Violent Game Devs are Virtual Child Molesters, Says Politician

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What a crazy statement. I have been playing games for a long time and I will pick a earthworm up off the drive way and place it in the dirt instead of letting it burn up from the sun. I can't see how comparing a game dev to a child molester is even in the same ball park. Darth Nader is tripping.
 
It could be that those politicians are trying to take attention away from their own real (not virtual) child molestation, and possibly trying to find some way to blame violent games for their molesting ways before the public finds out about all of the children that they have been molesting.

 
Hey ! Let me ask you this : In how many countries outside the US has schol shootings occurred ? I know you have a "Constitutional Right" but maybe it´s time to revoke it.
Kinder Eggs are prohibited because of a small toy inside is considered dangerous, but you can legally get an AK47 ??? Tell me in which scenario an assault rifle makes perfect sense for a normal citizen to have ?
 
were is a button of this guys face so i can dislike it into non existence
 
Maybe you should put a little more common sense into your posts, Gooberface. What, first of all, constitutes a "normal citizen?" I have been raised around guns since the age of 5, and got an Apple IIe with "real floppy disks." I didn't shoot anyone at school, nor have made any viruses to reap international havoc on unsuspecting consumers. It is our "Constitutional Right" which allows even asinine statements such as yours to said without consequence (nor merit, I might add.) For all the countries who trust their governments to do the right thing, let me remind you that they are composed of the same "normal citizens" who keep imposing their opinions into laws, and eventually (as history has proven) some of these normal citizens push further, strip the others of most freedoms, until there is nothing left but a dictatorship, and all the atrocities that go with them. It should be self-explanatory when confronted with such an assault that I have the same type of weapon to defend myself against such tyranny. I need not list examples, for there are too many presently, and historically, that make the point self-evident. So, it seems in every scenario, you have every sense but the common one.
 
toms get a van kid nap this guy and have a reader meat up so we can all slap him
 
If someone makes the argument that violent game developers are child molesters then I can just as easily make the argument that maybe the someone is saying that because they want to be able to molest children and in order to make it easier for them to do that they need to ban things that can help teach children how to defend themselves.
 
[citation][nom]The_Trutherizer[/nom]Is it a liberal initiative? Isn't this kind of restriction anti-liberal?[/citation]

Classical liberal, yes. Under the current definition of liberal no. Classical liberals were closer to libertarian in their views.

Liberal = Liberty = Freedom.

Currently, outrage that the government isn't doing more to stop things that one doesn't agree with is the current interpretation of liberal.
 
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]Libtards........[/citation]
This is even an issue at all because the NRA has brought up video games while trying to deflect blame from our insane gun laws. The NRA aren't exactly "libtards."
 
Progressives at their finest. These idiots will never stop until they take away everything good and wholesome about this country. It all started back in the 1800s, first going after alcohol. Today their targets include guns, video games, violent music, fast cars, steroids, smoking, and much more. I'm sure once they take a few of those out they will go back to the old standby of going after alcohol.... not that they don't go after it on the edges right now (like drunk driving).

These people are why I have a house in another country.

Ralph Nader got his start don't ya know going after small fast cars? He took out the old 60's style Corvette. Which is why we got the 70s style Corvette.
 
[citation][nom]oxiide[/nom]This is even an issue at all because the NRA has brought up video games while trying to deflect blame from our insane gun laws. The NRA aren't exactly "libtards."[/citation]

Show me something released by the NRA on this....

there were some conservative and liberal politicians who brought it up.... but I have not seen the NRA release an official statement about violent video games. And yes I am a member of the NRA and do get the press releases.
 
[citation][nom]Gooberface[/nom]Hey ! Let me ask you this : In how many countries outside the US has schol shootings occurred ? I know you have a "Constitutional Right" but maybe it´s time to revoke it.Kinder Eggs are prohibited because of a small toy inside is considered dangerous, but you can legally get an AK47 ??? Tell me in which scenario an assault rifle makes perfect sense for a normal citizen to have ?[/citation]

The assault rifle is just a name to make certain guns seem scary but the actual internal firing hardware is exactly the same as whats found in your standard hunting rifle. (if you do not believe me, dur your self a standard semi auto hunting rifle, then buy your self an AR-15 and take both apart.

Just like how you can have a PC with a bland case, of a system with the same hardware, but with a flash case with enough LED's to light up a small country, you get the same with a rifle.

Also there is nothing bad about semi auto. almost all guns sold are semi auto as it allows you to shoot multiple times. Unless you have a high powered military weapon, unless your shot is extremely well placed, it will be difficult to incapacitate someone with a single shot (it is not like in the movies where a bullet sends someone flying

If someone is hopped up on drugs to a point where the pain response is not functioning properly, you can fire a lot of shots into them and unless you hit the head, heart or spine, or key supporting muscles, an attacker can still come at you.

That is why in law enforcement training, you are told to shoot until the threat is gone. Not all people will go into shock the moment a bullet.

good example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEpEoWLkKMc&list=FLQONwMGUgRxD8jpGg1xmjGA

furthermore a standard handgun will kill someone just as dead as a rifle would, and a normal handgun will shoot just as fast as the "assault rifles" that some people are so scared of.

Imagine if someone breaks in and you are stuck with a single shot weapon and you mis the first shot, or you only graze them, or you don't hit anything vital? (you will not have the time to be fiddling with ammo and dropping it in a panic, or getting charged due to the unreasonably long reload time)

In the US, mass shootings as defined by 3 or more innocent people being killed in a single event, are rare but they all (with the exception of events such as the civil war) happen in gun free zones where the good guys are disarmed and the criminal is the only one with a gun.

Furthermore, there are 30-40 events a year on average where a potential mass shooting is stopped (a person begins shooting but is stopped by someone else, and every single one of those cases, a person with a gun was the one to stop them.

Gun ownership reduces crime, every state or country that has passed strict gun control to ban guns, have showed a 200-300% increase in violent crime (no exceptions), also an increase in murder as criminals no longer have to worry about their victims being armed and can freely assault the public. (in large part the increase in murder in areas where guns are banned is due to the shift of more criminals engaging in home invasions while the people are still home and deciding that dead people make bad witnesses.

In areas with high gun ownership, the cost of doing a violent crime becomes significantly higher. (if you look at the gun laws in many states, and find the ones with the most relaxed gun control, you will see that the violent crime that is not counted as domestic abuse and not counted as gang related activity, is in the single digits while in states with the most strict gun control (eg NY, it is in the thousands)

Most gun violence come from gang activity and lax gun control or strict gun control seems to have no impact on the gangs killing people (they get their guns from the black market to ensure that they cannot be traced to an owner, so banning guns only disarms the law abiding people) (the countries with the highest violent crime rate (essentially the top 10, will have the UK at the top, followed by countries such a Australia, and a mis of other countries with strong gun control and 3rd world countries. (the US may have the highest gun death, but we have some of the lowest violent crime rate on the planet (most gun deaths in America are due to suicide and gang activity, of the few that remain, most are considered justifiable homicide, of which most is committed by the police (which is also counted in the gun death stats)
 
Really!!! Okay these type of politicians should be called out and publicly bi@# slapped.

One big problem I still see today is that too many people look at video games as stuff for children only and that is one reason why you get Progressive morons and their push to tell people what they should do. Well first, like many here have said, parents need to pay attention to what their kids not only watch but play. I am a Gen X, the tail end of Gen X, and grew up with video games. Now I do not get to play them that much anymore but I still do so do many other adults. The game industry knows that and as such does put out games that are for more mature players as well as for kids.

There is a rating system for video games for all you parents that might be reading this. USE IT!. The rating is right on the gaming box and if you just do the digital downloads well go online and check the game out before you download it and you will see the rating.

If the rating is "M" for mature then its a good bet that game is not for little Johnny. I love fps games, but let me tell in my house Battlefield 3 is not for baby :).
 
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]Oh yea, Ralph Nader is a political activist... not a politician...[/citation]


you mean he's an a-- holes .. look it up in the dictionary , i'm sure a--hole is one of the defnitions provided for political activist.
 
I can't believe the comment section has devolved into a political debate. Let's just get the fact straight and kee it simple:

1. Ralph Nader's a retard.
2. He said a retarded thing.
3. Let's mock him for a while and then let him fall by the wayside.

There, was that so hard?
 
Nadar is a tree hugging liberal, aka fascist/marxist like almost all Demo☭Rats. They talk good lies but deep down they want to take away your freedoms and micromanage all our lives.
 
This happened in the 80s with music. Tipper and Al Gore going after musicians claiming their music caused kids to murder and commit suicide. Today's politician is nothing less than a rapist. They are raping the American people of their freedoms and our money. When government gets involved the people lose.
 
[citation][nom]bemused_fred[/nom]I can't believe the comment section has devolved into a political debate. Let's just get the fact straight and kee it simple:1. Ralph Nader's a retard.2. He said a retarded thing.3. Let's mock him for a while and then let him fall by the wayside.There, was that so hard?[/citation]
If the shoe fits.... and the shoe fits almost all Demo☭Rats aka loony leftists/progressives or what ever they are calling their communist party now days..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.