CT Senator: Games a Factor in Sandy Hook Shootings

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

CT Senator: Games a Factor in Sandy Hook Shootings

Chris Murphy

Senator Chris Murphy believes games can cause violence but admits there isn't enough research to legislate.

On December 14th of 2012, Adam Lanza walked into Sandy Hook Elementary and murdered twenty-six people, including twenty children, in addition to his mother whom he had shot earlier in the day. Understandably, people are still wondering why anyone would commit such a horrific crime and while there has been a choir of voices citing a variety of causes, more than a few have pointed to violent videogames as being one of the forces behind Lanza's actions.

In January, Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut,
gave a speech in which he singled out games as one of Lanza's driving forces. Now, Murphy has offered some clarification about his comments. "What we know is that this young man, deeply mentally ill walking the school with an assault weapon armed with 30-round magazines. What we know is that he was very, very severely mentally ill; that his mother had been trying to get him help for years. And what we also know, is that he spent a lot of time playing violent video games," said Murphy. "Now, nobody can sit here for certain and say that without any one of those things, without the powerful weapons, without the mental illness, without the exposure to video games, this wouldn't have happened. We can't put ourselves in his mind. But we do see a trend where some of these shooters do have exposure to these video games."

While Murphy does continue to believe games can be a factor behind incidents like the Sandy Hook massacre, he admits that there isn't sufficient research to back any sort of restrictive legislation. "What researchers will tell you, is that if you already have a severe mental illness, and a predilection to violence, perhaps the video game exposure can put you over the edge. But in and of itself, there is no research showing that there's a link," said Murphy. "Before we pass any legislation, which would limit the exposure that people have to these types of video games, I think it's important that we have the research and the data and that's what we're trying to do right now."

Source: GameSpot

Permalink

Sighs.

"But we do see a trend where some of these shooters do have exposure to these video games."

I suspect he also ate food, drank liquids, slept in a bed and wore clothes. It's this wonderful thing called "cause and effect" Mr Murphy. Something being common in all of these cases does not mean that they actually had any relevance. Until we invent time travel so we can see if removing gaming from these peoples lives would have changed anything, it is nothing more than pointless speculation.

CT Senator: "I'm an idiot."

image

Dear World: Stop. Your constant scape goating of videogames as a cause of violent behavior is becoming a nuisance. Stop. Effective immediately is a three year ban on correlation of violence and video-games. Stop. If anyone has any complaints they may direct them to the Ministry of zero fucks. Stop. So can you Please...STOP!

I am sure the use of soft drinks leads to school shootings. I don't have any evidence for it and no studies not funded by people aligned with my ideology can back it up, but it /is/ rather suspicious that all teenagers who shoot up schools, have drunk at least one can of cola in the months preceding.

Time for a full ban on soft drinks.

Severely mentally unstable and not being treated, whether because he was avoiding the help or it wasn't really being offered/pushed his way. Being unstable and prone to violence should be addressed just as much, of not more than, how much of what games a killer played. Cracking down on entertainment and ignoring other possible problems does nobody any good because the crazy/violent people will still be crazy/violent.

"Now, nobody can sit here for certain and say that without any one of those things, without the powerful weapons..."
Is this guy fucking high?

I don't know about idiot. I don't know about this man or his other politics, but from these sources alone he seems to be a lot more reasonably and logical about this than most politicians are. He goes as far to highlight that a violent mental illness and the access to assault weapons are more likely major factors, and though he does seem to be quick to jump to videogames-and the usual complaints against videogames as ridiculous as they are this sounds pretty bad- but he does suggest two things that make me relax a little; a) he says that its only in conjuction with mental illness and a predilection towards violence, and b) that there is no conclusive link and there needs to be more research.

So yes, it's good to stay aware and help tell this representative that no, Videogames are not a threat that needs to be restricted, and you should not go after them.

But we shouldn't freak out at politicians who are actually willing to wait for more information before utterly condemning them and attempting to enact legislation. Tell him what you think, let him wait for research data, and give him a chance to see and change his mind.

Of course, correlation = causality. Silly me, how could I not see it?

image

Oh well, at least he's willing to wait for conclusive research. That's something. Not much, but something. Probably won't stop him from ignoring the results if they don't acknowledge his ideas though.

Oh god, shut the fuck up you appalling twit. I don't have the energy for these people any more. It's like if the Flat Earth people were in the news every other week, or not being able to click on the BBC News Health section without seeing articles from crystal healing wizards denouncing modern medicine.

"But we do see a trend where some of these shooters do have exposure to these video games.

HE'S ALSO EXPOSED TO GUNS, GENIUS. And yet American politicians see fit to make guns easier to access than healthcare and proper education combined because money.

Kahani:
CT Senator: "I'm an idiot."

Just to play devil's avocado for a second here, but isn't dismissing anyone who merely mentions the possibility of video games having an adverse effect on people equally idiotic.

I'm not saying I think video games contribute to violent tendencies in any way, I'm just saying I think we should keep our minds open lest we fall to the same ignorance that we assume has claimed our critics.

image

There is also evidence that he lived in a state where Chris Murphy is a senator. Better make some anti-Chris Murphy legislation to stop such terrible crimes happening again!

In other news, the sky is blue.

Move along, nothing to see here, just another idiot saying what dozens of other idiots have said publicly over the past year, why is this even here?

And another Senator calls out for the cheapest shot

Because dealing with the actual problems is hard.. you wouldn't want to actually work for your money right. Nah just pull out the usual cheap shot.

Now, nobody can sit here for certain and say that without any one of those things, without the powerful weapons, without the mental illness, without the exposure to video games, this wouldn't have happened.

Erm...what.

Of course without the POWERFUL WEAPONS this would have never happened, everyone (except maybe him the idiot) can say that for certain. It blows my mind how someone like this can even get elected. Man I want to punch that smug face of his.

"What researchers will tell you, is that if you already have a severe mental illness, and a predilection to violence, perhaps the video game exposure can put you over the edge."

Huh? What "researchers" have said this? Citation needed. Jack Thompson is not a "researcher".

"But in and of itself, there is no research showing that there's a link."

Oh, there are no researchers who are saying this then, and you're just trolling us?

Cows say, "Moo."
Sheep say, "Baa."
Senators say, "Violent video games probably cause violence."

-

Good to know stuff's back to normal. I thought something was wrong for a couple days there when Microsoft actually made a good decision.

I don't think I've played the video game where you walk around an elementary school and pop children for a high score. If violent video games did persuade him to commit an act of violence don't you think he would more likely try to reinact the "simulation" that pushed him than to just go off in a school?

So a mentally ill person living in a country that allows easy access to high calibre weaponry goes on a school massacre.

.....

Curse you Doom 3 when will you learn that there are innocent lives at stake.

"But we do see a trend where some of these shooters do have exposure to these video games."

Well... I'll take a guess and say that basically MOST of the kids in the U.S are exposed to game one way or another, since he's saying games cause shootings... Does that mean that every kid in the U.S is going going to cause one? No? Oh wait what's that... Mental state? DIFFERENT mental states? NAH, too much money to actually treat the problem...

SecondPrize:
"Now, nobody can sit here for certain and say that without any one of those things, without the powerful weapons..."
Is this guy fucking high?

Oh of course he is, did you look at his face at all on the picture? This guy's high as a kite.

Also research has shown that the term 'gun violence' only came into being after the release of the Nintendo64

To be fair, this guy seems to be one of the few US politicians that is not a rabid gun nut member of the NRA. He actually tried to block the NRA from sponsoring Hillbilly racing... errr NASCAR.

But unfortunately he's still stupid enough to jump on the "games are bad oh my god" bandwagon.

In this day and time and in the free world, anyone aged 0-30 /not/ playing video games is becoming more and more a strange loner.

Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

If you have proof go for it. Otherwise let's just go with the kid was fucking insane. By all means, look into the cause of these events but still, for the amount of people that have claimed this there is a disturbing lack of proof.

Games don't cause violence; guns don't cause violence. What causes violence is a lack of respect for human life. We've been killing each other violently long before these things were even invented.

"What we know is that this young man, deeply mentally ill..."

Noooooo shit. In the words of Chris Rock: "Why can't they just be crazy?" People of all ages have been doing absolutely horrendous atrocities for a very, very long time...long before violent games have been around. There's no need to find excuses for them, no need to try and find what pushed them over the edge. The answer's already there: THEY'RE FUCKING CRAZY! Since we're blaming violent games, we better blame violent music too. And the movies, I'd imagine the violence in movie and television played a part too!

Lanza also probably saw violence out on the streets, or heard about it in the news. We better ban all violence in news programs too. In fact, the only way we can prevent these kinds of tragedies is to just go ahead and ban violence in general!

Why is it so hard to understand that crazy people are fucking crazy? That they don't need a source of inspiration before they do crazy things? By all account, Lanza was an absolute fucking psycho. If you've ever seen a picture of the guy, you only need on look at him to say "That guy looks like he's fucking nuts!" His mother had to warn babysitters to never turn their back on him because there's no telling what he could do, he was a dangerous person in general. It wasn't the games, music, or movies that turned him into a dangerous individual, it was the fact that he was completely fucked up in the head. He was a crazy person. We've seen countless crazy people in the past, we're bound to see countless more in the future.

It all boils down to votes. Something terrible happens and the public demands that lawmakers do something. And since you can't ban "being crazy", you need a strawman to burn in order to make it look like you care and that you're trying to prevent such things from happening in the future. Truth is you're never going to be able to prevent such tragedies from occurring, but the general public can't accept that as an answer, and no amount of common sense back by scientific research (as yet another study just came out saying NO FUCKING LINK BETWEEN VIOLENCE IN GAMES AND VIOLENCE IN REALITY) will convince them otherwise. But no, despite the numerous studies already done on the matter - the vast majority of which say "no link exists" - we still need to study it more.

It's quite simple, really, if you can't tell the difference between a game and reality, thus making you want to "act out" the game IN reality, you're already fucked. You're nuts. The game didn't make you nuts, it's just further proof that you ARE nuts.

Evil Smurf:
Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

Actually they don't, no more than a hammer causes a house to be built.

If we really wanted these school shootings to stop we'd ban schools
It's what the GOP wants anyway.

DVS BSTrD:
If we really wanted these school shootings to stop we'd ban schools
It's what the GOP wants anyway.

That's a heartless thing to say!

They don't want to ban ALL schools!

Just the ones for middle class and lower class students.

RJ 17:

Evil Smurf:
Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

Actually they don't, no more than a hammer causes a house to be built.

At the risk of turning this thread into a banhammer pavilion:

Without the hammer, the carpenter isn't very likely to build a house, is he?

"Video Games are a factor in the Sandy Hook shooting"
"I have no evidence of this, and I admit that, but they still are"

Cool.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

RJ 17:

Evil Smurf:
Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

Actually they don't, no more than a hammer causes a house to be built.

At the risk of turning this thread into a banhammer pavilion:

Without the hammer, the carpenter isn't very likely to build a house, is he?

Indeed that is true, but did the hammer make the carpenter build the house? Or is it one of the tools that the carpenter uses to build the house? Do guns make people commit acts of violence? Or are they just one of the tools that people can use to cause violence?

bandit0802:
Games don't cause violence; guns don't cause violence. What causes violence is a lack of respect for human life. We've been killing each other violently long before these things were even invented.

Bandit has it completely right, "What causes violence is a lack of respect for human life."

Granted, guns allow you to take a more lives in a lot shorter amount of time than, say, going on a stabbing-spree, but the gun is not to blame for the actions of the person.

I bet he also drank milk when he was young. Maybe even to this day...

My God! It's the cows! They cause violence. We need to ban cows. It's the only way!

Also, didn't the Virgina Tech killer not play games and was considered an outside because of that fact?

NameIsRobertPaulson:

RJ 17:

Evil Smurf:
Guns cause gun violence you know. But standing up to gun lobbies is a stupid idea isn't it senator?

Actually they don't, no more than a hammer causes a house to be built.

At the risk of turning this thread into a banhammer pavilion:

Without the hammer, the carpenter isn't very likely to build a house, is he?

The carpenter may not be able to build a house without a hammer, but a murderer can still kill without a gun. The classic example of a serial killer doesn't often use guns. More likely they use knifes or something else. Even a hammer could be used to kill people. And the worst mass killings used bombs. There's a reason they are suicide bombers, not suicide shooters.

Also, guns have other legitimate uses. Like hunting, target practice, or self defense. And yes, there are many legitimate cases of self defense with guns every year. If you wanted to really talk about the primary way guns are used to kill, it's suicide. Nearly two thirds of all gun fatalities are suicides. And it could be higher than that since the victims families have every reason to deny that it was a suicide.

To be honest, mass murder by gun is no more than a statistical anomaly. It barely registers in the data. Now, if you wanted to discuss banning guns as a means to prevent suicide, you would have a strong argument.

It should also be noted that these killings tend to happen in gun free zones. Literally, the only places a person can be guaranteed that no one else will have a gun.

It's a complex issue. Simply pointing out the tool, and saying that is the problem is not the answer and is incredibly short sighted.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.