Slashdot Mirror
German Gov To Ban Paintballing After Shooting
whoever57 writes "In response to the school shooting in March in which 16 people were killed, the German Government
plans to ban all games in which players shoot at each other with pellets. The rationale for this is that 'paintball trivializes violence and risks lowering the threshold for committing violent acts.' Fines could be up to 5,000 euros."
Come on Germany, you used to be cool.
Haven't these people learned that they are just going to cause a much bigger problem then they are trying to solve? It saddens me to see how they are going after everything but the cause of it. Banning paintballing isn't going to solve a thing, stuff like this is still going to happen. Next thing you know they are going to try and ban all FPS games over there. Get to the root of the problem, not something they "think" is the cause.
This shows the gun registration laws work! If only we made it illegal to shoot people in the first place, all our problems would be solved. Oh wait...
This is sure to succeed, just like banning the swastika has completely removed any trace of right-wing hate groups in Germany.
Does the German government actually think that people learn violence from games? Violence is part of human instinct. We have evolved so that we have a tendency to hurt other people. No amount of censorship is going to fix that.
When I was 15 or so, I wanted to play paintball. My parents were initially resistant to the idea. They thought it was militant and would be a poor influence on me. I learned quickly that it's damned well easy to get shot and the welts those things leave don't let the memory fade. Rather than thinking, "Hey self, let's go join the army and shoot people for real," I thought "If those were real bullets, I'd be dead inside of 5 minutes along with all of my friends."
So, yes, I did learn a thing or two about taking down mansized targets with horribly inaccurate, slow moving projectiles with no ability to penetrate cover. What I also learned was that I am not invincible, I play by the same rules as everyone else, and I want to be nowhere near real bullets fired in anger.
Although I am naturally quite uneasy about a German government demanding such intrusive power over people's lives with the explicit purpose of shaping their very thoughts, I am pleased that at least they'll all be unarmed. The last time a German government went mad with power, their military might soon controlled most of Europe, deep into Russia, north Africa, the Atlantic... But if they no longer have any projectile weapons, next time they won't manage to conquer anyone except France!
Years later, I amused myself with computer games, including a fair number of first-person shooters. Spent many an enjoyable hour playing Descent and Quake 3. Descent with the PC hooked up to my stereo was awesome -- those fireballs on the screen looked pretty damn good, and, by God, the booming from the speakers was way cool.
I'm 44 now and haven't killed anyone yet, but who knows, eh, what kind of violent rage was set into motion by all that mock fighting, only waiting to turn me into a murderous monster like that kid in Winnenden, Germany? OMG, I'm a ticking time bomb!
*shakes head in disbelief*
Instead of (correctly) complaining that "correlation != causation" or "this won't work!!", could we use examples like these to promote science education?
Will banning paintball cause a decrease in school shootings? Did you know that's a scientifically tractable question?
When a tragedy like this occurs, the public demands a political reaction. More education on the only known way to get at causation - the scientific method - might cause people to demand political reactions that work.
Only realistic replicas are banned. The reason is obvious. When cops are pondering shooting at you, they can tell if your gun is a toy easily. Even if you were using a replica they would have no reason to believe it was.
If the nut holding up the bank is using a realistic-looking gun, kill him. Society becomes a better place whether the gun was actually real or not.
Fingers will be stumped, penises removed... You know.. to prevent the rapes and the sexual harassment..
Soon they'll find use for the banned sporks and start scooping out eyes from sockets at birth --- to prevent people from seeing things that they *might* interact with in ways that *might* have negative outcomes.
It will only end when The Matrix is fully developed so nobody can actually be harmed.
Ban fire, it won't save your house. Ban weed, millions don't give a shit. Ban guns, the innocent lose power to fight for their rights, criminals blow a line and move forward w/ guns like it never mattered.... Ban piracy, all your songs are now belong to soundcat.
Ban words, people still say them. Ban religion, like that would ever work... Ban skittles, some jerkoff with a recipe will *STILL* make them and teach his kids how to do it out of spite and our human nature to do whatever we truly want to do.
Ban meteors... Ban terrorism... Ban lies... Ban polygamy.... Ban swine flu.
I swear, you could ban Dick Flavored Pizza and somewhere, somehow, in S. Korea, a guy will get a pizza that tastes like a dick.
Banning paintball guns and airsoft won't bring 16 people back to life. I'm sure anyone involved wants to be noticed for caring (hence this stupid law idea)... But sometimes its ok to say 'such is life' and move on. Yes, bad things happen. Sympathize, accept, move on.
Just don't let all that emotion force you to forget to think.
Here's how it usually goes down with these situations, aside from the case where the person isn't a sociopath:
1) Guy gets marginalized and picked on.
2) School knows about it and does nothing.
3) Guy gets subjected to violence.
4) The authorities do nothing despite the basic fact that we know from common sense and scientific observation that eventually an organism will lash out in self-defense if not protected.
5) Guy may defend himself, at which rate the authorities will come down hard on him because as we all know "violence never solves anything."
6) The authorities will earnestly pat themselves on the back as guardians of civilization for having stopped a victim from exercising force in self-defense.
7) Guy lashes out with disproportionate force because pent up frustration made his temper 5x more explosive it would have been if causality had been allowed to run its course between the attackers and the victim.
8) The authorities will claim it couldn't have been stopped.
Violence solves things splendidly with bullies. In the early 1960s, victims of bullying were allowed to beat the shit out of the bully, and the authorities didn't even think about taking up for the bully unless it was so extreme as to be a violent crime.
You want less violent shootings? Let teenage boys shoot guns (real guns), play video games and beat the shit out of each other when one attacks the other. When violence usually brings more violence back on the perpetrator, people usually are less inclined to use violence. Violent people who are quick to use force are not wired like normal people, and the best way to restrain them is to create a culture that will respond to them violently when they act out.
Germany: Great Idea, control the population by restricting personal freedom. How did that work out for you in the past?
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Violent movies are just as dangerous.
Actually, movies are probably worse. They teach that the main character can kill dozens without getting a scratch. Airsoft and paintball teaches you that you suck with a gun. Which is more glamorous in the eyes of a downtrodden teen?
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Well politicians live in a fantasy world and don't acknolwedge that the realistic nature of paintball forces you to realize that if you were using a real gun that your life would be very short.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
When things are illegal, people who deal in them will use illegal means of dispute resolution, in part because those are the only ones available. If you and I have a business dispute over legal business and we just can't resolve it, well then one of us can take the other to court, and resolve it there. However if we are dealing in illegal business, we really can't be doing that since, well, we'd get arrested and all that. Thus violence is a more common means of resolution. Now when you have a large, and well funded empire going on, then the violence level increases that much more. You have the means to get lots of weapons, and the reason to use them.
Well legalization really does take that all away. The reason is that you just can't compete effectively with the legal businesses, unless you set up your own. If you try to run a business designed around the way you did it when things were illegal, you'll go broke.
I mean take alcohol as a good example. There is no widespread distribution of moonshine. That isn't to say there aren't people who don't occasionally make alcohol illegally (it is controlled and you have to pay taxes on it and such) but it is rare, and localized. There's no way to make any real money. After all customers won't come seeking you, since you aren't offering a unique product, you are offering something they can get at any Safeway. You can't distribute your product at retail centers, so no widespread sales. You can't charge a lot since the only thing you can offer is a lower price. Thus there's all of no money to be made on it illegally. You either go legit or you go out of business.
Now I'm not saying legalization doesn't have downsides, no action is without cost, but to argue that legalizing wouldn't reduce violence is stupid, and shows a massive ignorance of the prohibition in the US and basic economic realities. You get Philip Morris and the like in on selling drugs and you'll see the cartels dropping like flies.
Yes, another fine product of the current german government. And yes, I am german, so I'm allowed to whine (and yes, I'm trying to change things).
The problem is that the current government in Germany is made up of people who are either incompetent or insane, and sometimes both. And when I say "insane", I actually do mean that in a clinical psychological sense. Our minister of the interior, who is pushing law after law which are almost all later found to be unconstitutional, is suffering from PTSD. His medical records are kept a secret. This is the same guy who says that if you've got nothing to hide, you couldn't possibly be opposed to all the new surveilance measures. Go figure.
Our (female) minister for family, education, etc. is the bitch behind the "STOP" sign and DNS redirection to fight child porn. You know, the thing that does absolutely nothhing against actual child abuse, but only tries very weakly to stop the display of pictures of same (i.e. at least two layers of abstraction away from the actual event). If you've followed her story even a little, you also have to doubt whether she's perfectly sane or not.
The list goes on with ministers of finance who were personally involved with some banks that crashed and likely prevented investigations until liabilities for the former owners (their friends) had expired, a minister of transportation who's trying to sell the state train system, at about 10% of its estimated worth, and a prime minister who very strongly stands for ... nothing. I don't think anyone on the streets of Germany could tell you what she stands for, what her policies are, or what the heck she's doing at all.
So that's Germany in 2009. Not so much different from the US in 2008, even to the point that it is election year. Except that we don't have an Obama to promise change. So elections will be very interesting.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org