School Shooting Prompts Legislation To Study Violent Video Games
New submitter seepho writes "Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) has introduced a bill directing the National Academy of Sciences to lead an investigation to determine what impact violent video games have on children. Senator Rockefeller commented, 'Recent court decisions demonstrate that some people still do not get it. They believe that violent video games are no more dangerous to young minds than classic literature or Saturday morning cartoons. Parents, pediatricians, and psychologists know better. These court decisions show we need to do more and explore ways Congress can lay additional groundwork on this issue. This report will be a critical resource in this process.'"
This legislation was prompted by reports that Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza was a gamer. A draft of the bill is available online.
The shooter played Star Craft. Not a FPS, not some blood and gore style of game, but a strategy game. Its about as violent as chess (ok, it has a bit more blood then most chess games).
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
As a philosopher, I would assert that some pieces of classic literature can be very dangerous: children may learn how to think.
If you want to have a reasoned debate you cannot selectively use facts.
Wikipedia tells me that for the past five years, Switzerland has only permitted 2,000 of those with military issue weapons to store ammunition at home. Prior to that the ammunition was strictly audited. It's hard to kill using a gun with no bullets. Prior to 2007, the auditing requirement would make use of the weapon rare.
You also neglect to mention that the weapons are issued to civilians who have undergone military training. This is not like turning up at Walmart and buying a semi-automatic.
Comparing gun use in Switzerland to that in the US is like comparing chalk and cheese. Unless you're suggesting as a solution to gun crime that everyone of age should be conscripted to receive military training and the government should be allowed in private homes to audit your weapons?
If you want to have a reasoned debate you cannot selectively use facts.
Agreed, and that's a two way street:
Wikipedia tells me that for the past five years, Switzerland has only permitted 2,000 of those with military issue weapons to store ammunition at home.
From the article:
Re: selective use of facts - the article refers to government issued ammunition. Waffentragschein (gun permit) holders can still purchase (and, therefore, possess) non-government issue ammunition.
Pot, meet kettle.
You also neglect to mention that the weapons are issued to civilians who have undergone military training. This is not like turning up at Walmart and buying a semi-automatic.
I neglected to mention a lot of things, as they were non sequitur to the point I was making, and I'm not in the habit of needless pontification.
Regarding this point of yours, I personally believe proper training should be mandatory prior to allowing an individual to purchase any firearm.
Unless you're suggesting as a solution to gun crime that everyone of age should be conscripted to receive military training and the government should be allowed in private homes to audit your weapons?
I suggested no such thing - I will, however, recommend for future reference that you fully read and understand the premise of a post before you respond to it, thus assuring that your statements are at least relevant to the topic at hand.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Google is your friend.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/potential_connecticut_school_shooting_8HMOSbP38TXwSYYsVGkYLO
"Lanza used two handguns — a Glock and a Sig Sauer — and a .223-caliber assault rifle, an official said."