The debate about whether or not violent video games contribute to violent behaviour is one that has raged for decades, but The American Psychological Association has recently reaffirmed its stance that there is no causal link between violent video games and the behaviour of those who are exposed to them.
While its updated resolution on the matter admits there is a slight link between video games and "aggressive outcomes" like pushing and raised voices, it states that the updated paper "should not be misinterpreted or misused by attributing violence, such as mass shootings, to violent video game use."
Mass-shootings in the US have often been blamed on violent video games – a sign of how massive the industry has become more than anything else – but APA president Sandra Shullman says that policymakers should be looking at other reasons for these tragic events:
Violence is a complex social problem that likely stems from many factors that warrant attention from researchers, policymakers and the public. Attributing violence to video gaming is not scientifically sound and draws attention away from other factors, such as a history of violence, which we know from the research is a major predictor of future violence.
Oh really, then how do you explain World War 2, because its awfully funny how a second world war started just decades before tons of WW2 shooters were made. Coincidence, I THINK NOT!!!!!
@Sean161 and when I play payday, I want to rob a bank
Mass-shootings keep happening because there's too much guns easily available. And I don't even need to arrange a study to arrive to that conclusion.
@Not-Geno @Sean161 When I play Zelda, I want to cut the grass and smash all the jars and pots I can find.
Well, what they are trying to say is... you guys only want to do that stuff because you have issues, not because of games
Now all of the Karen's can shut up now
I'd suggest stopping guns in super markets. I saw the other day a picture of a super market in the US actually having booths with guns and I was shocked!! I have travelled a lot around Europe and I have never seen something like this.
Videogames keep me from committing violence. They are a great stress reliever for me.
It's like people were saying this for the last decade.
@Nico_D Mass shootings happen mostly because we have bad people who want to shoot other people in areas that guns aren't allowed.
You never hear about shootings at gunshows, for instance, or gun rallies. It's always at places where you typically don't have guns, because mass shooters are cowards.
Problematic people problems are caused by bad parenting, abuse, etc. Not videogames.
The problem is that this doesn’t matter. Your average person isn’t paying any attention and politicians know this. Some politician will say “blame the games!” again in like a year’s time and everyone’ll be like “yeah blame the games!” Anything to avoid making the hard choices about violence, at least in North America (USA especially).
@MS7000 When I play Super Mario Bros I want to eat mushrooms and flowers, because that makes me big and powerful. Also I start jumping on turtles.
You’d think having guns readily available might be the reason mass shootings are so prevalent. It’s not as if countries where guns are banned have, you know, a much better record when it comes to shootings.
@Kalmaro but what makes people bad and want to shoot other people?
The second amendment makes it un-American to deny Americans their God given right to gun down their fellow countrymen...
No that can’t be right... That SHOULDN'T be right...
@nessisonett Or by using any other method of murder really. A lack of guns would in no way derail the motivations of a psychopath. There's people who will drive into a crowd of people, or who will knife down a subway station full of people, or who will plant homemade bombs (Using everyday ingredients found at stores mind you) to blow up a building or crowd of people.
Trust me when I say video games calm me down. It's real life that makes me feel violent.
Admittedly someone can go on a stabbing spree and kill people, but they're likely to kill less people than someone with an automatic rifle.
@Bass_X0 Its actually complex factors that go into the motivations of mass murderers. Take Elliot Roger for example, rich kid who came from a family that spoiled him. The problem is money couldn't solve his problems, he wanted to be loved by a girl but he lacked the social skills too. Instead of improving his own life, he resented the guys who could get girls, blaming them as well as the girls who would date those guys as he felt they were rejecting him. On top of a mountain of family issues, including 2 parents who were constantly trying to make him choose one or the other and a little brother he grew hateful towards as he had the social skills to make friends, he planned on getting his revenge, killing his family and mass murdering a ton of people in his dads SUV. Thank god his plans, for the most part, backfired and only very few people were hurt.
@MrGawain You would be surprised, its really disturbing but you would be surprised at the deathrate of Subway mass stabbings.
@Nico_D also mental health illness, bullying and people not seeking help. But to be fair getting a therapist in the U.S. is a lot of money!
@Bass_X0 It makes sense if it's in self defense. The amendment wasn't designed to just encourage people to go on killing sprees. It's a defensive measure, and has been working as intended for a while now.
Most gun related homicides and mass shootings are done by people who get guns illegally, which means the second amendment wouldn't even apply to them, they've given up their right, essentially.
Bruh my English class made me do an Article of the Week saying that ALL video games cause violence not just the violent ones. All I wrote on the paper is Animal Crossing wants to make me kill people
@MS7000 when I play animal crossing I want to pick weeds, build bridges and abuse my neighbor because of reasons
And news just in: Poop stinks.
@PickledKong64 When I play animal crossing I like to dig holes and wait for my neighbors to stumble into them...........they crawl out like the pathetic worms they are -_-
@Cosats normally the only supermarket with guns are Walmarts. But theres a number of reasons people do these things. Mental health is the biggest trend in these violent killings
Blaming videogames for violence is a thing of the past by now, only a few people insist on doing that in the 2020s.
These people were already replaced by progressives claiming videogames are making people sexist and bigoted.
@patbacknitro18 especially if that villager moved into an area and ruined my path. Luckily this wont happen in New Horizons anymore
@victordamazio well in my english class we had to read and annotate an article saying ALL video games cause violence
@PickledKong64 The funniest thing is that a while back Walmart took down a bunch of posters for a new shooter game, talking about how they didn't want to promote that sort of thing upfront. So people started posting online about Walmarts gun section and in several cases advertisements around the store for it. It was a glorious time for all.
@Kalmaro Not to start something, but that trend only works if you restrict your view to the US. There are plenty of places around the world with stricter gun control than the US that have next to no gun violence. Obviously can't say it's a causality for sure, the people in other countries could just be more content / sane, but it's just not true that more guns = less shootings.
@PickledKong64 Absolutely agree. This is why guns need to be much harder to get in the USA. Not that European countries have eliminated this problem but it's harder to get guns here and that's a good thing.
@nessisonett I know your not from the US (as this is a European website) and at least where I live, guns aren't as readily available as people think they are. My biggest problem is that people blame just guns. Now guns are used in these attacks which is terrible but one of the recurring factors is mental health issues. I don't know how expensive therapy is in Europe but in the U.S. therapists are so expensive. Most of the times the average family can't afford them. I'm just commenting this because I had to go to therapy for depression. I feel bad for these people who are victims of violence because someone couldn't get therapy. These shooters do terrible things and I feel if they just got help it would be better
Really? Confirming what we already knew to be true.
It was never any more than lazy journalism or political agendas, particularly in America where gun violence is the fault of everything apart from a significant amount of the population owning guns
The physical abuse my PC peripherals have to endure is purely down to the fact I'm a keyboard warrior & not because I like detonating Lemmings & sacrificing Yoshi for a higher jump.
@TeslaChippie I would argue that when you increase legal gun ownership, homicide rates go down. This is why places with some of the worse gun homicide rates also happen to have the strictest gun laws, in almost all cases.
When people have a legal means to defend themselves, they tend to die less. Add to that the fact that most gun homicides are done by people who have guns illegally and it becomes clear that the problem isn't people in general owning guns. It's bad people who are getting guns illegally.
We have places in the US with absurdly strict gun laws and it's done nothing because criminals tend not to care about laws.
While I agree that you can't point the finger at video games as a cause of violence, it can't be ignored as a contributing factor.
What we see is highly influential to us. Corporations know this and that's why they spend millions of dollars on advertising each year. One of the highest spenders in advertising is Coca Cola, spending hundreds of millions on advertising alone, whereas their profit is in the billions.
To give another example, perhaps more applicable, you can look at the military. Way back when they were doing target practice they only used circular targets to practice on, similar to that of an archer. It wasn't long before they changed it from a circle to the outine or silhouette of a man. Why? Because psychologically, this humanoid depiction breaks down our innate resistance to kill. In other words, when put in a real life scenario, the soldier will find it easier to kill another human than if he had been practicing on a circular target.
If the mere outline of a person can do that, what does hundreds of hours playing games in which we kill thousands of lifelike humans do to our psychology? Especially in games which boast multiple facial expressions on those you 'kill'.
Games like grand theft auto 5 sell in the millions, but not everyone who plays those games go out and kill. But to ignore them as a contributing factor, does not sound like they are taking the situation seriously enough. If people come from a violent background, immersing themselves in violence, however virtual, is not going to create an antidote. Like an infestation, the real problem is not going to become manifest until much much later. For example, when they shoot up the school.
Hate my comment or not, it is what it is.
@Cosats False. They do not sell guns in supermarkets here. The closest you can get is Walmart, which has a hunting and sporting goods section.
@UmbralChaos To be fair, the grocery selection in most Walmart Supercenters is bigger than most other supermarkets lol
What did they attribute it to before video games existed?
@PickledKong64 So in other words, it’s also down to yet another problem the US has, paid healthcare. And yet the minute anybody mentions a welfare state or free healthcare, they’re suddenly a communist 🙄
If a person is crazy and want to kill he does not need a game for encouragement.
If a person becomes violent because of video games, movies he/she has some kind mental issues.
@LavaTwilight it doesn't do anything if you are a normal person with the ample intelect to orchestrate between a game and the real world and that killing people isn't very nice. Advertising and being influenced to go and kill people are not the same thing. They said all this about the supposed banned horror films in the 80's. I saw them all as a kid, once again i didn't kill anybody.
If anything, video games keep me from being violent. I often go to games like Street Fighter and Smash Bros. when I'm angry or pent up to let off some steam.
Clearly you've never met a Karen. They don't need logic and reason to take a stance against something.
@YANDMAN yeah I saw some of those, the Peter Jackson ones (before he did LotR) and ISOYG come to mind... I too was a kid and like you, I've still refrained from manslaughter.
They are similar because they come in to us through our eyes, one of the most powerful senses we have. Ultimately, it is how the individual responds to what he takes in. If he is prone to violent behaviour, has a history of violence in his home or is in any other way mentally unstable, then he should avoid violent games the way a reformed drunkard should avoid alcohol.
It's not so much the availability of weapons, it's more the unavailability of support, love, freedom,... In my opinion. The willingness to use them against our fellow earthlings, when they pose no immediate threat to us. And clearly some games do overglorify war, hunting,... or just weapons in general. But sane people won't go on a rampage because of that, or want to join any group actually shooting to kill.
The idea that one's life is of more or less value than the other's.
The idea that those of different species, colour,... Are always lesser, or wrong when opinions clash, and therefore the enemy.
The arrogant idea that they must listen and change and learn and evolve, but we're perfect.
That slaughterhouses, battlefields, governments, markets... have more value than the lives they oppress and murder. That dominion, obedience, and blatant mass murder are okay if they can be enforced by fear, or pushed into ignorance and shared guilt as collective innocence.
@nessisonett You're forgetting the attacks in other countries, ones with your 'free' healthcare. The issue isn't wether or not the health care is readily available, it's if the person is well enough to even pursue it. The problem is no one pays attention to the quiet kid getting bullied until he's got a gun.
This is like telling me the sky is blue
Nothing new for me, but we live in a world where some people asume japanese ecchi games are for pedophillies (aside from the fact most people claiming it don't even know what that word truly means) and violent games make people become violent and murderers (because people need something to blame)
But oh well I look at stuff in a more logical way
This is not gonna stop politicians from blaming video games as the root cause instead of things like a culture that enables and emboldens terrorists like the scum that massacred those church goers in Charleston South Carolina. Its not gonna nudge politicians to look at the reality that police departments are little better than they we’re when the KKK terrorists were bombing and lynching the hell out of the American south and that contributes to the cultural aspect of the problem.
Then how do you explain the fact that I have go out stomping on turtles and mushrooms every time I play a Mario game?
@UmbralChaos Of course there are attacks in other countries, it’s moronic to suggest otherwise. The problem is the prevalence of attacks in the USA combined with the fact guns can be bought in supermarkets. In those countries with free healthcare you were so dismissive of, if somebody has mental health issues and goes to their GP, they get help. They don’t then have to worry about a bill being sent to their house. The whole ‘quiet kid with a gun’ is a bit too 2008 Reddit to even bother with. In normal countries, they’re just quiet kids, without access to guns.
@GrandScribe Wait, are you saying the police are racist as a whole? That's a pretty big claim, if you are.
@TeslaChippie @Cosats Murder is illegal, but still happens. Because people willing to commit murder are not concerned about the consequences. Guns, knives, vehicles, poisons, rocks; It's a matter of bad people committed to doing bad things, no matter what the implement. Gun ownership is high in the US, but there are also far more geographical differences between coasts. Preventing citizen A from purchasing a firearm for his property that is in a wooded hill 80 miles from the nearest town, in hopes that citizen B will not use a firearm in a firearm-restricted area in his urban environment; That's not a common sense approach.
@GrandScribe In a twist of irony, a governor of a southern state, featured in a yearbook photo of a KKK costume, is trying to restrict gun ownership.
Although shootings are not the only type of violence it goes without saying: you can’t shoot anyone if you don’t have a gun! You can play all the violent games you want to, but with no access to firearms you are not going to be shooting anybody.
A surprising turn of events in this saga. Thankfully at least some groups within an otherwise corrupt and broken organization still have their heads screwed on and are capable of thought.
From comic books to heavy metal to video games to social media... moral panics about "the corruption of youth" are never based on data.
I've always believed any kind of extreme content in the media almost certainly coarsens society. Not just violence but any kind of content that is more extreme than a normal person would do in real life. I'm in no way saying video games cause real-world violence, but I instinctively feel the way the violence in them has become so much more extreme over the last two decades cannot be a good thing.
Since the turn of the millennium, with increasing globalism and ever-greater reach of the world wide web, it's as though individual countries have stopped even trying to have their own standards or actually think through what they allow. Again, I'm not just talking about violence here, but anything you can access on the web. Bizarrely, we are getting much more censorship of a certain kind, when companies listen to pressure groups who resent non-extreme things like nudity or bikinis in mainstream media, but in terms of extreme content you don't see countries even trying to set out legal standards for "products" (as such) like I believe they would have done in the 1990s, for example.
It all starts with how we were brought up. Kids nowadays take no responsibility for their own actions and are taught that if things don't go your way it's because of someone else. When I was younger if I had disrespected my parents or got into trouble I knew I was in for a preaching and it wasn't on a Sunday and if it warranted it a spanking with a leather belt! Now let me tell you I never again did that which caused that. I wasn't abused but was given corrective action. I look around and see bullies everywhere and not just on the playgrounds! They are online tormenting kids to the point where some commit suicide! Instead of teaching our kids to stand up and fight against their bullies to show they can't push you around you have to tell the teacher, who tells the principal who may or may not tell the parents who would defend their kid and say their little angel wouldn't bully a fly!
@nessisonett The problem with violence in the US is far more complex than "access to guns". Everyone loves oversimplifying that "no guns, no shootings!" That's a simplistic as blaming games. It's a fever dream and a wish, not a reality for the ACTUAL underpinnings of violence here....it's a LOT deeper. The problem isn't as simplified as "because access to weapons exist in America, more people choose to attack people." It doesn't work like that. And even in America, guns are not the #1, or even #2 choice of weapon chosen to kill people. A few years running, hammers were #1. Hammers. #2 was either knives or poison, can't remember which. Guns were #3. The poison was interesting because it tends to be a chosen weapon of women, indicating more women were entering the murder game. But think about that. For all the gun deaths here, more people chose to pick up a hammer and bludgeon someone to death than even use a gun or knife to do it.
Even if we remove ALL murders caused by guns from our reports entirely, just pretend guns don't exist and none of those people killed by guns were killed at all, we still have more murders than other countries. What does that tell you? Solving "guns" does not actually solve the problem. It just masks it more cleverly, and not even very well. And, if I were a betting person, I'd say would start a cottage bomb making industry on a scale we haven't seen before.
As the report states, there are complex social issues that lead to mental states that compel violence on a scale other countries don't have. Part of our problem is that our numbers are skewed incorrectly. Due to our proximity to the South & Central Americas and our very lax border security, we have a massive gang problem relating to the drug cartels. A significant number of murders, gun and otherwise, are related to the gang wars and collateral damage. That's a problem that isn't going to be solved. It would involve very tough border/immigration policies and a lot of deportation without trial. We all know that isn't going to happen no matter who says what. So the gang wars are going to continue unabated forever, and the body count will pile up forever. It's unfair to include those numbers, really, gun or otherwise. That's not random or societal violence. That's business. Murder is their job, and they're good at their job, and nobody is going to compel them to stop. Ever. Because it's politically disadvantageous to touch on that deep enough.
But if we were to remove all of that and if we were to arrive at a higher than other countries murder count still without that (which I'd assume we would, but the numbers would not be nearly as stark as it seems otherwise), You hit part of a nail sort of on the head in your response above about medical bills. What America has in wholesale quantities more than other countries is instability and uncertainty. Mixed with a very unhealthy dose of division sewed in part by cynical politicians in favor of their corporate benefactors. When most of a population is in a constant state of fear, uncertainty, instability, threat, and distress, fully aware that one bad event could destroy them and/or their family at any moment, it shouldn't be surprising when they respond as any animal in a state of fear and instability reacts: violently.
Fixing THAT problem requires fundamentally redesigning the entire nature of the American system. Which nobody has any intention of doing. So we'll keep blaming thing after thing from games to guns to "crazy people" to everything else, making sure to cover our eyes any time someone points at the underlying causes of such things.
Simplifying things down to guns, or "mental health" is no less reactionary than blaming DOOM and COD. Mental health problems are induced, you don't catch them on a plane from Shanghai. But everyone focuses on treating acute "symptoms" and calling it a job well done, rather than identifying the deep systematic causes of so many people being in poor mental condition to begin with. Endless free "mental healthcare" doesn't fix the problems that caused people to need it to begin with. It's again, treating the symptom while ignoring the cause.
True I myself am a gun owner (several by the way) and have a permit to carry said guns. I live in a rural area so everyone and his pappy owns at least one in a household. Our gun laws were created so that the population could defend itself from dangers either domestic or foreign.
I think, if you are violent playing computer games it probably lets you do what you shouldnt do in life. therefore lowering violence in the real world, not the other way around
If you weren't convinced by the dozens of other studies that had the exact same result, then this one additional study won't likely change your mind either way.
There's no denying that all forms of media can influence your emotion or opinion, but if millions of people in a varied audience are able to play the exact same game and refrain from seeking out acts of violence, except for one disturbed individual, then it proooobably had more to do with the fact that they were a disturbed individual.
I've found that here in the US, your viewpoint on gun ownership is heavily influenced by whether you live (or relate to those) out in the country or in a major city. Out on a farm, a gun is more likely to be used as a hunting tool, or for security when the local police officer is a half hours drive away. A bullet can be shot in a random direction, and it would be highly unlikely that it would actually hit anything, whereas in a residential or business area of a city stray bullets can be far more dangerous. Which is precisely why you should never go hunting in a city environment.
I don't own any guns myself, but I have considered registering for a simple shotgun or handgun before, and my dad will likely have his passed down to me when the day comes. I'm not terribly concerned about people owning personal firearms. It's really the city folk with a collection of automatic weaponry that make me uneasy.
On some levels, I understand that there's a certain aesthetic element to automatic guns that can draw someone in to collect and display them. Theres no inherent malice there. I mean, I have a shelf full of Amiibos on display that I never intend to actually utilize in a game.
But if Griffin McElroy can put a pixel Mario amiibo in his mouth, and live to tell the tale, then I don't think there's a problem with someone running off with one to hurt someone with it.
@Kalmaro the FBI says that there is a link between White Supremacists and the police, pretty much just like there was when the KKK terrorists were at their height of power. It ain't like the FBI is some virtuous organization, their history is quite dark e.g. they tried to coerce Martin Luther King Jr. into killing himself, they participated in the white supremacist Move Bombing by providing the explosives, they propagandized against the Black Panthers by going door to door in cities like Richmond, Virginia when they providing free food to children and saying the Black Panthers tainted the food with STDs and even did things like ruin the Black Panther's food by urinating in it. No the FBI never did a purge to get rid of the bad apples and as the saying goes one bad apple spoils the barrel.
Violent people do violent things because they were already that way. It's not because they played some game. See the Joker movie and you'll see what I'm talking about. Psychos existed way before videogames.
This is true. It can only cause violence in the form of a trigger inside the player that is mentally unstable.
It's a shame that despite already haven proven this around twenty years ago, politicians with no respect for science have shifted the narrative enough that this has to be news again.
Before video games it was tv. Before tv it was movies before movies it was music before music it was books. There are deeper issues at play which are completely ignored.
Nobody likes to have their passions negatively criticized and put into potential jeopardy. I've seen gun enthusiasts claim that the best solution to gun violence is for more people to have guns, and don't even get me started on my views about hunting and trapping.
Before anyone jumps on me, let me be clear that I'm not saying violent video games cause deadly behavior. I'm just pointing out defenses and confirmation bias. Personally, I think a lot of violent people are into violent video games because they help them live out their fantasies. If a video game can somehow turn you into a murderer, you've got serious underlying issues to begin with, and if it wasn't a game, it would be something else.
I didn't need a study to know that. The majority of people that think that, its because of the media.
Instead of saying "The shooter had mental problem, he forgot to take its meds"
Media is like "The shooter was a fan of call of duty and spent countless hours playing shooting video games"
EVERYTHING is down to a healthy family dynamic and good parenting. That's it.
Gun control isn't going to solve anything. Mental health is the biggest issue and is often the cause of violence. If we take away guns, we take away a means of defense for many, while the violence either jumps to other means like stabbings or doesn't even go away - there would likely be black market/illegal ways to obtain guns. Did people forget about the late 2019 shooting at a church in Texas that was stopped by someone with their own gun? Or that there's still other violence in countries with gun control? I feel like I hear about a mass stabbing in London every few months.
The best solution is just to try and keep any weapons from the people most likely to use them for harm, as long as those are the people actually being targeted - along with talking about mental health and making it easier to seek help. Arguably, just working on fixing the mental health problems we have can make a big difference.
And in relation to the article, only the mentally ill would arguably get set off by violent games (and not even all of them would). This is all just what I think and I'm not trying to convince anyone that I'm right. Just like several other people here, I'm expressing my views, and no one has to agree with them. Cheers~
Every possible scientific expert: Climate change is real and we're the cause; no link between violent video games and violent behavior; vaccines don't cause autism; etc.
@MS7000 At least Zelda players know NOT to attack the chickens.
Let's not forget that the majority of school shooters have mental illnesses...
I never understood why the cartoonish violence is video games was always demonized while the far more realistic violence in movies got dismissed.
@Nico_D You might as well be blaming access to cars, blades, and blunt objects while you are at it.
The whole "lets blame the inanimate object for violence" mentality has always been highly flawed at best.
@PikaPhantom You can ban all the dangerous objects in the world, but so long as you fail to address the human factor you won't be solving any problems.
@Nico_D Actually it's the complete opposite. Because innocent civilians don't have access to guns, they can't defend themselves. It's amazing how so many shootings happen in gun-free zones yet people still can't realize the obvious
Actually that's not true at all. In 1986 I went to my local mall, walked into the arcade and noticed a new game by Konami called "Life Force". I put a quarter into the machine, pressed the start button, and an electronic voice said "Destroy the mall", which led me to stealing a bulldozer and devastating the entire shopping center.
@Kalmaro That is like saying more guns is the solution which it isn't, unfortunately reducing the access ALL people have to guns is what needs to be done along side mental health being made a priority. Ever hear the term one person ruins it for everyone, well this is a perfect example of that but on a much scarier scale.
@PikaPhantom The US is in a position where they need to do both now because people will still fall through the cracks. Every person who wants a gun for any reason going forward should have to have a mental health evaluation and gun training simple as that. A huge help to this solution is proper universal healthcare like Canada or other places that do it even better.
@Jokerwolf You can not remove all guns from all people in the US. We have a right to defend ourselves and that is a tool used to do so.
After I play Pac-Man I like to run around a darkened room with funny lights listening to weird electronic music swallowing pills, oh wait...
@Kalmaro No but you can all take a free psych evaluation and if they judge you to be unfit to have guns/projectile weapons they can buy them from you. Pretty damn simple solution to a never ending problem and while no one should have to do anything they don't want to the problem will never be gone if people do not step up with a solution.
@Jokerwolf You want every single person who buys a gun to get a psych evaluation?
That's an interesting idea, I don't see how that would help us though. The people doing the vast majority of the crimes with guns get them illegally.
@Kalmaro It is a start, there are also ways to curb illegal guns too but that requires the gun manufacturers to adhere to stricter guidelines, as well as banning all gun imports of any kind into the country, like I said I am not against guns and I am Canadian but there are many things that can be done to help the situation, illegal everything will always exist but you can definitely reduce the occurrence which will over time reduce access to those who should not have them illegally.
@PikaPhantom The Texas church shooting(2017 Sutherland Springs) is a poor example of a mass shooting that was stopped by a hero with a gun, as it omits important details(original poster PikaPhantom was referring to a 2019 shooting, though that was not initially stated). In fact, the shooting wasn't stopped by that guy. It was an 11-minute shooting with about 700 rounds used. The shooter finished his job, killing 26, injuring 20 more. It was when he left the church that he was hit by the man who came to help. Perhaps he stopped the shooter from continuing on to another location, but he did not stop the church shooting. And that shooting also shows the flaws of identifying problem individuals and prohibiting them from buying guns. The shooter was flagged, but the Air Force failed to share the proper info with the FBI.
People seem to have forgotten the Vegas shooting. Guns couldn't have stopped that one, and the damage was devastating. The stabbing sprees in the UK don't tend to leave dozens of people dead and scores injured per incident. The fact that they resort to using knives is proof that gun control does work. It's not about eliminating gun ownership. The problem is the assault rifles that allow people to shoot dozens or even hundreds of people as easily as possible.
@Jokerwolf The trouble with things like that is they become rigged for an agenda almost immediately. Because almost any form of authority can instantly be rigged to simply set the rules to use data parameters and conditions that are likely to arrive at the result you want.
Any time you impose some sort of evaluation or credentialing on an issue behind which an agenda exists, in this case, the removal of as many guns from as many people as possible, it will in rapid order be tuned by those in charge of it to use it's rules and requirements to both directly disqualify as many people as the rules can be pushed to produce, and to make the process as intimidating, frustrating, daunting, or costly as possible so as to discourage or disqualify through difficulty as many people as possible.
Which is of course why many people who desire the agenda's goals support such ideas to begin with. They know it can be used and manipulated to help achieve their end.
Which is a lot of what leads to the "not one inch" mentality among those that resist any change. People recognize that as soon as you give any group or authority an inch of what seems like reasonable oversight, it will quickly be escalated via myriad rules and conditions to become ever creeping total control of something. So you dig in and resist any change at all as long as possible, because it's the only way to prevent their inevitable overreach.
Not just guns. Everything, across the board. They already have pediatricians asking if parents own guns, and then doing investigations into that, required. Doctors used as gun control regulators where there isn't even gun control. No matter where you stand on guns, that should set off a lot of alarms in your head about the nature of the people you'd like to hand additional authority to. People tend to have a single minded focus. "I want to solve problem X so I support any use of authority and deception that helps solve problem X" People don't think of the mid and long term consequences of the monsters they create in many other areas in their permissiveness of power to accomplish one goal.
The "Fast & Furious" scandal is an on-topic official-level example of that. In the single minded quest to determine where illegal gun purchases were being trafficked, authorities supported distributing the actual weapons themselves to the very people they didn't want to have them. Higher quality weapons than those individuals otherwise had easy access to. Agendas are blinding and consuming to the finer details, supporting all kinds of metal gymnstics to justify why "but in this case it's valid!"
As for banning gun imports, heck if the American gun manufacturers could have done that, they'd have lobbied for it a century ago. That involves REAL border controls. That's not going to happen here. Its a topic that chews up political careers. Canada has strict border control. The US does not and has no intention of implementing it. We have a corridor/interstate highway nicknamed "The Iron Pipeline". So named because of the sheer amount of iron (guns) transported illegally through it. It runs up the whole US east coast. Up to Canada's doorstep in fact. Notice the pipeline stops there. They bring them up from S. America - mostly Russian & Chinese-made goods, to the Florida and Mississippi coast. Then funnel them for distribution up through NY. They know what and where and they still cant even put a dent in it. The "iron pipeline" is a heck of a more massive problem than the occasional paranoid schizophrenic that gets a Glock at the store. But they don't talk about that because they have no means to address it. So, they point to the small time shops. They point to video games. They point to Martians. Pretty much anything but primary problems because that's something they can look effective "stopping." Solving real problems is expensive and difficult. Selling your image by looking effective stopping minor problems within your grasp increases your market appeal as a politician/businessman. So politicians and media spend a lot of time inflating minor problems into huge problems and sell the solutions as achievable goals, rally a cause, all while distracting and ignoring the real problems they know they can't actually solve.
@NEStalgia You still have to try something, you don't just give up. There is always a solution to every problem, usually not one single solution but many over time that shape the landscape of tomorrow.
@sdelfin We're either referring to different shootings or you mixed up the statistics. Only 2 were killed in the one I'm referring to (still not good), and without intervention, more could've been. And while shootings can be more devastating with how many get wounded or gunned down...even still, total gun control is not the only solution. I think if we can just monitor mental health, do more to help those suffering from mental illness, and ensure to the best extent that no one has a gun who is a threat to others (and rightfully so - that's why I'm still skeptical of red flag laws, because the criteria might not be rigid enough to only target them), then there will be some improvement. But if all guns are just taken away, then that doesn't remove the risk. There are ways to illegally get guns.
While we aren’t perfect up here in Canada I am so happy that no one up here thinks a gun is a constitutional right. What are you all defending yourselves from in the USA all the time? Talk about an entire nation living in total paranoia. No thanks.
@Jokerwolf I really do appreciate your concern and i can see your point in taking the mental state of the person getting the gun into consideration in some cases.
I think the main issue is criminals and their use of guns. That's where most of our problems are coming from in the US. Especially gang violence.
@PikaPhantom My apologies then. I was referring to the November 2017 Sutherland Springs shooting which is more prominent(especially in searches) because of the damage done there, as I mentioned, and its close calendar proximity to the Vegas shooting. I kindly suggest you edit your original post for the sake of clarity and to avoid other misunderstandings on a topic like this, to point out that you mean the 2019 shooting, which I had forgotten about.
"You have to try something" is an idea that tends to cause 20 problems to fail to solve one.
You don't have to "try something" - you have to analyze a problem and determine primary causes and likely effective solutions. The psych eval idea creates a big problem in the form of a bureaucracy, cost, control, and honestly, poor treatment of the majority to attempt to seek out a POTENTIALLY unsafe minority, all in an attempt to solve what is only one minor offshoot of a mostly different problem, and in all cases continues to fail to address the causes of any of said problems.
Even if we were to enact every idea you have for restricting sale of firearms, or eliminate it completely, we would still have the exact same problem unfettered, plus a new big bureaucracy to fund, more legal overreach, and a lot more frustrated and angry people. Because your idea does not actually address the core problems or causes. The only difference is people would be standing around patting themselves on the back for an empty "victory" over nothing.
Of course there are solutions to the problems. The trouble with that is, if the country outright refuses to address, assess, or even acknowledge the actual problems, we can't solve them. Attempting to address ACTUAL causes means stepping on the toes of corporate America & finance (the actual owners and operators of the country), the entire mechanism of employment retirement, education, healthcare. The politically and agenda advantaging packaged and sold division. Immigration/outside economic pressure. Every untouchable benefactor of leadership and their causes. That can NOT be permitted to maintain the status quo. It means stepping into the border control arena....which again steps on corporate and finance. Nope, can't do that (so instead it's all about xenophobes and racists, and not actual problems. They save us from Kinder Eggs though. Can't trust those Germans. The dude with the skull tats though..I'm sure he's fine. And scary....we'll just let him go. Don't want to be a racist! That could cost years in court and a destroyed character! )
We don't find solutions to the problems because we don't want to, or more to the point, our betters don't want us to even acknowledge the actual problems exist. It's not that we don't know how to solve it. It's that we're not permitted to acknowledge what it is we need solved, and CERTAINLY not permitted to implement anything that's required to solve it. It isn't going to be solved. Because it's not designed to be solved. They'll sell control of the general population as a solution. But only if it makes sure to not solve anything.
That's not going to change. And as long as they keep us wrapped up here pointing fingers at each other for not solving a leaky faucet on the wall of a dam that's ruptured and pouring over the top, they win.
Going after a handful of unstable people who via loopholes and such shouldn't have had a weapon but did....that's an "actionable item!" It makes them look good. It makes you look participant for supporting them. It makes me look bad for stating the truth that that isn't the actual set of problems, and even where it's a problem is a symptom not a cause.
Canada doesn't have a gun problem not because you keep guns away from a handful of crazys. Canada doesn't have a gun problem because you actively don't let our cartels funnel them from Guang Dong through Rio through Miami in by the tens of thousands weekly through the Niagara checkpoint, and you don't let our cartels operate in concentration in plain sight in control of 20% of most of your metro areas like a military operation.
Who, that was intending to kill someone, would buy a pistol for $300 from a dealer with a serial number and a registration, and a mandatory wait and background check, all of which we already have, when you can buy one for $75 from a guy under a bridge, in cash, with no traceability, and do your business with it in under 10 minutes? And how would all the gun control and regulation you could muster actually affect that reality?
Which STILL doesn't solve the problem of why, outside the gangs themselves, we have so many people that want so many other people dead, no matter the method used to do it. The problem is fundamental and societal.
There's so much back and forth about "guns kill, guns don't kill, crazy people kill, etc." But it all sidesteps the real problem. We have massive gang activity and no intention to solve that. We have a society that has more angry/frightened people that want to hurt people than most Western countries. Either it's the water or it's societal. Or both. Psych evals doesn't help that. The structure of the society itself is the problem.
Yes, some of our famous (at least media-famous) shootings were from specifically mentally unwell people who were born unwell and always demonstrated symptoms of brain/chemical issue. But if you add up all of that, ignore what weapon was used (guns, bombs, knives, vehicles, poison, etc.) you're not going to find any eyebrow raising numbers compared to any other country. The numbers that make us stand out come from something else.
@NEStalgia the fact that hammers and knives are more used isn't at all surprising, the largest number of homicides tends to be passion crimes, i.e. people who react violently to a quarrel and cause irreparable damage that was never intended. This is true the world over, and has nothing to do with mass shootings cause those have to be premeditated to a degree.
@Kalmaro #42 I can understand that, but you can't deny that the U.S. have a hell of a lot more guns free for almost everyone to purchase in comparison to any European country (or any other in the world, I'd wager), and simply by playing the numbers' game you're gonna have a hell of a lot more shootings. Less guns does equal less shootings.
I don't think I've ever heard of mass shootings here in Europe, aside from a couple, that were not related to a group of terrorist (for example Charlie Hebdo), while I've heard of many in the U.S., and I don't even live there.
@xpownz not necessarily, I'd say a certain
Percent is down to bad parenting, and the other % is just down to a rotten apple just being rotten. I've seen mothers cry themselves to sleep trying to guide their children on the right path but to no avail.
@clvr That's not really contrary to my point. Any discussion about the violence that's trying to actually look at the problem, causes, and solutions has to step away from the emotional/politically motivated attachment to whether guns are or are not involved.
We have to look at the murder rates, regardless of the weapon used. The fact that guns are not the most used weapon tells us something. The availability of guns is not even the most significant driving force behind the total number of murders. The violence problem is not a gun-induced problem. The violence problem is a violence problem. Guns are frequently selected because they are available (and because of their use as the dominant weapon among militant organized crime.)
We still come back to the same problems: We have more people that are likely to kill people via any weapon at their disposal, regardless of what weapon it is, more quickly and easily. Plus we have a lot of organized crime related murder.
Among premeditated murders, we have no particular information that suggests premeditated and large scale murders would stop being perpetrated if legally obtained, legally purchased guns were not available to have done so and that other means would not be used. While it is possible that hypothesis is true, there's more evidence suggesting the inverse is true. That the weapon used would changed for something more available but premeditated murders would continue as they have, because the availability of the gun is not likely the cause of premeditating mass homicide in most cases. Quite the opposite is more likely. Crimes of passion would be more likely to use a gun because they are available. A premeditated murder facilitates much more creative selection and implementation of the means of attack.
There's a lot of backward causality on the issue. Popular discussion always comes down to "guns are available, therefore a lot of people kill people." But the whole body of information suggests instead "A lot of people have intent to kill people. Guns are available, and are therefore are in the top 5 selected weapons used." Political expedience then becomes "we'll stop the murders by removing the guns" rather than, the much more effective "why does this country have so much murderous intent compared to other countries and how do we change that cause?"
Again, we have to pull the organized crime related numbers out of that, though. That's its own whole problem, but is a self-referential one. Your comment to @Kalmaro does state "less guns = less shootings" But that's an irrelevant data point. Does "less guns = less premeditated homicide by any means, excluding organized crime?" I suspect the average social media punter immmediately would say "yes", but the overall data of overall crime statistics here suggests otherwise.
If I ran a study and fed 1000 people a salty meal and provided a table with 5 beverages, one of them was water. Most likely everyone, or nearly everyone would choose the water to drink. It fits their current desire most conveniently and purposefully. If I removed the water from the table, would you conclude that the study participants would cease drinking a beverage because the water was no longer available, or that they would choose a different beverage from the available selection?
Even in the European union one can get a gun if you know where to look so banning guns never really works where there is a will there is a way and it will just switch to knife attacks or blunt weapons.
@NEStalgia maybe I didn't explain my point that well: I don't think you can consider a passion crime and a mass shooting on the same level, cause they are different crimes.
Here in Italy we obviously have our unhealthy dose of passion crimes where, for example, "husband snaps and stabs wife", but we have no mass shootings as in "guy grabs a rifle, enters schools, decimates it"; the reason we don't have the second kind of crime is because we have, comparatively, very few guns.
I know of a very small amount of people who own guns, and they all do for hunting purposes, not for self-defense. I saw this point brought up in other comments and that's one thing that drives me crazy about gun culture in the U.S., because, as an outsider, I get this probably skewed view, but it's not the first time I hear Americans defend their right to own a gun for self defense. And to me, and outsider as I said, it's pure madness. I don't know anyone here who would want a gun to feel safer, if anything it's the opposite.
So maybe, if one really feels the need to own a gun to feel safe, well, I'd say they live in a pretty screwed up place.
Also, I get the thing of buying guns illegally, but obviously if it was hard to get one legally it would also be harder to get one illegally.
I don't know how it works there, but you painted a pretty simple picture for buying a gun illegally. Here, I wouldn't even know where to begin if I wanted one legally.
Just my 2 cents but I believe the violence we see today is people’s disconnection with being a part of society. Communicating and building relationships with other people is what makes us human and dealing with the stress of living amongst others is something lots of people are missing out on. I think video games, for some, is a means of shutting off the real world but those people are unstable to begin with. So yes I think video games should be regulated, some may not see that as fair due to a few spoiled eggs. But if giving up a violent game and trading it off for something a little more pg saves even a life from some deranged individual, I’m fine with that.
@NEStalgia I don't think I've said I've disagreed with what you're saying.
@clvr That's oversimplifying the problem though, more people doe from car wrecks or malpractice than from guns in the US. Just removing guns does not mean that people would be safer.
Mass shootings aren't even that common, I'm not sure why it comes up so often. It's not a contender for the biggest threat to Americans.
@Kalmaro you can't tell me I'm oversimplifying while you count mass shootings and car accidents together, it means you have completely missed my point. I honestly can't fathom how you'd dream to bring up such unrelated thing, it's really baffling.
You said "more guns = safer people", which must be the most American thing I've ever heard ,and one of the most absurd.
I countered by saying "well, statistically it's inevitable that more guns = more people shot", so no, people are not safer with guns. Here in Italy (and I'd say all or a good portion of Europe) people feel perfectly safe and fine without ever feeling the need to buy a weapon for self-defense, that is another mainly American thing. People buy weapons for hunting, for sport, not for self-defense, and to everyone that is not American, the U.S.'s fixation with guns is simply inconceivable. I'd never dream of buying a gun myself.
Regarding you newer comment, I was talking specifically about guns and you can't downplay their relevance just because people die in other ways, that's pretty stupid.
I was talking about guns specifically, so of course I'm gonna talk about mass shootings: the point is my country luckily doesn't offer guns to everyone and anyone, and a consequence of that is that we don't have any mass shootings.
The number is irrelevant, the fact that you even have any in the first place is appalling, and the fact you can downplay those because "they don't happen so often" is equally appalling; not because of faults of yours, but because you apparels live in a place that has conditioned you to think that it's "normal" to have some mass shootings every now and then.
The fact that this "vidya gamez cauz violence" mantra is still even up for debate after a quarter century of being proven factually wrong just goes to show how much power a dumb right-wing media narrative can have on our culture.
@clvr I brought up stuff like car and such because I find it odd people focus on guns when they are not even a significant source of death in America. It's a talking point that gets brought up every now and then for political reasons.
I also don't understand why people say that we aren't safer with guns. How exactly is it that the bad people with guns are stopped in the first place?
And no, we don't just give guns to anyone and everyone. No one does, that in aware of. Do I think that mass shootings are normal? No, of course not, I also don't think it happens often enough that we need to remove guns from everyone because bad people are misusing them.
The problem falls on people, who are often criminals, misusing guns to hurt people. It's a people problem, not a gun problem.
The only time I'd be fine with guns being removed is if all guns on the entire planet vanished. Until then, I'm not giving up a means to protect myself. Especially if the government is saying that they should hold onto them while no one else has them, as some of our politicians have pushed.
It's very clear you are not American, our nation's started different ways.
Other research found violent media actually decreases the rate of violent crime. The basic findings were the violent crime rate dropped during the specific hours a violent film was playing. This is because correlation goes two ways; people who commit violent acts are attracted to violent media, violent media does not make people violent. A simple correlation could point to that, but it isn't correct. Violent media actually acts as a replacement or expression of violence for those that are inclined to violent ideation. A big point in all this is the violent ideation already existed in those more likely to act out in violent ways, for those who do not have violent ideation violent media does not create violent ideation.
@clvr I think your points were well enough stated. But I disagree with the overall conclusion with respect to the overall data. As you say, in Italy you don't get many "guy walks into a school with a rifle" type situations. You're attributing that to being a result of a lack of guns.
My theory for the US is a bit different, based on what we do already know. I think if guns were to be magically erased, we'd still have "guy decimates school" but it would be with a bomb, or a truck, or a stolen airplane, or toxic gas, or lighting a gas line, or dousing the building in fuel, etc. etc. etc. Even a lot of the shooters also used pipe bombs and some homemade explosives. The guns weren't the only weapons they chose.
Which is kind of my point. From your perspective in Europe, the notion of trying to kill tons of people isn't a common thought, and the idea that "it must be because we don't have guns everywhere and America does!" My point is that that's not the difference. It would be the same here without guns. Different (in many cases worse) weapons would be used. So our problem is cultural. Something sets a mood, a mindset, that the others have to die. I do think part of that is the high pressure, high stress, winner-takes-all, if you're not first you're last mentality that drives nearly every aspect of life here. Or at least a part of it. There's clearly a lot of elements, most of them probably subtle and subversive that affect the psyche so extremely for so many here.
While the (agenda driven) media does like to flaunt "self defense" guns as a problem, both in the country or out, when was the last time you heard of someone that killed someone with a self defense weapon? Either in self defense or in crime....those are very very rarely ever actually used at all. I'm not a gun owner myself. It needs to be a hobby for it to have any value and I have more than enough hobbies. If you don't train and practice with it regularly it has no utility. If you don't maintain it impeccably it's more likely to harm yourself than anyone else. It needs a commitment. A lot of people that own one for self defense never really train with it. They probably couldn't use it if they needed to. Though I do know quite a few people who do have guns for hunting and/or self defense. On a regular basis it's no different than being in Europe...they might as well not exist. You don't see them. They're not used. They're sitting in a locked car glove box or trunk, or in a house, or in a purse. It's not really a part of life unless your a participant in the hobby. Media makes it seem that way, but it's not.
OTOH, if I were heading through the seedy part of the city on a daily basis, again, where there's tons of those illegal guns around? I'd feel a LOOOT safer sitting next to one of those friends that carry. I would really be remiss for not doing so myself.
To a degree you have to be familiar with what our ghettos and crimelands look like. I had a friend back in college, came here from a city in the South. That city has a known bad ghetto too. She came here and wasn't prepared for what she saw. The bad parts of cities here are a lot more like ghettos you'd expect in the middle east or Africa than what you might find in Europe. The other part we're not supposed to notice....
I don't feel a need for one here. But if I lived or commuted a mere 30 min from here? Yeah....I might feel the need for one. Ironically, being in Italy this will amuse you, back in the 1920's the Mafia was the heart of organized crime. Today, the Mafia inhabited parts of town are arguably some of the safer ones. If you're not involved in their dealings they aren't a threat, and they tend to keep the streets free of the worse gangs.... Practically, they do more to keep a safe environment than the authorities do. The cartel gangs know the law more or less can't touch them for long. But they're afraid of the Mafia....they're armed and not hamstrung by laws. Illegal guns in the hands of criminals helping citizens from worse criminals while the law fights over jurisdiction and evidence.
But that's two separate things. The one is the ganglands and ghettos. That's one problem. The other is self defense weapons....honestly not a problem. Every now and again someone turns out to be a killer....but that's as uncommon as any other murder in Europe. Then we have the societal problem leading to the more common than average desire to kill people en masse. That's the one that really needs addresing here.
To put it in a European context....there was the incidents in Germany, France, etc with terrorists using trucks to plow down crowds. That seemed odd. It was because of a foreign idea coming in to cause harm, not actual French or Germans deciding to do that to their home. Here....if there were no guns, they'd be using trucks or bombs much more regularly to do the same. Why is it this country has a small but nonzero number of people that want to damage their population to the same degree that non-Europeans want to damage the European population as enemies. Why do we have so many more people that feel their own country is, effectively, a foreign hostile enemy? That's a societal problem, deep in the fabric of life here. Guns are a distraction from that at best.
But even still, "gun violence" isn't a major issue unless you're near the ghettos. In which case "gun violence" and "violence in general" are a way of life. That alone, speaks to the societal problem....
@Kalmaro I'm gonna repeat myself, where gun death rate in the "leaderboard" is not important, it's the fact that they happen at all.
"I also don't understand why people say that we aren't safer with guns. How exactly is it that the bad people with guns are stopped in the first place?"
By not giving guns away, just like the rest of the world does. Simple as that. Sorry but if you can't grasp such a simple concept I don't think there's a point in discussing this matter further. It's probably me, but I find it absolutely inconceivable that someone would reply something like that. Again, it's probably not your fault, but paints a rather terrifying picture of your country.
Also, with your last comment to Kalmaro: Where it falls on the leaderboard is relevant. You can kill people with a pencil. People do kill people with pencils. Should pencils be banned? No. Are pencils a problem? No. What's a problem is that in a particular country more people want to kill each other than in other countries. Regardless of the tools used. There's a weird political fixation on guns partially because it's one thing that's a threat to themselves as well....they can insulate themselves from crime, but not the risk of an armed public that doesn't like them very much. Politicians are a lot more paranoid about guns than normal people who are paranoid about a whole host of threats to their safety, many of which rank a lot higher than guns on their watch list.
The more the conversation of that goes toward "guns guns guns" the more nobody looks at the REAL problems rather than the tools used to act upon them.
We don't "give away guns" - there are lots of restrictions on purchasing them. Waiting periods. Background checks. Identity verification. Most of the shootings that do happen involve illegal guns that a ban wouldn't solve. Of the ones with legal guns it's often someone else's guns (parents, neighbors, friends that weren't kept properly secure from theft - plain stupidity), or a "crime of passion" more or less with someone's own gun. But that's the rarest of all.
The worst school attack on US soil still remains one from the late 19th century. No guns were used. It was dynamite. One can say things actually improved in the last century....
@NEStalgia oh ok, now I see your points clearer and can get behind them.
Regarding the ghettos, here in Italy we don't have that kind of thing so I wouldn't know how it works, though I'll admit it terrifies me that the most powerful country in the world still has this kind of problem with violence out in the open. And my criticism was mostly towards the culture of "carrying", which is something unimaginable here, but if ghettos really get that bad, I might maybe understand it.
The closest we have here are some suburbs in the south: I'm from the north so I don't know first hand, but pretty much everybody knows which blocks to avoid in cities like Naples, cause there's a strong presence of mafia-like organizations and that also spurs minor crime and a generalized sense of "anarchy" around there.
That said, most of gun violence that happens there is strictly between criminals fighting for turf and whatnot, while the real mafia, as you said, have long since established in the upper echelons and leave violence to their lackeys.
Back to shootings, I think you nailed it on the head: when stuff like that happens here, it's usually foreigners and terrorists, while in the U.S. they're often Americans.
And I absolutely agree that there are greater societal and psychological issues beneath it (I'm studying psychology), I never wanted to chalk it up to "it's the guns' fault", but it seems a bit absurd to me to downplay their importance in American culture simply because there's no analogy anywhere else in the world, as far as I know, and the way guns are considered "normal" in American in simply not healthy.
What worries me the most is that people, like Kalmaro for example, see them as the solution, when really they're the problem to which they should be the solution.
If guns were more regulated like the rest of the world, less criminals would have them, and you'd feel safer, and you wouldn't feel the need for a gun to protect yourself.
@patbacknitro18 WW2 was actually sponsored by Activision so they could sell games in the future
@Kalmaro I've done some research and writing on the topic and there isn't enough space here to give a decent summary. You are completely right and the topic is so politicised hardly anyone is talking about reality. Basically, more than 95% of the US is as safe or safer than any peer nation. Crime stats are filled up by career criminals in strictly defined territories and everyday people are blamed. Rarely there is a mass killing (which is not limited to guns). Guns in circulation are not the problem because as they have increased crimes of all kinds have decreased. Statistically and logically there is no justification for most of the lazy arguments that the "lax laws" or "access" are to blame. Those only work if one doesn't know anything about the situation in the US.
@clvr Are you suggesting only the government have guns or all guns cease to exist?
The reason I ask is that part of America's history, a huge part. The idea of a government holding absolute power over the common people under it is extremely repulsive to a lot of Americans, or has been until recently.
Lately, there has been a push for just having the government having guns and no one else. However, then one has to ask what do the people do if the government starts to oppress the people . The reason we have our guns is to help make sure we never have to deal with an authoritarian government again.
The only way I would ever be okay with our guns being taken is if all guns were to just vanish on the planet and that's it. I don't want guns just because they are cool or fun for hunting, I just don't trust the government.
That's not even touching on why we have a lot of our gun-related homicides, gang violence and often with illegally obtained guns. That is why I'm against just making it harder to get guns for law abiding citizens when they aren't the problem, criminals are.
@Krazzar Oh trust me, I know. I hate hearing about how cops are shooting black people "so much" but no one wants to talk about black on black crime causing problems too. We can't fix problems of we refuse to acknowledge them.
After I play Sonic all I want to do is steal rings and emeralds and start a fight with a bold fat guy.
Violent video games don’t cause violence.
-continues playing Manhunt whilst chewing a steak and sweet potato-
@clvr Yes, it is terrifying that such a country has ghettos the way we do. That should be a very troubling thing. Nobody talks about it. It's ignored. It's meant to be ignored. Theses and essays could be written on it and only arrive at part of the causes and hows and ways. A lot of historical and modern causes combine to create that. Suffice it to say it's a mix of the ever widening economic gap (which is accelerating) plus the organized crime cartels, and the associated drug dependence that's a self-feeding problem. Some would point to racism but, like the gun issue, that's a nice pretty political cover to put over much more complex problems involving economics. Many would say "racism" but like "guns" that's a pretty and oversimplified political canvas painting over a much more intricate and complicated confluence of truths. It's a mix of economics, overall social constructs, the history of how things were divided, race divisions (not just the current white/black relationship but historically overall city development and social migrations that occurred in the early 20th century with the large Italian and Jewish immigration that affected economics and migratory patterns around cities, etc....it's very complex and involves Europe's history through WWI and WWII as well helping to shape it.) So many facets from a sociological perspective built the present (yes, including cynical and corrupt politics that continue today.)
But the end result of major metros generally surrounded by ghetto rings where no sane person would spend any time if they have a choice. Places with broken glass lining the streets, extreme poverty, decay, and of course the drug cartels which is a big cause of the condition of the areas in general. South/Central American gangs, Bloods, Crips, MS13, etc....a very violent bunch, really control those areas. And what they don't, their product controls.... drug-wasted sections of society. The vicious cycle of poverty and drugs feeding each other.
And therein lies part of the violence problem and gun problem and where most of those statistics you see come from. Not everyday crazy people with guns that you hear about once every year or two.
Solving that ghetto problem. Well...if you were a politician with a dedicated voting populace among those ghettos......would you work very hard to fix it? Or would you keep that problem well hidden and keep taking payment via votes from your dependent population because you keep telling them the same lie over and over, and they're not really in much of a position to figure out you're lying even though their never improving situation probably should be a clue that you don't have their best interests at heart? That's a whole other complex conversation though...
Of course Europe has crime and ghettos....but there's something particularly "3rd world" about our ghettos that should be a national embarrassment and shame...but isn't, because we pretend it doesn't exist.
Maybe that's part of that driving force of fear that makes people prone to violence. There's always that looming threat that if you slip far enough you become one of the "unwanted" lost in the ghettos.
Kalmaro's points aren't invalid, but they do at times refer to the "opposition" talking points on the matter...cliches that are also simplifications. The problem is REALLY hashing through the details is exhausting and time consume, and too often people don't listen anyway and fall right back into the same politically-curated mantras that the "shorthand" of the talking points is just easier to bother with.
@Kalmaro every point you make is about how, “yes this is bad, but there are other things that are bad too”. Guns kill, but so do hammers knives and throwing stars. Police shoot and kill African Americans, but African Americans are apparently overly violent towards each other.
A thief in a department store is still a problem, even if there is another thief an aisle over. Maybe the department store needs to rework how they handle their security as a whole?
@Kalmaro I and the majority of Italians also don't trust our government, but we do entrust them with the power of wielding violence: I get your point, but giving up rights such as the right to be violent and to make your own justice is the foundation of a civilized state.
And while I don't trust my government at all, the fact that the police can wield a weapon and I cannot is honestly the least of my concerns.
Again, it seems to be a problem in the U.S. only.
@clvr It's because the King of England attacked their country via sail boat over 200 years ago. That's why every man, woman and child needs to stay armed at all times. You don't want to be left empty handed if the Queen sends over another fleet of schooners.
@NEStalgia thanks for the in-depth reply, I really appreciate it cause I don't have first-hand knowledge of how it works over there and that helps paint a more realistic picture.
As with everything else, the issue is multi-faceted and dives deep into other aspects of life, so thanks for trying to explain it to a foreigner.
To be clear, I never wanted to dumb this thing down to "gun bad, get rid of them", as you can see from my other comments it's simply inconceivable to me that guns have such a central role in the U.S. for what I've been used to experience in my life.
That said, you helped shed light on some of the contributing factors 👍🏻
@itslukec That's not true at all, that was not my only argument or even my main one. It's just one of the point o was making, why are we focusing on guns so much when we have other issues that are bigger and are not being addressed.
We are already handling things with guns now, it is not as easy as the news media makes it out to be to get a gun in the vast majority of cases. That and, the problem is with criminals getting guns illegally, which means gun laws being stricter won't help.
@clvr Its an issue in the US because it was a large part of our history. Keep in mind that we have completely different histories as far as how our nation's came about.
That also comes with different ideologies. I don't think that what you are doing where you are at is better or worse than over here, its obviously working fine for you guys. What I am saying is that this is the US so we can't just take a solution from one place and apply it to somewhere else without fully diving into what the problem is.
Over here, it's not that gun laws aren't strict enough, they are already extremely strict, to the point that if you do the wrong crime, you can't even be near a gun without going to prison. The issue here is that we have people who just don't care about gun laws and will also get guns from out of state (which is illegal here I believe, you can't drive across state lines with a gun without following some very specific rules that change depending on where you're at) or sometimes from out of the country.
If we had numbers to show that a large amount of gun homicides were caused by regular people with no criminal past then I'd be more inclined have harsher background checks and such. As it stands now, its criminals were dealing with, and they are taking guns to places where guns aren't allowed and THEN shooting people.
@clvr thanks, and thanks for taking the time to read it all and really think through the various complexities. As you can see from many responses here, it's rare that someone really does that (and this thread is very polite in contrast to social media!). It was definitely pleasant to have someone actually converse rather than falling back on battle lines. I appreciate it!
And for the record, don't let media color your perception that guns are just everywhere all day every day here. It's not GTA: Real Life Edition here outside the ghetto. Most people aren't thinking about guns most of the time.
Well except Florida. Florida people think of nothing but guns all day....
And yet, some people will still blame games anyway. All you can do is keep repeating the evidence.
@MoonKnight7 nah that type of people will ignore the evidence at all cost.
Their ideology is the only real truth in their eyes.
The Link is only on legend of zelda games
I just finished going through all 4 episodes of the classic Doom yesterday and so far I don't have the urge to shoot up any high schools, but we'll see what happens when I finish Doom II.
The clowns in the comments talking about guns should really look up the statistics about 90% of all gun crime are committed with illegally obtained guns
@NEStalgia I know you Yankees love to point at Florida and laugh, but I still don't fully understand why 😂
Though I'll admit looking up Florida on the internet and taking a look at the headlines is quite amusing.
I enjoyed our conversation too, my friend, take care 👍🏻
@Kalmaro I definitely agree on different solutions for different places, both you and NEStalgia helped shed light on this for me.
Though to be honest, the fact that there is such a presence of illegal weapon is quite worrying and seems to me that it still stems from a generalized overenthusiasm over weapons. You describe smuggling weapons illegally as quite simple, and I couldn't imagine doing this here as easily, but I might be wrong.
@clvr No problem
We do have a lot of drugs and weapons that try to get smuggled across the US border, then there's how we have people who just don't care about laws and will do whatever they want.
Any semi-intelligent and informed person who doesn't have an agenda could have told you as much a long time ago. In fact, many of them have been saying as much for a long time.
I once sniped [as in killed] nigh-on an entire city of people out of pure frustration and rage--in a video game called GTA.
I should probably be locked up right now just in case.
No Link Between Violent Video Games And Violent Behaviour, Says American Psychological Association
This says it all.....Now those DoomedDoomed should stop scapegoating games for this reason many-many gamers already knows. GAMES don't make a person Violent
@xpownz Problematic people problems are caused by bad parenting, abuse, etc. Not videogames.
That's TABOO talking... lmao
@Kalmaro This is the very same people whom have no clue about owning a Gun is for hunting not hunting People. Let's get this fact out. There is NO study about what your talking since the Alt(Nazi)Right and NRA have joined party to stop any meaningful studies. So what study are you talking about Please give links to factual and verified Studies. Also did you know those Criminals get guns from gun owners whom are STrawBuyer for them. How do you think criminals get a majority of their weapons - sure they steal them but they just buy them online or from STRawBuyers put those StRawBuyers in with Bubba and you will stop guns and Criminals.
@SwitchForce Well let's be specific, which claim that I've made are you disputing?
I know I haven't put up links to studies and that's largely because this is getting off topic from the article itself, so it's best for people to do their own research.
There's another that is talking your points about statics and yet they have never done any kinda statics because the NRA/Gun Lobbyists blocked anything. And yet people don't talk about putting those gun owners whom sell to illegal market why not stop those and you will stop all those criminals with guns. But we all know those aren't the ones behind bars-that will stop all those illegal guns out there. For a Criminal to get a gun a legal owner must sell or leave unsecure to get stolen and used. Maybe if we started putting those owners whom can't secure their weapons in Jail we will start to see gun violence drop.
@SwitchForce Pardon, you didn't tag me so I didn't notice you're comment. Are you saying that the only way for a criminal to get a gun is from someone who legally purchased a gun? What makes you so sure of this?
Also, yes, the CDC has done research on guns and has gotten quite a bit of data on how they have been used, like how most mass shootings involve handguns, and shoots in general. AR-15s aren't used as much as the media says.
Tap here to load 143 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...