Slashdot Mirror
German Police Union Chief Wants Violent Game Ban After Shooting
A recent shooting in Germany has raised the ire of many politicians and officials, and they're turning to video games as a scapegoat after it was revealed that the shooter was a fan of Counterstrike and played Far Cry 2 the night before the rampage. First, a major retailer decided to drop mature-rated games altogether, and then the Minister for Social Affairs suggested restricting "addictive games," such as World of Warcraft, to adults only. Despite an unfavorable reaction from gamers and game developers alike, the chief of Germany's national police union has now spoken out against violent games as well, saying, "The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames."
In Nazi Germany, games play you!
I can go to Germany, kill a bunch of people, tell everybody I am modeling myself after the chief of the German National Police and then they'll call for a ban on German National Police Chiefs. Sounds like a plan!
Seriously? This is completely ridiculous. There is no way that just video games alone made this person go on a shooting rampage. Several studies by groups such as Harvard Medical, The Journal of Adolescent Health, and the British Medical Journal have shown that there is no conclusive link between video games and violent activities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_controversy). These people don't think that uhm...the media for instance has anything to do with it? Let's get real here people. There is no way playing some Far Cry 2 or any game like it alone contributes to the initiative to do violent things.
For me, video games are a great way to relax after a long day. It's an unwinding period and I don't feel violent at all when playing. I'm not alone saying this, there are many others who feel exactly the same way. The German police chief should look at the facts and statistics before he jumps the gun.
Just my two cents.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits" - Albert Einstein
Blame the games. Because we know how many people are killed each year by mice and Dual Shock controllers.
This is in the same vein as people who blame pornography for rape.
I am scientifically inaccurate.
...leave it to a German to take one person and blame a mass of people for that one person's faults. counter-strike and Far cry 2 aren't animate objects. they can't load a clip for you. they can't cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Run a search for violence statistics on google and you'll see that since the creation of violent video games, world-wide violent crimes have gone down, not up.
for free wallpapers, visit Sargosis.com
It was also found he was breathing the night before he killed those people. We should ban that too.
The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames.
or killercops, for that matter.
If Police would not carry guns, less people would get killed.
You'll find that the vast majority of school-shooters play first-person shooters.
The vast majority of young males also player first-person shooters.
You'll even find that the vast majority of young males eat bread.
What exactly does this tell us?
I would say something about violence in Germany, but I am afraid someone might call Godwin's Law.
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
So, I'm just wondering...
Did we export Jack Thompson to Germany or something? Or is that just the end result of bad post-WWII eugenics programs, ideological clones of Mr. Smackywhack himself?
Who's got the pool going for the next, "Oh noes! It's gonna destroy society!" form of entertainment? It wasn't motion pictures, it wasn't talkies, it wasn't comic books, it wasn't TV (although that's debatable... Yes, I'm looking at you Fox Reality Channel), as much as some would like to think, it's not violent video games. What's it going to be?
Mess not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Many more killers wear shoes when they kill someone than there are those that play video games. And while we are banning shoes, we should ban gloves while we are at it, since those even make it more difficult to identify people involved in shootings. And speaking of adding difficulty of identifying shooters, we should ban hats, sun glasses, face masks, hoodies, and wigs, since they all also help alter the appearance of a shooter and make it harder to identify them...
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Lets ban violent movies, news messages, songs, and books to altogether. People shouldnt be able to see anything violent...
Why oh why cant politicians show common sense?
who gets to make that arbitrary decision?
Brutal rapist likes chocolate. Legislature in the works to ban chocolate.
from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
We are only shooting zombies right?
Speaking of that, if we ban violent games, it stands to reason we should ban violent films, so what happens to Hollywood?
Think Deeply.
Given a choice between the Germany of today (ban violent video games!) or the Germany of 70 years ago (Genocide! World wars!), I'm not going to lose any sleep over their current extremes.
Just an opinion.
This wouldn't have happened
1) if the guy hadn't had access to inordinate amounts of bullets (you can't kill 15 people with less than 15 bullets)
2) if the guy hadn't had access to a gun that was stored outside the legally required locked safe
3) if the guy hadn't been given weapons training even though his diagnosed mental condition (again, this was against the law)
Once you've addressed these issues, we may want to talk about banning violent games.
Look, the whole world culture is becoming more violent when compared to - say - the 1950s. Comics like Tales of the Black Freighter existed in the 1960s, but they were harder to get instead of say, Archie comics. Television had violence in shows like Gunsmoke, but always with a moral tone.
Movies like Last House on the Left would have a hard time getting made even in the 1980s. Yes, Texas Chainsaw Massacre existed, but Last House on the Left depicts a violent rape, and the Saw movies are torture porn.
Responses to web boards (every major newspaper now takes comments to about every single story) depicts a violent world. I took a look at the Entertainment Weekly website, looked at an article about Natasha Richardson's death from head injury. Unfortunately, the sysadmins at EW don't screen comments. It was horrific, with comments that are hard to repeat, many talking about what they would do to her corpse and many being glad that she "got what she deserved".
Videogames are simply reflecting this culture shift. A game like Bully simply reflects what goes on. It's a deep, and very unfortunate, confusion of the chicken and the egg. Somehow, legislators look at Resident Evil 5 and see something that they don't see in the remake of Dawn of the Dead. They look at Far Cry 2 and they take a pass on Sorority Row, a trailer I saw last night that looked as violent and horrific as anything I've seen from Wes Craven.
Somehow the interactive nature of video games makes people feel that it "thresholds" behavior. If you fantasize about harming animals, you need therapy. If you actually bind, torture and kill animals - you are quite a step closer to being a human killer. Somehow, this logic is being applied to shooters. That makes playing shooters itself a deviant behavior. I think it signals something deeply wrong with our culture, but it's interactivity alone does not single it out as threshold behavior.
Nah, we just have that a lot in Germany. Something bad happens, and politicians jump to it and want to ban violent computer games over it. So, for example, someone shoots some people at a school and the day later, we learn from the press that we need to ban Counterstrike, and also that suspicious pornography was found. Then of course we need to something against child pornography, regardless of no child pornography being involved whatsoever in the shooting or the shooter's private live. You get the idea.
That said, I would personally appreciate if computer game makers could cut down on the violence a little, I don't like it very much in my games. Of course, other adults who like to shoot pixels should be allowed to do so, and the government should stay out of it.
It seems that most responses to this sort of article are of the form "violent video games have nothing to do with what he did!" And then when something about a black shooter in a ghetto comes up, most people say "It's his society and location, if we could just get rid of the ghettos/black gangs/whatever, we'd have less violence/shooting/murders."
So it seems that in general, people do think that the environment one lives in affects one's decisions. Well, video games are part of my environment.
So instead of simply dismissing video games as having anything to do with decisions (which, IMO, is a ridiculous proposition, the idea you could spend 20+ hours a week playing video games and not have it affect you, whether that's morally, ethically, intellectually, ... grammatically ... what about, oh, say, myspace? no affect?)... I'd propose that we start posting how video games (especially violent ones, since that's this article's topic) DO affect you. How does virtual violence affect someone.
And preferably more than the curt "Duh, it lets you cool off virtually making you less likely to kill someone in real life." I'm not sure that is any more or less proven than video games causing real life shootings. If it does... then [citation needed]
game software houses would be poorer. :-P
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Crappy journalistic research.
It's "just" the chief of the Hessian section of the DPolG, not the Chief on the federal level.
And there's several police unions as well, with the DPolG only being second largest (about half as big as the GdP with a few micro unions not worth mentioning).
Apart from that, it was pretty clear that everyone's gonna scream BANZOR KILLARGAMES after the little fuckwit ganked his old school, so no big surprise there.
What is imo most surprising is how careful and diplomatic Christian Pfeiffer is with his statements. He usually was pretty rabid anti-"Killergame" the last couple years and I expected him to gloat and go "TOLD YA" to his critics, but he actually says stuff like games are not the deciding factor, not the original cause for stuff like that, just a small piece of a big puzzle with social issues being the real problem, etc.
I'm confused. It's like if Jack Thompson would go ahead and offer to become BFF with John Carmack.
What was the name of the game that Hitler used to play? //David cross
Sure. Let people buy guns. When they use them to kill people, ban video games. Hey, some crazies have killed people because God told them to! Let's ban religion!
It is time for politicians and parents to stand up and take responsibility for protecting their children from the dangers of history. History contains many scenes of violence, aggression, debauchery and foul language. It is a social issue, and one that effects not just our children but our children's children, and our great grandparents.
I would think movies, magazines and books are next. The real problem today, total lack of future outlooks for our youngs will continue to be overlooked.
People with no hope, future or money are much more likely to give up and some of them want to get revenge on the world and take people with them.
HTTP/1.1 400
"Did we export Jack Thompson to Germany or something? Or is that just the end result of bad post-WWII eugenics programs, ideological clones of Mr. Smackywhack himself?"
The world spent millions of lives and billions of dollars killing off Germans who were comfortable with violence and considerable post-war effort conditioning their society against it. (Ditto Japan BTW.) Now that Germany is mostly neutered and finally has a broad social buy-in to being that, what sort of response do you expect?
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Yeah, violent video game ban is stupid, and all like that.
Restricting highly addictive video games to adults is actually worth consideration, in my opinion. Finding an appropriate way to measure addictiveness of a game prior to market release is one obstacle. Quantifying the effect of such a ban is another.
It would be nice to see controlled study of success metrics for children raised under and without such a ban. Of course that would take decades, but we have decades.
The fact that he played a video game the night before proves nothing. I usually play a "killer game" or two each night, so do alot of other people...
If your fucked up enough that a video game will somehow persuade you to go kill a bunch of people, you already have issues and it's not the game dev's fault.
I'm tired of this shit, and it's always from people who've never actually played the games. It's like this substitute teacher I had in class today, he went on about how rap music is horrible for kids, so I asked him if he's actually listened to any. While I think rap "music" is crap, he hadn't, and had no right to be saying anything.
This is the same old shit, all over again:
-banning violent games (in the us) completely would be unconstitutional
-if you don't ban them completely, but restrict the age, kids will just play games for older people
-even if you do ban them completely, there are free games, and you can't regulate that without a huge firewall across the internets, which would fuck everything up
Solution?
Parenting.
If your a good parent
a) your kid won't go kill people
b) if s/he has a mental condition, you'll give him proper care as needed
If you as a parent believe your kid shouldn't play violent games, don't buy him/her violent games.
It never ceases to amaze me how little thinking these noobs can do, and still make it into important offices.
What the fuck.
[/rant]
There is no justification or defense for games that glorify killing and death. If you enjoy simulated murder and mutilation that is your business, if you get your kicks from that I feel sorry for you.
When ever you see a tragedy such as a school or public shooting or anything for that matter the first thing you do is say why, the second thing you do is find the easiest answer. The truth is that if someone does something that people don't understand they tend to blame the thing that person did that they didn't understand. I would agree that violence can breed more violence but it's pretty hard to blame video games when you see it played out in movies, TV, on the streets, and anywhere. The question is, is that when every one I know plays violent video games and not one of them has been convicted of a violent crime what does that prove? Counter-strike has 4.2 million users(just the original not source as there would be some cross over between the users number comes from Wikipedia) world wide. If this game(which is 10 years old give or take a few months) truly breed the kind of violence that made this kid kill people that's 0.0000238% of all people that play are made violent enough to commit a crime, I'm pretty sure that's an anomaly.
I would hope that things would settle down people would look at it a little more logically and decide that this kind of thing is silly. I would hope parents would be aware of the mental state of their children and be trying to get help if they can, and be aware of what content they can handle. I have heard of kids calming down once fighting games were removed but as a parent you should be watching them instead of letting them socialize on video games alone. If you let them play video games watch or play with them, of course as they get older it's harder to do that besides not giving them money to buy games, and then if they are still violent it's tragic but at least you shouldn't be blaming video games at that point.
Check this out and then look at the US Army and tell me killer games are bad. I mean US soldiers don't act anything like that.
...as is evident from the hundreds of thousands of CS gamers who DIDN'T go on a murderous rampage.
The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames.
Nor would it be any poorer if there were no movies in which people died, or books containing stories involving violent conflict.
I also think the world would get along just fine without football, golf, chess, horse races, and many other things.
But that doesn't in any way justify me taking those things away from people who want them....let alone those who turn a decent profit from facilitating them.
Does anyone else here find it ironic that a country with such strong anti-naziism laws doesn't use them against politicians who seek to embrace one of its main tenets?
Government censorship/speech control is never the solution. It is always the problem. Didn't the rise of the NSDAP teach them anything?
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
It's easier for them to blame games then for the system(Police and other institutions) to do their job.
I played violent games as a kid, and I didn't end up shooting people in my town, and I believe 99 % of kids are the same as me.
The psychological problem of those kids, who shoot people, aren't caused by violent games, but by vast range of other mental factors. Sane human beings can tell the difference between shooting people in real life and shooting them in some stupid game.
Violence, unprovoked/provoked killings where happening long before games where invented. What was the cause then ?
Well, human violence have only one reason. And that reason is mental issues. If you are capable of killing other human being or even animals for that matter, then you will probably do that at some time in your life, no matter if you playing or played violent games or not.
the chief of Germany's national police union has now spoken out against violent games as well, saying, "The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames."
It won't be richer either. Nor it would be safer. It will be more censored and more opressed.
God damn fucking asshole micro-brain fascist.
It was role-playing games.
I remember it well. Role-playing games caused the complete collapse of civilization in 1983.
Some say it was the atomic war, but that's just propaganda put out by our mutant overlords.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Maybe they should ban guns?
TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
As I understand it most of my favorite "violent" games aren't legal for sale in Germany (or France) because they reference the Nazi movement and are variations on WWII simulations or story lines.
I suppose though that all of the modern and futuristic military campaigns are perfectly legal. I just have preferred things like Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor, and Call of Duty.
Think Deeply.
If you're going to blame video games for the shooting, then they need to let the guy go free.
After all, he is the real victim. How was he to know he'd be "infected" by his video games?
"I would personally appreciate if computer game makers could cut down on the violence a little, I don't like it very much in my games."
Isn't it entirely your choice to acquire such a game, though? Perhaps you didn't know ahead of time that the game would be quite so violent - in which case.. yeah, that happens. Sometimes I don't know ahead of time that a game is going to suck.. even if I enjoyed the demo very much. But there are a plethora of games out there that have very mild violence or even no violence at all. They're not likely to be shooters - or if they are 'shooters' you're going to be shooting with something rather abstract (or not-so-abstract, like a paintball game) - so if you like shooters.. I think 'violence' rather comes with the territory.
Export Jack Thompson? How about deport.
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
They are legal in their local versions, removing all nazi icons etc.
Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life
Yeah, but who would take him?
Mess not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Politicians are great at missing the obvious. The guy didn't go on a shooting rampage because of video games; he went on a shooting rampage because he had easy access to guns.
Don't blame the left hand when it was the right hand was pulling the trigger.
People blaming games is as common as all other excuses. These include TV, Poetry, Twinkies (yes, look it up), Bad Genes, Demonic Possession, and even being Poor (not as a socio-economic incentive for the illegal gains, but rather as an indication of being inferior and less civilized. Yes, it was a Victorian theory.).
Since there is no science to back up this supposed link, what he is basically saying is:
"I don't have any proof, but let's ban it just in case. Of course, we should also ban everything else, just in case..."
As to his assertion to ban WoW and other 'addictive' entertainments, what he is really thinking is apparently:
"Since humans can obsess about anything they enjoy, let's ban everything fun..."
Hopefully some people with at least 3 functioning brain cells will take him aside and explain his folly. Even if it requires a burlap bag and some 'funtime' for him to get it. Maybe then he'll understand that violence is caused by many things, not the least of which are politics, and also stupidity.
And before anybody asks, no I am not advocating the use of violence, I merely used that particular imagery to make a point.
External locus of control. The shooter had it. Why do you think 14 out of 15 victims were female? He was gunning for females, because he was blaming all females for his condition. He blamed them for so much that he thought they collectively deserved to die.
Now the interesting part: pretty much everybody who wants to ban videogames because of events like these believes just as much in an external locus of control as the shooter. Except instead of believing that a group of people is directly harming them, they believe that a group of people is influencing "their" people through violent games. And instead of wanting to shoot the people they accuse, they want to ban their product.
Granted, it's better to ban a product than to shoot someone. But the fundamental drive is the same. It's also the drive that's behind book burnings and conspiracy theories like the protocols of the elders of zion. It's bullshit that makes people feel better and in control - it's not them that's the problem, and there's an easy solution at hand.
I despise both the shooter and the idiots who clamor for video gaming bannings equally. One's more harmful than the other, but that's just because the other is a bigger pansy. I'm convinced that under the right circumstances, the head of the state's police union would be just as willing a shooter as the 17 year old kid.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
People forget a bit too readily that the Nazis didn't come to power in Germany on a platform of genocide, they came to power on a platform of law-and-order, traditional values, and national pride.
History should have taught German police and government to refrain from trying to interfere in free speech and to be very tolerant of speech and content that people might find objectionable. Instead, they are apparently just reverting to their old ways.
When will these people learn that freedom is meaningless if it doesn't include the freedom to make bad choices? When will they learn that democracy is only possible if we accept the risk that our fellow citizens sometimes make bad choices?
Ah, I understand. The German populace loved violence! We had to be neutered and conditioned! Is that what schools teach in other countries?
Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat
to reduce warfare! Ban Monopoly to reduce greed! Ban Poker to reduce deception! Games don't cause the darker side of human nature...they allow a safe acceptable way to explore it in symbolic simulacrum.
"ISP records show that right before the shooting that killed 12 students, Troy was reading Slashdot, and appeared to comment on an article about DRM, an article about banning video games for no damn reason, and an article about Microsoft Silverlight."
For legal purposes I have to say here that I'm kidding.
OR AM I.
No, I don't actually own a gun.
While we're at it, lets also ban drugs, that way, we'll never see them on our streets again! ... Oh wait, we do. The only thing this will accomplish is an advocacy of piracy. Do you really think passionate gamers aren't going to turn to the torrents to get their fix? Keep dreaming you simple-minded jackasses.
Help fight spam
Yeah, and it leads to the harder stuff like GTA. Next thing you know these kids will start smoking...marihuana gasp!
Now here's the dilio. If you want to say that games, or any other thing has no influence on a kid, then you will have to also say that propaganda has no effect on adults... and keep a straight face.
What?
Attack censorship in every way at every turn!
I just have preferred things like Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor
Medal of Honor
and Call of Duty
Call of Duty
The games can only be sold to persons over 18 years, though. And AFAIK in Germany you can only sell the German version, without swastikas, which can not be used in games set in the Nazi era (while for movies for example that is acceptable).
To those few of you that don't yet speak geek, != is 'does not equal'
To those that don't understand the statement. Just because something happens in sequence or at the same time (correlation), it doesn't mean that the one has anything to do with the other (causation).
To give you a real world example you can laugh at, I had a lady inform me that the local gas station was selling bad gasoline. She knew this because she filled up her tank the other day, and didn't get half a block away when two tires blew out.
To her, it was obvious that the events must be linked.
And yes, I really did have someone claim this to me. I've had worse, but this is the easiest of the funny ones that doesn't cause me to pull my hair out in frustration.
Video games are played by all but a minority of adolescents. Inevitably when there is some kind of violent incident involving young people, more likely than not they are at least very a casual gamer. This demonstrates causation that video games have spawned all violent crime which did not exist back in our day.
Nobody was ever shot before 1974, because our generation are perfect role models and our children have been subverted by mindless video games.
Therefore young people are to blame, the sooner we lock them all up the better.
} sarcasm;
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
No. He was merely an average /. poster - i.e., a complete idiot. ;) :D
Did you read the rest of his post?
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
During the "interviews" regarding WCG, most gamers start losing their highly competitive edge by 25. They're as young as 14-15. These people can make 100+ grand a year. Restricting gaming to adults is ridiculous and hurting people's livelihoods.
You think gaming is dangerous? How many people suffer more serious injuries than carpal tunnel syndrome in sports like Hockey, Football and Boxing? And how sick is Olympic gymnastics. Besides the fact they stunt their growths, and their level of obsession is insane.
You know what I think, Germany is bitter about not winning WCG, what with it being in their country in 2008 and is doing this so they can say, oh well, our competitors couldn't practice till they were 17 unlike the Koreans.
Besides if we don't practice zombie hunting, and anti-terrorist efforts, those losers who don't have experience will be victims of the zombie hordes and freak out if an AK47 lands in their hands and they have to defend themselves.
But seriously. Critical thinking skills. Hand-eye coordination. Prioritizing. Improved Reflexes and Motor skills. Typing Speed. Memorizing. Build-order. Tactics. Resource management. Tolerance to Mundane and repetitive actions. These are all skills garnered from games like SC, RE, CS, WC, racing, Civilization. These are skills maybe if our politicians had, they wouldn't have screwed up the world so much.
people like this actually get elected? Whats next? Movies, books? Bible is a nice one to start then.
Do you know anything about German Unions?
There is quite a difference in how they act, work, and interact with politics and economics than in the US or Great Britain.
Must be nice to honestly believe banning games would solve any problems anywhere.
If it weren't for games I'd have drank my way through public school instead of roflstomping nubs to pass the supreme amount of free time.
Ah, I understand. The German populace loved violence! We had to be neutered and conditioned! Is that what schools teach in other countries?
No.
However the German people did bring something of the sort upon themselves. World War Two in effect amounted to a eugenics program that weeded out quite a lot of the German population. This is of course slightly ironic.
I think that's the reasoning the UK used to ban guns. If no one has a gun, then there isn't going to be any more killing right? except that now people are killing with knives. some people are even calling for certain knives to be banned to stop the killing. The thing is that they are completely missing the point. If a human being really wants to kill another human being, it is going to happen regardless of what weapons or anything else is banned. The real problem here is that there are murderous individuals not the tools that they could potentially use nor what media they watched.
Ain't that the truth. I almost got arrested in London recently by a couple of cops who searched me with a metal detector as I was going into a museum. The reason was a small pocket knife (5cm blade) because the blade was lockable. They raised a major hullabaloo, asked me where I was from and why I felt it was necessary to "carry a lethal weapon in public" (their words) and finally explained that I wouldn't be charged this time but that carrying a knife of this type can apparently get you a draconian punishment in the UK. The UK obsession with eliminating knives and 'weapons' in general is getting pretty bloody ridiculous. The only thing I ever used that thing for was to peel fruit and open packages from Amazon.com. In some European countries army reservists keep their guns in their houses, a friend of mine who is an army reservist in Denmark used to have an MG-42 heavy machine gun and a couple of belts of 7.62 mm ammunition he kept locked in an armoured cabinet in his cellar. While there has been some gun crime in Denmark nobody has yet gone postal with an MG-42, last I knew the worst incidents was a couple of people using army guns to commit suicide which is a problem you can solve with regular mandatory psyche evaluations. Eliminating guns, axes, machetes, knives .... you name the implement, won't solve anything. Limiting ownership to people who are trained to use them, who are encouraged to join gun clubs that drum into their members proper weapons ethics and most importantly people who are screened by the police to make sure they aren't total prats... now that might get you somewhere.
Counter-Strike is one of the top 5 games played on any list avalible on the web. Even today. This is like saying the shooter had watched a drama DVD or listened to alternative music the day before. Statistically it's very likely.
moox. for a new generation.
I'm curious how does that law work for WW2 films, or documentaries come to that?
>> the shooter was a fan of Counterstrike and played Far Cry 2 the night before the rampage. ...he also eat dinner, watched some TV, and went to bed on the night before the rampage.
Maybe those things should be banned as they can clearly be linked to this crime too.
> Do you know anything about German Unions?
Nope. I don't know much about American or British unions, either. But I do know something about opportunism.
> There is quite a difference in how they act, work, and interact with politics
I'm sure that's true. But the practice of blaming violent video games for real-world violence appears to be popular in both English and German.
There's been quite a common denominator with a lot of these kids and massacres. In almost all cases that I am aware of, it's not so much videogames, that's a distraction from the most probable real reason, something they don't want you to see or even think about. You go back and see case after case and you'll see the kid has been force addicted to dangerous psychoactive drugs by his parents and various officials, like the school will "recommend" that your kid is "ADHD" or something and go on prescription drugs.
Now, go back to before this was common, try to find examples of school massacres or kids going nuts like that, even when firearms were extremely common..go ahead..you won't find any examples. I'm old enough to remember when there were no "add" or "adhd" kids, and forced addiction to speed was unheard of it, it just didn't happen. And no massacres. Normal fights, sure, but no massacres, at least I certainly don't remember any, and I've always been a voracious news junky.
Just something to note. I think it is way more relevant than videogames, although the *combination* of an out of control speed freak kid being conditioned to violence could be the combination that pushes them over the edge when they are trying to cope with normal adolescent pressures.
You mentioned *fiction* works. What about a Book that a significant percentage of people not only claim is NOT fiction, but a work full of moral and ethical teachings? What if that Book has scenes of drunkenness, incest, genocide, murder, prostitution, debauchery? How much worse would be the effect of that?
Sorry dude, the Germans are only a blip in the modern PC education.
School shootings are an definite US invention. However, it was so easy to copy and so school shootings are now in all over the western world.
I elaborate more in my other comment, but basically, I don't see people claiming that environment or nurture has no effect on people's upbringing. But you can't leap from that argument, to saying "One particular thing caused someone to commit murder". Where is your evidence to show that it's that thing, out of all other possibilities?
And a crucial point you miss is that even if people discuss someone's upbringing, I don't see any calls to ban or criminalise that. No, the person is still to blame, and we still criminalise their actions. Looking at what influences people's motives isn't the same thing as saying that they were caused to do it.
Lastly, "most people say" are not Slashdot readers. "Most people say" that violent games cause murder, but people on Slashdot are not making either of these claims, so there is no inconsistency. But have fun with your straw man - there's nothing like making up an argument, so you can accuse it of inconsistency.
Well that is true.
The strange thing is, that the cause of his action was most likely his depression and not the video games. However, these games could be a trigger. But his visits and training at a shooting ranch might be a plausible cause as well. His father definitely violated German law in two points
a) his guns were lying around
b) he gave weapons and training to a depressed person
...demand that Pac-Man, especially Super Pac-Man, be banned from retro-arcades. Also on the hook are Burgertime and Jawbreaker. A world-champion eater has gone on record to say, "the day before a big competition, I engross myself in literally hours of Pac-Man. I find deep inspiration in his unabashed gobbling of dots and bonus items. If the dots were hot dogs, I would probably do even better as I wouldn't have to imagine so much!"
Stupid politicians and parents indicted Ms. Pac-Man's "beauty mark" as giving a false sense of beauty to girls and young women with facial imperfections and deformations. Fundamentalists charge that Pac-Man and Ms. Pac-Man had Baby Pac-Man, or Pac-Man Jr., outside of wedlock, as indicated by the fact that she never took the title "Mrs. Pac-Man." Even though the Saturday morning cartoon presents against this notion, certain children never saw it since television is one of the Great Evils, right next to comic books, the Internet, and free thinking.
One parent stood up to say, "It is just outrageous to think that people are screwed up BEFORE they get a hold of things like video games, movies, and comic books! Obviously these things are made from pure evil and must be destroyed!"
Another member of the mob noted that, while modern games such as "first person shooters" far exceed older games in terms of realism, he blames Pong for his child's inability to play a proper game of tennis. "Seemed real enough to him!" he shouted. "And don't get me started on Mortal Kombat. He tried to lance me twice in the throat yelling 'Get over here!' after playing THAT nightmare of a game!"
Members of the band "Motley Crue" were asked for comment, but did not reply in time for this rant.
In a related note, the NHTSA released data today which clearly shows the number of traffic violations and certain types of accidents skyrocketed after the release of a "Looney Toons" racing game on the Dreamcast, and saw another identical trend after the release of "Mario Kart."
(okay, I am done.)
> Minister for Social Affairs suggested restricting "addictive games," such as World of Warcraft, to adults only
If this were true, I would still be playing.
Merriam and Webster defines Karma as "the force generated by a person's actions held in Hinduism and Buddhism to perpetuate transmigration and in its ethical consequences to determine the nature of the person's next existence." I will simplify it a bit and succintly say that your actions affect you and your environment equally, be it at the macro level or at a brain cell level. Newton's third law. The majority of the comments are ridiculing the German police for this "immature" behavior and I simply see it as a "laziness" to try to see the other side. To think that something you do 20, 30,40,50 hours a week, will have no effect on you at all is just naive. However, the question should not be if it affects you at all but does it affect you enough to act on your killing intention? Perhaps it triggers something or provides a catalyst for the violent behavior. That is still unclear. A scientific study here or there is inconclusive which does mean that there might not be any link. OTOH and many ppl have missed it, it also means there Might be a link. Until then, what's wrong with being on the safe side if they want to? Aren't lives more important than your recreational use? Just an Opinion.
I love it when something bad happens and people just look around for someone or something to pin the blame on. And when they find that something, they waste resources, time and lives in combating this something. Who makes these violent games? Game developers! They're corrupting the good people, sowing seeds of evil throughout society! We must tie game developers at the stake, and set them alight. If they burn, they're guilty but if they emerge from the flames unharmed, God has shown us they are righteous! Some people have mental problems (and some of these mental problems are socially acceptable), and then go and kill someone. It's a fact of life.
How everyone seems to ignore the fact that he was a gun nut, owned 40+ soft guns, had his parents remodel the basement to a shooting range, and was an outsider. All of that doesn't matter, let's nevermind that. It was obviously the videogames. Perhaps the whole censorship thing germany is pulling on games and movies made him desperately ache for that extra bit of violence that the government denied him? Could more violence in games have prevented this? :p
Except he never actually said he wanted to ban them. Way to read the source everyone. More exaggerated sensationalism by a trumped up blog!
It's Germany.
If it was the French, we'd just poke fun at them; repelling a video game is a battle they can win (though they might suffer some casualties). But it's the Germans, and they are just too sad to poke fun at.
I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
The most effective deterrent to actual violence is a credible threat of violence. When you know that many of your potential victims might be carrying guns, and might shoot back, you think twice before attacking them.
Conversely, when a criminal knows that his/her victims do not (because they can not) carry guns, even if the criminal don't have a gun, the criminal will just size up the weak-looking ones and launch the attack.
The world was a dangerous, and violent, place long before humans came along. We evolved to survive in a violent atmosphere by getting good at violence (and at calculating the risks of a violent action before taking it). Throwing away our weapons will not make the world less violent, nor will it make us less violent; it will just make us more vulnerable to violence, hence easy prey, thus increasing the actual amount of violence we experience.
Careers in German law enforcement: ...
Eh, fill in the blank yourselves. WAY too easy.
It's no problem in educational or art context. As a rule of thumb, if Nazis would enjoy it, it's illegal, if they'd hate it, it's fine. I'm not sure if the removal of swastikas in games is actually required by law, it's hard to see how Wolfenstein could spawn an anti-constitutional movement. If anybody knows, I'd be curious.
"The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames."
Perhaps not, but I know your re-election fund will be short a few deutschmarks?
[End Of Line]
In Germany, they came first for the Gamers, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Gamer; And then they came for the Anime fans, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't an Otaku; And then they came for the Musicians, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Musician; And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
We all know no one in Germany ever killed anyone before video games became popular.
After every school shooting you hear some group calling for the ban of violent video games. The best ones are always the ones where the shooter didn't even play any video games.
I wouldn't even see this as news since it happens every single time in every country.
Video games don't kill people, guns do.
There are exceptions for works of art and science, see Strafgesetzbuch  86a. So it's allowed to use the swastika in films, documentaries, history books, etc.. but it's not OK to print it on t-shirts for example.
The Angels have the Phone Box
[...] As a rule of thumb, if Nazis would enjoy it, it's illegal, if they'd hate it, it's fine. [...]
oh shit, I hope nazis don't enjoy sugar >.>;;;
DON'T PANIC.
Look, the whole world culture is becoming more violent when compared to - say - the 1950s. Comics
What? The 1950s had everyone censoring violence at home and all the moral codes and such because they were sick of the debauchery and blood letting they went through. After World War II and then Korea, all followed up with the seemingly inevitable prospect of atomic war, most people didn't want to see too much blood and people getting killed because they were sick of it. But, with that said, nobody minded a good beating to watch. Friday night at the fights was a hugely popular show and NFL football back then was a lot well, less rules based, than it is today.
This is my sig.
If you fantasize about harming animals, you need therapy.
You don't need a shrink to eat a steak, and I certainly have thought about how I hopefully have a rifle if I see a bear or an alligator.
This is my sig.
What European nation is that already has the most strict rules on censoring violent games? Where the blood has to be green or the enemies have to really be robots and in command and conquer the suicide bombers were all changed to a cartoon bomb on a tea trolley? Now remembering that answer, what European nation has been in the news most for school shootings?
Oh dear! can someone say logic fail!
Isn't the common factor between all these school shootings actually that the kids parents had multiple guns in their house that the kids could get hold of easier than the cookie jar?
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
I still recall the reaction of our 11th grade German exchange student to seeing a history book with a swastika on its dust cover. He was shocked to discover that was okay to have lying about in the US.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
People forget a bit too readily that the Nazis didn't come to power in Germany on a platform of genocide, they came to power on a platform of law-and-order, traditional values, and national pride.
Um, Hitler's Mein Kampf - destroy all jews in europe because they are Germany's eternal enemy, avenge versaille, then go in and invade russia, kill everyone there, and, make plenty of room for german settlers.
you know its funny, but the fuhrer actually did try to keep his basic campaign promises... but, to your point, when it came time to organize the coup - Hitler never actually got enough votes in his own right, he did so partially because he told the then powers that be that the whole mein kampf thing was largely just rhetoric... or, they just didn't care, so long as they got the government contracts.
This is my sig.
The world would be no poorer if there were no idiot politicians looking to gain fame and control the masses, and leveraging the bodies of the recently deceased to do it.
Neither the US nor the UK have ever gone off the rails like Germany, so they're doing something right.
Actually, the UK did go off the rails. You just aren't that familiar with their history. Just read up on Oliver Cromwell, and maybe read some Irish web sites on what they feel about him.
Given its history, Germany has a special obligation to avoid fascist tendencies.
Assuming that we ourselves cannot become fascists, communists or some other radical party is the surest way to slip down to just that level of madness. The lesson of Germany is that we all have to police ourselves.
This is my sig.
Thanks for the link. What about computer games though?
It seems a double standard if a film set in WW2 is "art" but a game set in WW2 isn't - or is it that they are both okay, and the OP was incorrect?
This makes me think of comedian David Cross's joke about Hitler and what violent video games he played. I'll preface my main post with this: I'm not German but my wife is, and I've spent quite a bit of time in Germany over the past few years. That doesn't make me an expert, but I have observed a lot about their culture through talking with people, being there, and just simply paying attention to what goes on there.
What amazes me is that for a country that has contributed some of the important art and intellectual works across all spectrum, they are so willing to sacrifice certain rights for a perceived sense of freedom. I get into arguments with my wife all the time about censorship, and like most people (even here in the US), as long as it doesn't directly affect them, they don't care. I've often said that it's easy to sacrifice another man's freedom. Sacrifice gun rights, freedom of speech and press, expression, religion, just as long as the right being given up doesn't affect me. I guess I expected more out of Germany.
I'm so sick of the whole violent video game debate. I'm having flashbacks to the 80s when I was a young metalhead, and watching Tipper Gore and the PMRC blame metal music for society's ills! You can make statistics prove anything. The fact is that the problem is not epidemic. Millions of people all over the world play violent video games. If there really was some direct correlation to playing games and real violence, we would have mass chaos and destruction due to the sheer number of people playing games. It's a lame, knee-jerk reaction to explain complex problems. I guess it's easier to blame serious problems on video games than on the real problems that cause violence on a mass scale: ethnic disputes, religion, etc. People have taken the old "Devil made me do it" argument and put a new spin on it: TV and movies made me do it, DnD made me do it, metal music made me do it, and now video games made me do it. What is the percentage of people that commit real acts of violence and play video games? Is violence something new? Did man just become violent in the last 30 years or so?
I don't want to put all of the blame on Germany. There are other countries that do the same - Australia, for one (I lived there!). As an American (and as an artist), the idea of censorship is repulsive to me. I've grown up cherishing and respecting my constitutional rights, and when I see people in foreign countries (modern and democratic countries) so willing to give up their rights, I'm shocked.
Ok guys. Here's the secret... Violent people (read: people with a tendency towards violence) do violent things. People with violent tendencies are DRAWN to more violent forms of entertainment. This is not to say that the form of entertainment is the cause. Millions of people around the world do not kill people the day after they play CS:S. I am also not saying that just because you have violent tendencies that playing CS:S or watching "Silence of the Lambs" or "Halloween" will cause you to go out and shoot, eat, or stab people. The people that do stuff like this are simply violent due to some freak coincidental chain of events that happened in their lives and the choices they made to cope with those events. Parents need to teach their children how to cope with stuff going wrong... But even if they fail that responsibility, it doesn't warrant the person committing such acts to do so. Nor does it warrant the government to ban these forms of entertainment for the general public. (Or people "targeted with violent tendencies" for that matter.)
Look, the whole world culture is becoming more violent when compared to - say - the 1950s.
However, violent crime and violent deaths are actually decreasing.
I think it signals something deeply wrong with our culture, but it's interactivity alone does not single it out as threshold behavior.
Oh, please, get real. Most families used to slaughter animals to eat. There used to be public executions using unimaginably horrific and inhumane ways of killing. A large fraction of young men would go to war and kill and see killing first hand. As for violent stories, just look at the Old Testament: rape, torture, murder, genocide, it's all there.
Our culture is tame both in our experiences and in our actions.
when will someone start blaming the parents?
parents are responsible for instilling the mores and ethics in their child.
seems that they have failed at that and at claiming responsibility for said child.
Before video games were invented, Germans didn't murder people.
(j/k)
Gotta blame something, right?
There goes my "violent" life as a druid in Germany... Or maybe I can become a wizard, but oh well, that's too violent too, cuz you can become that in Germany as well. ** heh **
Obviously gun bans don't eliminated crime - but surely you can't claim they don't help at all.
Killer running amok in shopping center with automatic assault weapon vs. killer running amok in shopping center with bare hands. Nah, no difference at all!
"The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames."
Said the man who trains to kill for a profession. Aren't police simulators basically violent videogames (or "worse")? Isn't he effectively calling for an end to police training? Why can't videogames train defenders and tender warriors as well as they could train murderous villains? How many of the cops on this man's police force also play Counter-Strike and Far Cry? Did it turn them into serial killers or mass murderers?
Well how about we just go and ban killing altogether then? ban the movies, ban tv, ban the internet, can we ban history? Sure lets ban history! Lots of death and killing in that vile thing called history! I mean someone went mad last week and killed 3 people and you know what? I heard he had a history exam yesterday! By this dumb-ass logic we can then assume that history classes cause you to go on a killing spree with their terrible content.
Wouldn't that just them a bunch of obese violent bread eaters?
That's weird, because I've seen plenty of swastikas in history class and school books.
Also, you can see it frequently in movies or documentaries. This one even features a swastika quite prominently on its poster.
Ban is not the solution of everything. There are more ways to sort it out. I am agree with Cornwallis. It sounds like plan or something.
From
Samantha
www.dvds-online-rental-review.com
It's time for someone to go on a killing spree with a "I want my video games back" T-Shirt.
They also cancelled an Electronic Sports League (ESL) LAN event in Stuttgart. It was never easier to see who's a bad politician.
Will "killergames" be allowed if they change them so that you're not killing simulated human beings? I.e., if a German version of Grand Theft Auto comes out with the city set to one full of zombies or robots, will that be OK?
This is not without precedent; apparently the German version of Wolfenstein was changed to involve evil space aliens, because depictions of Nazis are illegal in Germany.
I don't think grinding wow gold affects the thinking of a player and turn him into a devil to do such crime. If they want, they can implement psychiatric test every 2 mos. to check if the player's mind is stable or not.
You say there is no conclusive link. Do you know what that means? It means that no link has YET been proven. Not that a link does not exist.
There was no conclusive proof the earth was around until men circum navigated the globe, after all it could have been a half sphere.
Right now nobody wants to burn their fingers on this. It is very telling that the institutions you cite say what they say. No conclusive proof, this translates as "we found no link but also no conlusive proof there isn't one and so we are going to be safe because if we say there is no link and someone proofs us wrong we are going to get our asses sued off".
You say there is no way... Proof or is that what you want to believe?
Me? I know this. I know that the music from jaws can make a harmless scene threathening. That a heartrending scene with the humpa band in the background becomes comic. I know that music can play my hearth, my emotions, my feelings, at will. We all know this. Get on a bike, born to be wild and try to control that throttle.
Porn makes us horny, comedy happy, romance sappy. So why violence not violent?
That you and me might not take it to the next level does not mean it does not affect us. So don't claim it doesn't.
The real question we should ask ourselves is this: Do we wish to limit the majority because of the failings of a minority?
X Y. X drinks and drives == Y can't drink. Is that what we want? Looking at anti-smoking laws, some would say so. X smokers can't behave and not be drug users in public so all smokers are banned. There is even a proposal to ban smoking by young parents, just because a minority has to light up over the cradle.
1 gamer goes on a killing spree, but is not joined by millions of other killer game players. Do the math, stop looking for a scapegoat, Germany. He was a homocidal maniac. 'Nuff said.
Fat people drink Pepsi MAX. Pepsi MAX should be bannet because it is obvious that Pepsi MAX is to blame.
It was only a matter of time before another total nutjob stood up to take his place as the anti-gaming figurehead, really. I'm just surprised it took this long.
the kid was mobbed by his class and his teachers.
That's why he went to his former school to kill his harassers.
In total he played 10 minutes of FPS as shows his online counter.
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
...eliminate the rather ominous-sounding position of "Minister of Social Affairs".
I am sure we can blame the Crusades on video games also.
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
There are many correlations between violence and other things. Studies have shown that 97% of all people who participate in school shootings are wearing pants at the time. Contact your government representatives and get them to ban wearing pants in school!
the truth is that the german shooter was suffering from sudden withdrawal syndrome from antidepressants
according to german police "Kretschmer had been receiving psychological treatment for depression, but according to the police, he had recently abandoned his therapy."
if u suddenly cease to take antidepressants you might experience psychotic behaviour
big pharma covered this up in the news
and the videogames industry is being made into a scapegoat
see this link for similar cases
http://uniteforlife.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/facts-on-recent-school-shooters-taking-antidepressants/
The world would be no poorer if there were no more Police Union Chiefs!
Yeah, I know: we're all tired of idiots saying "I blame society."
However, for smart children, this society is a mess. It has no goals. It suffocates us in platitudes (equality, generosity, compassion) while forcing us into a life of conformity to very basic aims, like money and popularity. While all this public bloviation goes on, commerce destroys everything good by turning it into a lowest common denominator product. The smart kids see this; everyone else is oblivious.
From my reading of the documents that school shooters like Jeff Weise, Eric Harris/Dylan Klebold, and Pekka-Eric Auvinen leave behind, this more than anything else is their motivation: our society is a monstrous hypocrite that has lost direction, and because it cannot face that, we all serve in boredom and frustration.
Futurist Traditionalism
What video game shall we blame for Adolf Hitler's actions?
(Oh, that's right. VIDEO GAMES weren't invented yet!!!)
The human mind is the greatest weapon ever created, plain and simple. Because the German police have lost touch with reality and decided to be patrol officers instead of being active in their society, what that teenager did was ALLOWED to happen.
"The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames."
Actually, I was thinking about the fact that the videogame / entertainment industry is one of the bright spots in the world economy during our current recession. So in a very REAL sense, the world WOULD be poorer.
So there Herr Killinzejoyyen.
The Digital Sorceress
Far Cry 2(the other mentioned in the article) had 3 million sales by January. It would be interesting to see more detailed statistics on ownership but when you are talking about populations of that size: 0.0000238% is probably going to be FAR below average on convicted murderer occurrences. Murder happened at a rate of 7.6 victims/100,000 people in 2004 worldwide. Seems like you would have more random occurrences that in multiple millions of people especially if it was a root or even largely contributing factor.
Hey Chief,
He ( the game ) didn't kill the victim,
He ( the purp ) did !
Some folks kill other folks over money,
want to ban money ?
Some folks kill other folks because of something that was said,
want to ban speech ?
etc etc...
The game did not hire this person to kill anyone. The game did not tell this person to kill anyone.
The game is JUST a game.
It is a persons duty to be civil to others. Period.
Stop blaming the games, or the gun, or the bow and arrow, or the knife, or the tire iron, and just arrest the person(s) who shed their morals and civility to do harm to another. That's the job, just do it.
And let's keep the blame squarely where it belongs, ok ?
There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause comedy in the streets?
-- Dick Cavett, mocking the TV-violence debate
Every time something horrible like this happens (and 15 people, many of which children/teens, losing their lives is indeed horrible), you can expect over-zealous politicians, police or others to pop up all over the place, calling for banning of either Internet, Games, etc ...
And why? Easy!
First of all, they want to be seen as somebody who is "actively" doing something ... (with most people not understanding that the only thing being done is talking, bot taking care of the problem). With several elections due this year in Germany, this way of producing themselves is even more probable ...
Then, calling for ban of $random will always be easier than calling for actually doing something to fix the actual cause ... which, in this (and probably most/all cases) is taking care of a psychologically sick kid decently, and/or kicking the parents for not taking the time to care for their child(ren) ... sure, it's easier to let the TV and computer take care of them instead of spending time yourself ...
I always love how they target violent video games as the source of gun violence.. Maybe they should put into perspective that kids who are violent and have used, own or handled guns enjoy the excitement/rush they get out of playing games such as Counterstrike or other "shoot'em" games? That would also make sence... no?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have written about this problem several times. It is not the game but a little known feature of human physiology, Subliminal Distraction,.Explained in first semester psychology the problem was solved forty years ago.
Several mass shooters had this problem. I have written the two investigating officers in Germany to ask that they look for this problem.
Look on the Werner Erhard, Redlake school shooting, and Atlanta Day Trader, Mark Barton page at VisionAndPsychosis.Net
At least they stopped blaming heavy metal bands for this sort of thing. *sigh*
Someone needs to send this nitwit a letter containing only the words post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Apparently the shooter's computer was also full of violent porn. I'm looking forward to Germany banning that, as well!
Yes I did. Why do you ask?
Basically my reply asks this question:
- Isn't buying a violent game entirely your own choice?
And posits the following:
- If you buy a game that is based on some form of violence, then you shouldn't be surprised to find violence.
I omitted a question - though I swear I did write it, must have gotten lost in deleting a part of my post to concatenate things a bit:
- What games have you played where you have found the violence 'too much' for your taste?
His post doesn't already address these issues.
He states that people who want to shoot pixels should be allowed to do so and the gov't should stay out of it. That doesn't say anything about how he believes that developers could do with adding a little less violence because he doesn't like it very much in "his games". Hence the question that I omitted.
It also doesn't say anything about whether or not it is one's own free choice to decide on a game, or whether violence is something that one should expect in a 'shooter'... and if one doesn't like violence, thus shouldn't buy a 'shooter' game.
Thanks for asking, though - hopefully I've clarified my post and hopefully GP will be able to reply better :)
Censorship is only going to make these psycho's more creative. But that real censorship isn't going to happen: If you're banning the inspiration for these types of shootings why not ban the media, it's obvious the inspirating here were other school-shootings.
@Sackvillian: The subject matter and it's discussion are stale rather than empirical: Is featured violence/porn etc Aristotle's catharsis or is it Plato's mimesis. In other words does explicit imagery clean the soul, washing out emotions or do people embrace the imagery and act it out.
"The world would be no poorer if there were no more killergames." Similarly, the world would be no poorer if there were no more guns.