Slashdot Mirror
Trump's Meeting With The Video Game Industry To Talk Gun Violence Could Get Ugly (washingtonpost.com)
Anonymous readers share a report: President Trump is set to pit the video game industry against some of its harshest critics at a White House meeting on Thursday that's designed to explore the link between violent games [Editor's note: the Washington Post article may be paywalled], guns and tragedies such as last month's shooting in Parkland, Fla. Following the attack at Marjory Stoneman High School, which left 17 students dead, Trump has said violent games are "shaping young people's thoughts." The president has proposed that "we have to do something about maybe what they're seeing and how they're seeing it." Trump has invited video game executives like Robert Altman, the CEO of ZeniMax, the parent company for games such as Fallout; Strauss Zelnick, the chief executive of Take Two Interactive, which is known for Grand Theft Auto, and Michael Gallagher, the leader of the Entertainment Software Association, a Washington-focused lobbying organization for the industry.
Three people familiar with the White House's planning, but not authorized to speak on the record, confirmed those invitees. A spokeswoman for the White House declined to share a full list of participants on Wednesday. ESA confirmed its attendance this week, but the others did not respond to questions. Opposite of them are expected to be some of the video-game industry's toughest critics, including Brent Bozell, the founder of the Parents Television Council, and Rep. Vicky Hartzler, a Republican from Missouri, the three people said. After another shooting -- the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. -- they each called on government to focus its attention on violent media rather than just pursuing new gun restrictions.
Three people familiar with the White House's planning, but not authorized to speak on the record, confirmed those invitees. A spokeswoman for the White House declined to share a full list of participants on Wednesday. ESA confirmed its attendance this week, but the others did not respond to questions. Opposite of them are expected to be some of the video-game industry's toughest critics, including Brent Bozell, the founder of the Parents Television Council, and Rep. Vicky Hartzler, a Republican from Missouri, the three people said. After another shooting -- the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. -- they each called on government to focus its attention on violent media rather than just pursuing new gun restrictions.
FFS, editors should really check that there are no âoes in the posts.
The meeting shouldn't be any more interesting than the Take Two Interactive and the Entertainment Software Association showing the studies that violent video games do not increase violence, and then everyone else sticking their thumbs up their asses. Then again I doubt it will go that way.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
that's designed to explore the link between violent games [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled],
The link between violent games may be paywalled?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Thousands of game journalists have been proclaiming for years there is a link between sexism in games, and sexism in real life. They also constantly whined there were too many violent shooters and so on.
So why would you not expect any non-gamer to read what the game journalists wrote and take it to heart? Trump would seem to be well-aligned with what the press has been saying for years, that games are affecting behavior.
A little late to back out now fellows now that someone you hate has finally listened. Who did you think would listen to you, the game developers that actually have to make money from what they sell?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It seems to me a significant portion of the video game industry is based in Japan, where guns kill between 10 and 20 people each year. Meanwhile in America, 500+ are killed by guns accidentally going off, 10000+ murdered with guns and 40000+ kill themselves with guns every year. Must be the video games they said. We need to do something about the video games to save our children.
Did anyone else see the news about the elephant in the classroom last week? It doesn't seem to have gotten the attention it deserves.
Like someone else said on the internet:
Real guns = Good
Fake guns = Bad
But in a broader sense, video games are unrealistic. When you get shot in a game, it should cease to work. In fact, it should erase the entire contents of your computer. And delete your social media accounts. You are dead. No more fun stuff.
For some people shot in-game, the software should scramble all your data, making it unreadable. And the game controls should respond slowly, if at all. Just like suffering a traumatic brain injury.
Have gnu, will travel.
The President thinks he's getting good visibility / PR with these free form live discussions where he can say whatever he wants (without following through on anything). I would expect the same with this one as was done with gun session and the dreamers sessions - and expect more of this. Echoing back to the Apprentice and him talking at the board room scenes....he probably really likes this - even if nothing gets done legislatively. He's getting back to being able to be on talk TV again.
This is all just a classic misdirection technique. That campaign to call those kids who got shot up Crisis Actors in a False Flag operation was the same thing. The point is to steer the debate away from gun control and put the pro-gun control side on the defensive. Get them arguing about absurd things like violence in video games and conspiracy theories. Worked too. Even the left wing press picked up these stories and ran with them.
The funny thing is IIRC these techniques were invented by the Soviets. To be fair though it was Karl Rove that popularized their use in the Republican party.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Kids have always played variations of cops and robbers, cowboys and indians etc.
The whole "I kill you so I win and you lose" game is as old as our species. We have adapted it into a new kind of entertainment with the same basic premise.
How often do you see kids playing at raping each other compared to shooting imaginary fingerpistols at each other? Yes, even in Europe.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
... is a school satchel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rVKknah1Ws
In holland, they don't let people have guns, so bad man only had knives and failed to kill anyone.
People in holland play the same video games. The difference is, they don't let ordinary people have guns without a damn good reason. Even IF IT DID cause violence, you'd have to remove every cause of anger and violence to fix the problem... video games, even if they do cause violence, are not the one and only cause.
The fix is to remove guns from the populace. Not just under 21's, under 81s.
The NRA is the problem here, the money they launder distorts politics.
... don't knock Trump over and teabag him repeatedly, I am going to be very disappointed.
It's apparently completely acceptable to a sizable chunk of society for kids to play video games where they kill people
Before video games existed, kids played games like "Cowboys and Indians" where they pretended to kill each other. Somehow, they did not all turn into violent sociopaths.
Also, we're on our 3rd generation now where kids play video games where they kill people. So this isn't new. Also, crime and homicides have plummeted during this time.
What if someone made a video game that allowed you to simulate raping people?
Already exists.
Imagine if you could buy an artificial vagina or human head that integrates with your gaming console so that you could rape it.
Already exists.
Society is advancing in morals in some respects but declining in morals in others.
Since crime and homicides have massively fallen since the 1970s and 1980s, citation required.
I think firearms will always be necessary and dangerous. If we don't cull the deer population, they will cull us on the roads.
:facepalm:
You do realize deer exist in lots of countries with strict gun control, right? And that the roads in those countries are not deer-encrusted death traps?
Some people legitimately need firearms for self-defense. Therefore, people should be allowed to have the freedom to possess firearms, and the second amendment is a good thing.
You're missing a very large step in your logic. Specifically, why nearly unfettered access to firearms must be granted to untrained people in order to satisfy your self-defense issue.
If some people need guns for self-defense, they can get the training, licensing and insurance required to handle those guns properly.
To its credit, the NRA isn't defending bump stocks.
No, the NRA did not defend bump stocks in the immediate aftermath of the Las Vegas shooting. Now that there's legislation to actually ban bump stocks, and some time has passed, the NRA is defending bump stocks. See: NRA opposition to FL legislation.
Who would want to play a game like that?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Don't forget the breakdown of institutions like marriage.
We should expect social order to break down when Biblical marriage (which is defined as a marriage between a man, his third wife and a porn star with a non-disclosure agreement) is under attack.
You are welcome on my lawn.
USMC used doom
Yes, they did. And as the article you linked to states, it was developed:
to train U.S. Marines for "decision making skills, particularly when live training time and opportunities were limited."
Which is what I said. Video games and more complex simulators were developed and used for their logistical and fiscal advantages, rather than because they're a particularly good way to train. They don't replace actual training, they augment it.
Even when used in these ways, it's not like the USMC just had guys running around blindly mowing down whatever popped up; they trained as teams under the same command structure as they would in the field, and emphasised things like fire control, target identification, team movement, etc. The key point was to practice every skill other than actually putting the bullet onto the target; that was secondary.
When I was in we did dry-training for that kind of stuff. You could practice "house clearing" with just a team of guys with no ammo (and sometimes even no weapons), in a parking lot with a floor plan marked out with rope. I guarantee that training was more useful than "marine Doom", which is why we did that instead of playing video games.
You cannot have a soldier freeze up in combat because of the sheer level of violence evolving around him.
We can have it, and we do have it. Nobody can predict how they will react in a real firefight. No amount of prep and training can ensure that you'll be able to function at all, or to what extent your normal behaviour will be degraded. True desensitisation only really happens after you've survived enough firefights to have real experience ... and even then, there have been plenty of combat veterans who lose it in later engagements.
Training does help, but it's not a panacea.
Thats why they train and train and train. So that muscle memory and detachment allow the combatant to remain engaged during the conflict.
That muscle memory and detachment is exactly what you don't get from video games. It doesn't do us a lot of good to have a squad of soldiers repeatedly making the WASD motion in the middle of a battle.
You also don't get the stress, which is a crucial part of basic infantry training as well as realistic field training exercises. Anyone can point and shoot a gun in a video game; being able to move, communicate, respond to commands, and actively seek out people who are trying to kill you in an insanely hectic and stressful environment ... that's a whole different world. You're not going to get that from video games until we perfect the Holodeck.
No, the distinction is artificial when it comes to these two specific cases. As I've said. Marriage and homosexuality are both biological impulses and both have been integrated into societal structures, and have been since long before the bible was written.
You are welcome on my lawn.