · · Score: 1

      no, no, no, no, no.

      Their parents did not provide the guns. Many were obtained on the black market.

    2. Re:Wrong question! by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

      Boy, are you off base! The US Dept. of Justice did a study (note: link is to a PDF) about 10 years ago which determined that when parents teach their children responsible use of guns, their rate of ALL crimes (not just gun crimes) was 10% lower than children raised in strictly gun-free homes, their rate of gun crimes was 0% (vs. 1% for gun-free homes), and their rate of drug use was 2% lower than children raised in gun-free homes.

      --
      Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
    3. Re:Wrong question! by GrievousMistake · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's quite what it says... It doesn't say anything about 'strictly gun-free homes', merely whether the adolescent owns/are in possession of a gun.
      You aren't suggesting that not owning a gun directly leads to drug use, are you?

      And your sig... Thinking that a random woman is more likely to have a gun than someone who plans to commit rape. And that more people die from being strangled with their panties and then raped, than die from irresponsible gun handling. Bah.

      --
      In a fair world, refrigerators would make electricity.
    4. Re:Wrong question! by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

      Clearly, you did not read my post - instead, you read INTO my post what you wished to read into it.

      --
      Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
    5. Re:Wrong question! by GrievousMistake · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, I did read it, but didn't connect it properly to the post you were replying to, and got it in the wrong context. Sorry about that. The study still does not mention 'strictly gun-free homes' or 'teaching children responsible use of guns', though. The crime rates you seem to cite are for adolescents who don't have a gun vs. those who own a gun legally vs. those who possess a gun illegally.

      --
      In a fair world, refrigerators would make electricity.
  43. No problems by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

    Given how active this topic has been, missing a reply was bound to happen sooner or later. Thanks for checking it out.

    --
    Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
  44. Future Visioneering... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 1



    Violent Video games today.

    Violent History Books tommorow.

    Sorry, my knee just jerked and made me type this.

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
  45. Games... No evidence... Maybe... Columbine!!! by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    Alright. I've heard enough. These violent games must be stopped in case they maybe could possibly lead some kids to behave aggressively!!! Who's with me?! - Hogue

  46. Feticide is not the answer. by tepples · · Score: 1

    Would these same kids have done this thing if their mothers had aborted them as fetuses before birth? Definitly not!

    Likewise, would you have said this thing if your mother had aborted you as a fetus before birth? Definitely not!

    1. Re:Feticide is not the answer. by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Would you have responded to my post saying that these same kids wouldn't have done their deed if they had been aborted if you had been aborted? Definitly not!

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  47. What kind of society by Pasajero · · Score: 0

    Blames bad parenting on VIDEO GAMES?????

    To the citizens of the USA: STOP! count to ten! You're loosing track of reality and common sense!

  48. Re:And you would have gotten away with it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every where that chick goes, people die. Seems pretty suspicious to me...

  49. free training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just think of 'violent video games' as subliminal messaging/free training for the U.S. Army. :-)

    1. Re:free training by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Or you could get the game America's Army for free, directly from Uncle Sam.

  50. What about the availability of firearms? by SharkyTech · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not,' he said, referring to the Columbine massacre." What a moron. Would they have done this if guns were illegal and therefore much harder to get? Probably not!

    --
    Give us this day our garlic bread and lead us not into vegetarianism but deliver us some pizza.
    1. Re:What about the availability of firearms? by Yinepuhotep · · Score: 1

      Actually, the guns they used were illegal for them to own.

      --
      Gun control: The belief that a woman, raped and strangled with her panties, is morally superior to a dead rapist.
  51. Re:Score so far by Chrontius · · Score: 1

    Wow, the politicians will do everything short of the one act that would actually make a difference. Of course, repealing the 2nd ammendment and banning firearms would be death at the polls (and elsewhere, probably). So we get crap like this for the sake of appearances. Such courage. You're right, it would make a difference. Go look at what's happening in Darfur to people who don't own firearms. They're being hacked to death with dull machetes. And you're right, it would be death at the polls and elsewhere, as those with the ability and inclination to ignore the laws shot anyone who didn't vote for their candidate like it was waythef**kbackwhen before the secret ballot was enforced. It'd also be death elsewhere as these people, holding the power of life and death over their fellow men, let that power go to their head. And yes, this stuff *is* crap, for it trades more than a little liberty for not even the guise of security.

  52. I don't like Mondays by KillerBob · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/mondays.asp

    There were school shootings long before video games started to take off, and long before the advent of the kind of graphic ultraviolence that this bill targets....

    --
    If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
  53. still small voice by crazylocks · · Score: 1

    During my brief tour in the looney bin, I learned that people who talk to God can be perfectly normal. On the other hand, people who hear God talk to them are totally nuts.

    --
    My momma gave birth to a winner, I gotta win.
  54. The List by Databass · · Score: 1

    Another state gets added to me "Don't Live There" list!

    If enough states make enough different laws and people move to one that matches their values, eventually all like-minded people will live in a state suited to all their whims.

  55. what a logical argument, i love it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would Charles Manson and his teenage accomplices have killed if it weren't for Beatles music?

    I think its clear to everyone now that the Beatles are the real threat.

    Goo Goo Cah Chu

  56. Obligatory Orgazmo reference by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    -Have you been living under a rock or something?
    -No I'm from Utah
    -Oh sorry...

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  57. Direct links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from the summary: "Even though there's still no evidence of a direct link between video game violence and acts of violence committed in real-life..."

    Yeah. There's no direct evidence for speciation either, if I hear right.

  58. fact about criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FACT: 80% of criminals wear socks. We need some more anti-sock legislation!

  59. Could this be a GOOD things? by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1
    Look, we often complain about how it's considered horrible to see a nipple for three seconds, but lopped-off heads rolling down the street are ok. We decry the categorization of sexual material as "pornographic" and say that violence is the real pornography.

    Could this be a step in the direction of correcting that? Could this lead to the categorization of video violence as porno? Could this lead to removing violence from TV shows accessible to children? Could this lead to the eventual realization that violence AND sex are things that are exploitive, explicit, often obscene, and therefore something that we as adults need to choose wisely when exposing children to, but then with this evening of the standard between sex and violence, we will see that important choice as a matter of PERSONAL responsibility, thus leading to LESS government interference?

    oh, you're right - I'm just daydreaming again.

    --
    This space available.
  60. I can't help it. I stomp winged turtles on sight by beoswulf · · Score: 2, Funny

    Goddamn Mario. It's not my fault. Blame my parents.
    Also whenever I'm in a big box store I get the urge to run through the aisles, eating fruit off the floor and dodging obese people in brightly colored mumus

  61. Re:Score so far by east+coast · · Score: 1

    America is so fucked up right now

    Indeed. It's sad to say but we didn't have such a gun violence problem back in the day when drugs were legal and any adult could buy a thompson subgun in a sears without showing so much as a drivers license... what the hell have we done? Oh, we've created blackmarkets by creating bans on what were once legal goods... So, banning more of these goods will do what?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  62. Re:Score so far by east+coast · · Score: 1

    I may get modded as troll but it just goes to show whats what now doesn't it? "I'll turn my back to facts from certain sources so my little glass house isn't shattered..."

    Pathetic.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  63. (Games = porn) = (ban on porn = extinction)? by gweihir · · Score: 2, Funny

    If games are what causes violence, then porn must surely be what causes people to have sex?

    If this is true, then only people watching porn can reproduce. Hence if porn is banned, there
    will be no sex and no next generation anymore.

    The other way round, in order to ensure reproduction in the developed countries, free,
    high-quality porn should be available to everybody. Since games = porn, the same should
    be true for games.... I think I like this law!

    I also have a nagging suspicion: Do all these overpopulated 3rd world countries have better
    and more porn than we do?

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  64. *sigh* by homerj79 · · Score: 1

    Sometimes I just wish I didn't live in a state that makes an ass of itself at least once during a calendar year.

    --
    SYSOP ('sih-sop) n.: the guy laughing at your typing.
    1. Re:*sigh* by Darby · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I just wish I didn't live in a state that makes an ass of itself at least once during a calendar year.

      Might I suggest Puerto Rico?
      It's a territory, or possession or some such rather than a state ;-)

  65. Re:Score so far by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

    Wow, the politicians will do everything short of the one act that would actually make a difference. Of course, repealing the 2nd ammendment and banning firearms would be death at the polls (and elsewhere, probably). So we get crap like this for the sake of appearances. Such courage.

    I'm just gonna, you know, go ahead and nullify that flamebait moderation. Dear libertarian asswipes, go back to Fark.

    --
    Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
  66. Re:Score so far by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

    You know, I can count on one hand the number of times I've had to mortally wound a government agent with a firearm. It's just not a situation that presents itself very often.

    Ok, ok. The deal is that I was making the case that we'll always have people killing each other w/ guns as long as we have guns. For a politician to address this by trying to ban videogames seems like pure cowardice. Nowhere in my post did I advocate repealing the 2nd amendment (I own a few rifles myself, and enjoy reading about dead highschool kids), I'm just saying that legislation like this ignores The Elephant In The Livingroom(tm).

    Oh, and as a little fuck you to the mods who tagged my post flamebait, here it is again:
    Wow, the politicians will do everything short of the one act that would actually make a difference. Of course, repealing the 2nd ammendment and banning firearms would be death at the polls (and elsewhere, probably). So we get crap like this for the sake of appearances. Such courage.

    --
    Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
  67. Re:Score so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Libertarian = Fewer laws.

    I think you mean 'liberal', but even that's a bit of a weird one in this case, because liberal typically refers to economic rather than social agenda.

    The word you're looking for it 'Authoritarian'.

    Happy to help
      - Anonymous Coward

  68. Re:Score so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean certain sources like the frequency of gun violence in Japan? Norway? Sweden? Or any other of the many countries with bans on handguns?

  69. I am very glad someone is regulating violent games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A number of posters have written on this thread, stating that there is no evidence that video game violence translates into violent behavior.

    There may not be evidence from studies, but an expert in making people violent states that first-person shooters will inevitably lead to violence in some people who play them. According to Lt. Col. John Grossman, the psychologist who designed the U.S. Army's behavior modification program causing soldiers to shoot to kill more of the time, the psychological barriers to killing another human are nicely reduced by repetitive simulation of the act. Grossman used the psychological theories of behaviorism to 'improve' the in-combat behavior of soldiers. The Army has estimated that his training increases the desire of soldiers to kill enemies in close-quarters from around 10% up to 80%.

    So my opinion is that Lt. Col. John Grossman is an expert on devising training that makes people less restrained in their violent behavior, he says that first-person shooters are an optimal way to accomplish the same thing, I have no reason not to believe him.

    As a society, we have to weigh the cost/benefit of deconditioning people's resistance to violence vs. the merit of violent games being available. And, with that in mind, I agree with Utah.

  70. the first I remember was in 1975. Ban Pong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the earliest school shootings occurred in 1975 in Ottawa, Canada. On Monday, October 27 of that year, 18-year-old Robert Poulin went on a killing spree at St. Pius X High School, killing one student and wounding five others before turning the gun on himself. Poulin had earlier raped and stabbed a 17-year-old friend to death.

    Fucking pong. for real. it must have been the cause.

    Let's see...before that we had "tennis for 2" look it up. an ancient game played on an oscilliscope in 1958. that must have been what triggered Starkweather to kill 11 people.

    I'm fairly certain the game "space war" triggered Juan Corona to kill 25 migrant farmworkers in 1971.

    I think you see where I'm going with this.

    Correlation is not Causation.

  71. Re:Score so far by east+coast · · Score: 1

    You mean certain sources like the frequency of gun violence in Japan? Norway? Sweden?

    get past the idea of "gun violence" and look at violence, rape and theft in general. You'll find something that may astound you, at least in Japan.

    So, are you going to continue to be a fucking AC or are you going to own up to what you say and come out of the shadows?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  72. Proof by nazsco · · Score: 1

    ok, we all know the media quantitize the number of under aged killers that played video games.

    What about the big picture? the numbers of under aged kids that weren't used to play video games so often (or at all)?

    what is the number of underage criminals that attend to church?

    --
    Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
      Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
    Homer: Thank you, dear.
      Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
    Homer: Oh, how does it work?
      Lisa: It doesn't work.
    Homer: Uh-huh.
      Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
    Homer: Uh-huh.
      Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
                  [Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]
    Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

  73. The truth hurts, doesn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Go back to Fark"? Is that the best you've got?

    Why don't you pull out your gun and shoot me in the head, while you're at it? That would be just as rational, mature, and as well thought-out, you Fascist swine.

    Cowards like you are the reason that criminal scum run this country and enact cowardly laws like this one every day. No amount of insults can change that fact.

  74. An idiotic theory? by ArcSecond · · Score: 1

    It might be a flawed theory, proposed by an idiot, but one would never know based on your total shambles of a refutation.

    I mean, really! If you are going to tell someone they are an idiot for proposing a connection between schoolyard violence and war, then you had better do more than invoke what you are "fairly certain" you will never hear as the basis for your counter-argument.

    Because otherwise, you look like the kettle calling the pot black.

    --

    I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.

  75. Dear God. by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 1

    This is a travesty, you can't let the faults of the minority affect the majority, but once again it is happening. This is another case of the government trying to find scapegoats for social problems, Columbine wasn't because those kids played Quake... it was because of a build up of a huge number of factors. This is like saying seeing the army on TV makes people want to kill others, someone needs to set the people who think up laws like this straight before they get too much power. I'd like to keep my civil liberties, thanks.

  76. idiot politican by Susceptor · · Score: 1

    the idiot politicans want to make it SEEM like they are doing something about violence in young people, but since they havent a clue as to what they could do to actually prevent violence, they go for the nearest scapegoat, so when it comes time for re-relection they can claim that they are trying to prevent youth violence. it's the same BS that the death penalty is based on. Support the death penalty, and then you ca claim that you are hard on crime and that this somehow equates to safer streets, the fact that it does no such ting never even enters the equation.

    --
    Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)
  77. TV/Movies/Games has more impact than News by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    Not to start a big flame war or anything, but doesn't invading other countries kind of encourage aggressive behavior?

    Nope. I was in elementary school during the Vietnam War. I recall seeing fragments of combat footage on the news. When friends and I played violent games we did not emulate or act out the news footage, we emulated TV and movies of the early 70s. Play was World War II themed, SWAT themed, etc. One friend's mom didn't allow toy guns, no problem his dad's old discarded golf clubs were fine stand-ins for rifles and shotguns. I don't find it hard to believe that games have an affect similar to TV and movies. Music videos too, they are kind of mini-movies.

    So my friends and I engaged in violent themed play at early ages.
    Later got into punk and metal.
    Man, how did we wind boring hard working tax paying law abiding citizens when we were so conditioned to be satan worshiping homicidal maniacs?

  78. Um... Football? by nsmike · · Score: 1

    Anyone who went to grade school and high school should remember that the ATHLETES were the violent ones, and the quiet, loner kids who played NES for hours every day at home were... Well, quiet. Not violent.

  79. Yes, this is obvious by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Random massacres and crazy people running wild has to be caused by computer games. One thing's certain, it has nothing to do with the widespread and easy availability of guns of all kinds.

  80. ...except... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    ...a great deal of people haven't STOPPED speaking up. Just because they've been unsuccessful at stopping the tide of American politics doesn't mean they've been sitting in their barcaloungers the whole time.

  81. Who's being activist? by jakell64 · · Score: 1

    Rep. Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem) pointed out that HB 257 is the most narrowly defined legislation of these kinds of violent games bills. "I think it is worth a try," she said. "Otherwise we give up and say the court will always determine our values." Um...it's *YOU* who's trying to determine our values!

  82. Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A. Life is tough for anyone.
    B. "Anyone who says differently is selling something." - Westly (The Man in Black)
    C. Anyone assuming that life is tougher for Mormons hasn't got a clue how life works. (Yes, they were "legally" hunted and killed in Missouri in the first half of the 19th century, but victims of atrocities like that generally recover more quickly and more often than the perpetrators.)
    D. Probably the people that have the toughest (most painful) lives are those that truly believe a moral code, and live contrary to it.