Slashdot Mirror
Dungeons & Dragons and the Ethics of Imaginary Violence (hopesandfears.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Are people just naturally inclined to be destructive when there aren't any real consequences? Should we be worried about people who imagine such violence? Writer Clem Bastow spoke to D&D experts, psychologists and others to answer these questions. It turns out that playing out violent fantasies in D&D is not only healthy, but could even teach players how to be a better person. “Rather than playing an extension of who you or I are within the game, I see it more as playing a fantasy character who can do whatever they want, and who doesn’t feel inhibited by social anxiety or fear of punishment or rejection. It’s an exaggerated version of how [the player] would like to be, but can’t. The game is a safe way to be this other person,” says Clinical psychologist and games designer Dr. Owen Spear.
But every time I played it, it broke down with inevitable real life fights and arguments.
Will still get parroted by the press - whether it's D&D or GTA or Halo.
Tuesday evenings are usually our AD&D nights. Last session, we met some friendly halflings. Later, we encountered them fighting a bunch of monsters and without question, we jumped into the fight trying to help the halflings. Turns out the halflings had been hunting for these monsters, which were just minding their own business.
Whoops. Since I'm a priest, my god will probably not like it. Now I have to figure out how to make it up :)
I'm almost 40, but since we picked up AD&D with some colleagues, I almost never skip a gaming night. It is sooo much fun!
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
If you have an issue with people using graph paper and pencils to pretend to kill magical creatures no one can see in a world all players agree is a shared fantasy, I hope you remain ignorant of the degree of photo-realistic violence video games have been achieved in the last twenty years.
Table-top role-playing games are fine. No harm there. It's all in the head, after all.
But computer games? Whoa! Hold on there. That's far too violent.
Ask me about repetitive DNA
Dungeons & Dragons...
Cool - hopefully it'll be...
Oh shit - here we go again.
This wasn't especially news in the 80s during the "Satanic Panic" years, and it's far less news now. Peer reviewed studies were done then, showing that roleplaying games build social and problem solving skills. There's nothing new or obscure here.
There are lots of ways to play, play as an extension of yourself, play as someone you might wish to be if you weren't constrained in some way, play seriously as someone you would never wish to be, play as a parody of someone you would never wish to be. It is fine to have a mental shortcut to understanding why people might play but understand also it may not be fully representative.
Paper D&D is in the past Video games have more stuff.
heroes of might and magic was and still is fun.
Offtopic, but WTF is the point of shit like http://amzn.to/1NQpuYW ?
D&D board games? Isn't D&D supposed to be roll-your-own type shit?
I've never played, but I think if I did I'd be seriously offended at the idea of a board game version.
If you ever encounter someone who insists on banning some form of media because it supposedly causes those who consume it to become violent/sexist/etc., say that you wholeheartedly agree with them and ask when they will be banning the Bible (or better yet Quran) as that's been responsible for all sorts of violence/sexism/etc. It seems that most of the people who try to make an argument in favor of banning media for such reasons are either religious-hardliner nut-jobs from the Christian conservative camp that will flip shit at the thought of any attack on their Jeebus or wacko authoritarian cultural-Marxist leftists who would never want to appear to say anything bad about Islam.
The mental contortions that follow are spectacular to watch.
I enjoyed playing D&D during undergrad. My wife wasn't much for it so it has fallen by the wayside. Her family is super into sports and I've picked up enjoying the games of a particular college team. You know what I've found out from her family: enjoying watching sports is almost exactly the same thing as playing a tabletop RPG. You get together with people you know. You learn a lot of statistics and rules. You argue or discuss different decisions with them and complain about the officiant. You snack and probably drink together. You pick up a lot of obscure trivia as you go along. Everyone enjoys themselves enough to do it on a regular basis.
Commentary on D&D by a Dr. Spear? That's a pretty suspicious last name, if you ask me.
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
Oh I forgot to add, just because you didn't enjoy the system that you shared with the group doesn't mean the hobby is out. I can't stand baseball unless my son is playing, but my in-laws just eat and breathe it.
So the relatively new indie fad PC game Undertale makes some pretty interesting statements in this arena. It gives the player every chance to kill monsters along their path, but puts you in a world that is reasonably shocked and horrified if you actually do that. I've never seen a game so expertly make me feel guilty for resorting to violence instead of searching for another path, and it's pretty emotionally rewarding to finish a pacifist run. If you go the other way, it bends the fourth wall to explore the motivation behind a serial murderer.
It's not impossible. Cults, addictive drugs, new children, 12 step programs all can create massive changes in personality.
Note the only one of those events that doesn't require a massive willing, commitment, intention and effort on the participant is drugs, and well that's why they call it 'addictive'.
Violent games are not biologically addictive. Withdrawal does cause physical symptoms. It does not alter the brain chemistry.
There is no commitment, intention or effort to change your behavior in real life, and thus you get no direct effect.
But as always, people that previously have inclinations toward violence do prefer violent games of all types to non-violent ones.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
The imagination is still far more accurate than any game, or movie for that matter, both in graphics, details and mood.
And that is why it needs to be protected.
D&D does cause violence. I want to punch people who play D&D.
I don't respond to AC's.
Arguably, the most 'deviant' thing about generic D&D, as played by those who have never bothered to go beyond the Tolkien Convention on Hackneyed Absolutist Morality, isn't the relatively unexciting amount of destruction that happens; it's the game's moral framework:
You've got 'Good' and 'Evil' and those just are. Most NPCs will have little or no development that explains why they fall into a given category; but that's just how Orks are(PCs, especially clerics and paladins, will typically be called upon to adhere to a few more rules). Want to kill some people and take their stuff? Are they evil? What more reason do you need? Smite the bastards.
Obviously, this excessively hackneyed version has been improved, modified, actively subverted, etc. numerous times; but it's still a pretty common lazy default. Who needs guilt or innocence, 'motivation' or 'diplomacy' when there are Just Evil things to massacre? There's a fun spoof RPG ruleset that does a pretty good job of skewering this sort of D&D play style "Violence: The Game of Egregious and Repulsive Bloodshed". Not actually very playable; but a good read. Plus, what other RPGs have rules that specifically address how to roll to see whether your attempt to interrogate someone with a belt sander is successful or not?
You also get higher verbal/word scores on the SAT ... enough that there have been studies about it.
At least D&D players don't assume you want to subsidize their enthusiasm for choreographed violence on your monthly cable bill.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
During elementary/middle school, I had a DM who was well educated, and part of the campaigns were dealing with various things other than hack/slash/loot. A few examples:
1: As a traveller, how do you behave in a plutarchy versus a benevolant dictatorship, versus a theocracy (especially as a cleric), versus a monarchy? One mistake and you will be doing an "escape from prison" subcampaign.
2: Sailing a ship. How do you set up a clock, how do you navigate by a sextant? Guess wrong, TPW (total party wipeout.) Then there are logistics of sea battles, convincing a place you are about to land that you are not hostile, etc.
3: Map navigation/cartography.
4: Ramifications of combat. The party takes out the orc tower and goes their merry way. Well, said tower is empty, and now becomes a home for very nasty bandits. The party brings tons of treasure into a town (causing an economic boom), then when the party moves on, there is a subsequent bust, and the town now hates the party, sending assassins to bump them off.
5: Dealing with things with various history and likes/hates. Make friends with the local naga, as opposed to killing them, they may have info which can be very useful later on. Challenge the orc chieftain to non-lethal combat and win, the orc citadel now is a trading post, as opposed to just XP.
6: Religions and fanaticism.
7: When to use an aphorism versus an axe.
A good DM is rare, but I learned more about political parties and government oppression from AD&D campaigns than I ever learned in school.
In what universe where Spock has a beard... does an IT guy:
- Play golf
- Enjoy football
I grant you the wife and kids, assuming you're old enough that the young people don't respect you (>5 year difference in age).
The college degree is hit or miss; if you were hired out of college without finishing the degree to be a cubicle warmer, and have been too well paid subsequently to go back, you probably won't have the degree still. Otherwise, generally you don't hire self-taught people if they have to work on a team, wo it's a mix of haves/have nots there.
I saw a comic recently comparing Fantasy Football with D&D, there really isn't much difference.
http://www.myneworleans.com/Bl...
https://www.google.com/search?...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
http://www.chick.com/reading/t...
"Intense occult training through D&D prepared Debbie to accept the invitation to enter a witches' coven"
If only I understood the dangers before I started playing! Pretty sure my DM isn't nearly this cool.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Stop trying to cloud the issue with scientific studies and hate facts.
I play a gnome and love showers. I honestly look at people who are like "I shower every other day" and am like....you mean you have an abundant supply of hot water and don't shower every single day? Life is too short to not experience such delight as often as possible.
other than that.... um yah pretty much; except, I am married too....cept my wife is also a geek/gamer who plays D&D with me.
As for escapism? Lol, compared to who? You mean fantasy football fanatics are not engaged in escapism? Lol we call it "D&D for Mundanes".
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
If your players have no fear of punishment, or rejection if they decide to do unethical things they they are doing it wrong. Murdering the black smith for his weapons is basically asking the DM to write you a ticket to abusive DM land.
Because he's a moral fraud. And gun control has nothing to do with D&D or violence prevention for that matter.
I have seen first hand what damage D&D can wreck on unsuspecting kids.
All-of-a-sudden they get confused. They hear you talk of a game and yet there is no screen to see the game. Then they talk about some RPG games for a computer or console and don't understand how you can do something better with pen, paper and dice.
You begin by describing an alien world that exists only in the mind with a user interface that looks very different to facebook. At this point most compeltely give up...but some are susceptible to imagination and abstract thought and begin to imagine.
Before you know it they start blaspheming and talking about "gods" and pretending to be characters with divine-like powers that do away with rulers or anyone they do not like. Stealing, brutal executions, piracy, killing make-believe flying lizards for this thing they keep chanting like crazed monks "loot".
Piece by piece these kids become attached to their characters, and their character's flying horses or wands of wonder (which only makes sense if you're on crack; possibly a gateway drug) and the inevitable happens. That DM guy explain how something that makes no sense makes sense and your character dies, or you have the easiest battle except all your rolls are utter shit and that fucker DM keeps rolling 18, 19 and 20 and well your character dies because of that DM. (It's always him, he sets the penalties, sets the encounters, the monster actions, even the dice choice to randomly select who gets attacked and then the dice choice to randomly select how many attacks and even the damage, all that asshat's fault) and well...then your character is dead.
When little Timmy's character dies you know this game is evil. He was already socially rejected, isolated, alone, possibly with acne and braces...but when that character dies Timmy seriously loses his shit in the worst way.
Crying, anger, death threats, promises to succumb to the dark side and what not. It's ugly.
All I can say Timmy is that when you chet your DM on the dice roles one day he finds out. One day your level 16 expert theif slips during climbing and rolls downhill being unable to break the fall. He falls, hitting extremely sharp rocks on the way down following the natural curve in the mountain side he falls down a creek (yes on that unexplored side of the mountain and no it's not a creek that;s on the map cause it's too fucking small) and because of momentum he reaches the waterfall...AND FALLS...falling down and hitting some more rockas on the cascading waterfall he struggles to breathe as the current takes him...and washing him down another 8 fucking waterfalls. Yes, with very sharp rocks. Then the very thing that caused your expert climber thief to fall becomes apparent when he finally grabs on to some bush as he gasps for air being mortally wounded and bleeding but just in the real of the living. A loud, low rumble of the impending earthquake that sees half the mountain side come crashing down on you. CRASHING DOWN ON YOU TIMMY! FOLLOWED BY LIGHTNING BOLTS AND METEORS THAT HIT TAHT SMAE SPOT WHERE YOU ARE BECAUSE ALL YOUR MAGICAL ITEMS HAVE CREATED A POSITIVE CHARGE SO STRONG THAT THE AIR CANNOT ISOLATE YOU FROM THE NEGATIVE CHARGE INTHE ATMOISPHERE AND WHE NTHAT SHIT GETS ELECTRIFIED IT CAUSES A HORRENDOUS WAND OF WONDER MAGNETIC ATTRACTION TO NEAR FAERUN ASTEROIDS. YOU'RE DEAD. A SPLATTER CRISP OF A CINDER DEAD. BEYOND RESURRECTION AS THERE IS NOTHING TO RESSURECT. THE SMASHING AND ELECTROCUTION OF ALL YOUR MAGICAL GREAT CREATES A RIFT THAT SUCKS THAT PORTION AND WHATEVER REMAINS THERE ARE INTO THE NEGATIVE ELEMNTAL PLANE. THAT SORTA DEAD DEAD.
Sure that might be hard to imagine but just look what happen to Hitler when his character died; https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
So is D&D dangerous? -you decide. Just a word of advice, don't do the thing your DM hates the most and then keep it a secret and then amke it an inside joke in the group cause th
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
As a life-long tabletop gamer, I've found that Shadowrun tends to reward players who do not resort to violence. In D&D, your rewards generally come from killing monsters in the form of experience points and loot. Shadowrun on the other hand, rewards players for completing the mission. How the mission is completed is largely up to the team. In fact, sometimes violent actions in organized play can adversely affect your reward. The game actually has a reward called karma that can be spent on upgrading.
This difference between D&D and SR was made clear to me after completing a long-slog of a mission with a ton of combat. The GM said the previous group burned through the mission pretty quickly, had slightly better rewards at the end, and they never fired a shot. Incredulous, I asked how they accomplished this. The GM said the previous group simply negotiated with the hostiles...who in fact, weren't really hostile. They were just reacting to our aggression. I didn't expect that to be written into the module. If you want an RPG that teaches you violence isn't always the best solution, Shadowrun is a good one.
That said, the flaw my D&D Goliath Fighter exhibits is, "Violence is my answer to almost any challenge." and charisma is my dump stat. Peace is overrated!
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
"Quozl", Alan Dean Foster: An alien race claiming to be totally non-violent . . . turns out they use complete simulation technology to be ULTRA-violent in privacy, and get it out of their systems. One of the arguments in favor of playing violent fantasy and/or video games. Problem is, in real life, some people will find it a substitute and some will find it an incentive.
It turns out that playing out violent fantasies in D&D is not only healthy
Well, no, it doesn't "turn out" that way. You've got an expert who asserts this, but that doesn't make it fact.
I'll be the first one to defend D&D and other role playing games (got my dice taken away in school numerous times). I'd never call them "unhealthy." But I really don't like the way people assert opinion as if it were objective truth.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
A lazy platitude that is virtually the polar opposite of reality.
This wasn't about the ethics of D&D. This was one person's opinion about how alignment should be handled in an RPG, presented as factual, objective instructions.
For the fun of it - and countering his /suggestions/ - how about these definitions:
"Alignment is how you treat everyone who is not in your party." ... and to counter individual suggestions about the impact of alignment:
"Alignment is a rough pigeonholing of your moral and philosophical outlook, used to qualify for magic spells and effects, and can change on a day-to-day basis based on your actions or justifications for actions, but should restrict you in no way - it's a classification, not an attribute."
"Alignment is a silly thing, and it's implementation is overly restrictive, making it difficult to role play realistic, complex characters. So we're not using it in this campaign."
There's no need to make every crime result in moral reflection or in-game (negative) consequences - this is a game, for entertainment, not explicitly a forum for ethical reformation.
It's okay to have a world with full populations of cartoonish, evil beings and villainous stereotypes who can be abused in a number of ways, with joy and abandon.
Since the goal is fun, you can have fun 'beating the game' without even descending into roleplaying, much less worrying about how an arbitrary classification is supposed to straight-jacket your player into behaving in a single, stereotypical way.
They spend far too much time in town bartering for supplies, crafting items, and decorating / renovating their keep.
I'd ask what the fuck you are talking about, but I somehow expect that any answer you might give would be equally incomprehensible,
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Well, there's a difference. CounterStrike puts you in a situation where killing is your only option. Choosing to play the game might be a moral decision, but it stops there. Tabletop RPGs put you in worlds where (depending on the GM) there may be many non-lethal solutions, and choosing to resort to violence above other choices is more morally meaningful while you're playing.
Wow... I wasn't expecting to be actually proven right.
Thanks for that.
Oh, and I'm not Jewish.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
There's a lot of different RPGs out there. Of course it depends on the group, but there's a lot of them that are designed to be less combat-y. The World of Darkness games (for all their flaws) often turn out that way, and sure they might be mostly the purview of whiny teenagers, but there's a lot of existential stuff and plotlines that focus on defining who you are and what your place in the universe is. Many of them outright punish you for killing people (without a very good reason) by tying immoral actions to some kind of sanity mechanic. And yeah, while settings like Vampire and Changeling: the Lost have plenty of characters who go around abusing their powers and murdering as they see fit, the PCs are usually the ones trying to reduce the amount of violence in the world, trying to make it more safe for art, philosophy and love. Even if they can't be a part of that world themselves and oh hey now we're back to the whiny teenager part. Also a big emphasis on telling a good story over "winning"; tragic failures are encouraged, which also means more introspection. In any case it's pretty common for an entire session to go by with no combat. ...and then there's Werewolf, but even in that straight-up power fantasy I swear people are twice as moral as your average "lawful good" D&D character. Seems like the setting is better at keeping people accountable for their actions. The bad guys may be irredeemable, but letting violence spill over into the mundane human world just helps the bad guys' cause. I think it's my favorite WoD setting, it's just a good balance overall, as long as you're willing to houserule stuff to simplify the dice-heavy combat.
I think it helps that D&D is one of actually very few tabletop RPGs that ties character progression to killing stuff. GMs that award experience points for advancing the plot instead of killing monsters tend to encourage way less violent games.
Sorry, but that argument is a straw man at best. FPS games can actually also put you into a moral decision. In P&P games it depends on your GM. Yes. In FPS games, it depends on the FPS game. FPS games don't necessarily put you in a situation where killing is your only option, just like GMs don't have to. And likewise in both scenarios you might CHOOSE a violent option.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You like golf? Dude, don't call yourself normal. No normal or at least sane person could like that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Why do we let so many "abnormal" people play "real life"? That answer might actually make you a better person to ponder.
Mostly because my lawyer informed me that it's illegal to keep them from doing it...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The word you are probably meaning to use is "atypical", not "abnormal".
If you don't want to be downmodded, I strongly recommend investing in a thesaurus.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
SJWs need to go pound sand... somewhere far away. Seriously, STFU. We're tired of your crap.
What are you hoping to accomplish by spamming the same four offtopic replies to every post the GP makes?
I think he reinvented kibozing, 25 years too late. (Much like his hosts file.)
I find it very different. Watching sports is very passive, sure you talk to others and learn stats and what not, but all that knowledge is passive. When you roleplay you explore ideas and concepts. Sure, some games are more comedy with friends and is more about just having fun, but other games are challenges that people collaborate, plan and execute complex ideas. I would say it's more like playing a sport in those games, by which I mean mental team sport, because each person can have their role on the 'field'.
A day is 4 facets of Nature's Harmonic 4-Dimensional Time Cube, you are educated stupid to deny it, world leaders are in conspiring to prevent you from knowing the truth. I'm not sure if we're speaking the same language, but this is the closest I can get.
See how well you do in a dungeon crawl the GM set up for hacky-slashy gameplay if you don't use violence. And how likely you will get kicked out of a Payday game where the players tried to sneak the heist if you go in with blazing guns.
It all depends on the setting, that's the whole point.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You don't have to play DM. There is CTF too, where you just have to be sneaky.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
Dude, you have some serious issues ...
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
This is a genuine question APK, and not a dig - do you have autism or asperger's syndrome? You behave in a very unusual way, tracking all these things people have said to you and pasting them back into conversations weeks and months after the fact. I'm just curious about what motivates you.
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
"Because he's a moral fraud. And gun control has nothing to do with D&D or violence prevention for that matter."
Seriously?... gun control has nothing to do with violence prevention? (that is subject to SERIOUS debate)... and you claim HIM to be the moral fraud.. from what I'm reading he was 100% correct. especially when Im modded as flame bait simply for agreeing and you calling someone a "moral fraud" is modded as insightful. Clearly no bias there.
(that is subject to SERIOUS debate)...
So? I was just making an observation about the lack of correlation between presence of guns and violence. For example, US society is more violent than Swiss society, but they have similar levels of gun ownership.
from what I'm reading he was 100% correct.
About what? What wolf are we feeding with responsible gun ownership and fun D&D? I bet it's not the rabid wolf Mr. AC was thinking of.
moral decision [...] more morally meaningful
When there is no harm, there is no morality. If it doesn't matter what you choose, then it's not more moral or less moral.
(that is subject to SERIOUS debate)...
So? I was just making an observation about the lack of correlation between presence of guns and violence. For example, US society is more violent than Swiss society, but they have similar levels of gun ownership.
Let me add to your information... "The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. The personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of the military obligations. However, it is generally not permitted to keep army-issued ammunition, but compatible ammunition purchased for privately owned guns is permitted. At the end of military service period the previously used gun can be converted to a privately owned gun after a weapon acquisition permit has been granted (fully automatic weapons will be rebuilt into semi-automatic ones)."
So if you want there here in the U.S. by all means... instead of a gun in every bubble gum machine, there's serious regulation involved with gun ownership in switzerland.. the same thing that would be considered "grabbing guns" here in the U.S.
About what? What wolf are we feeding with responsible gun ownership and fun D&D? I bet it's not the rabid wolf Mr. AC was thinking of.
Oh so you admit it's about RESPONSIBLE gun ownership now... not JUST gun ownership? FYI, we don't have responsible gun ownership in the U.S... we have "gun nuts" and a God/Constitutional right to arm ourselves to the teeth pretty much regardless of training or credentials.... a recipe for .. drum roll... violence!
Let me add to your information...
So you do admit that there is a lack of connection between gun ownership and violence? Ok.
Oh so you admit it's about RESPONSIBLE gun ownership now... not JUST gun ownership? FYI, we don't have responsible gun ownership in the U.S... we have "gun nuts" and a God/Constitutional right to arm ourselves to the teeth pretty much regardless of training or credentials.... a recipe for .. drum roll... violence!
Gun ownership has always been about responsible gun ownership as you admit here. That doesn't have a thing to do with violence.
So you do admit that there is a lack of connection between gun ownership and violence? Ok."
No, just because you refuse to acknowledge it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist...
Gun ownership has always been about responsible gun ownership as you admit here. That doesn't have a thing to do with violence.
Nope... no it hasn't... it's been about the right to have a gun.. period (regardless of responsibility)... and there is a direct correlation between irresponsible gun ownership and violence.
No, just because you refuse to acknowledge it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist...
Which is a meaningless observation since it doesn't support your arguments at all.
Nope... no it hasn't... it's been about the right to have a gun.. period (regardless of responsibility)... and there is a direct correlation between irresponsible gun ownership and violence.
Which simply isn't true. Else we wouldn't have laws against negligent use or storage of firearms, much less laws against assault and murder with firearms.
Which is a meaningless observation since it doesn't support your arguments at all.
Which is about as meaningless to the argument was what you posted.....
Which simply isn't true. Else we wouldn't have laws against negligent use or storage of firearms, much less laws against assault and murder with firearms.
Your argument is that there is no correlation between gun ownership and violence..... ok, fine... please explain the cause of the massive gun violence rate in America and your solution for solving it...
please explain the cause of the massive gun violence rate in America and your solution for solving it...
There isn't massive gun violence in the US (it is merely a moderately higher rate than other countries). As for "solving" it, I would continue to enforce laws against violence - with or without guns.
I would also legalize most recreational drugs and other victimless crimes like gambling and prostitution. And finish with a rational immigration policy that provides a clear, prompt, and rather easy path to permanent residency in the US.
There isn't massive gun violence in the US (it is merely a moderately higher rate than other countries). As for "solving" it, I would continue to enforce laws against violence - with or without guns.
So basically you're saying.. "it's not happening and I wouldn't change anything" Again... just because you choose to bury your head in the sand about it doesn't mean that it isn't a real thing. The U.S. has a horrible gun violence rate, unless you're comparing it to 3rd world failed nations.. is that what you're doing?
I would also legalize most recreational drugs and other victimless crimes like gambling and prostitution. And finish with a rational immigration policy that provides a clear, prompt, and rather easy path to permanent residency in the US.
Just a point, prostitution is not a victimless crime, but like anything else it needs tight regulation in order for it to be closer to being a victimless crime.
am i a jew too? i think you're fucking insane as well.
This APK guy seems like he knows what he is talking about but he doesn't, i have gone through his posts and he just ignores any rational debate and spams his crap over and over.
maybe slashdot could blacklist his ip?