Video game turns students to a life of crime
polycounter
Just saw this article, later linked on Kotaku:
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/student-found-weapons-orange-co-elementary-school/nZ8DK/
Sure, I can understand titles like GTA or CoD getting a lot of stick over this, but Minecraft? Really XO
If you're going to bring a weapon to school, at least make it a diamond sword :poly124:
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/student-found-weapons-orange-co-elementary-school/nZ8DK/
Sure, I can understand titles like GTA or CoD getting a lot of stick over this, but Minecraft? Really XO
If you're going to bring a weapon to school, at least make it a diamond sword :poly124:
Replies
The article I feel was fairly balanced about this. They made no correlations between games and violence, just stated what the father himself had said - no judgement, no attempted connection, they didn't even bring up similar cases.
Seems like the journalist and most rational people are going to figure that the boy was emulating something, only he fucked up by not recognizing the threat that others would feel the gun posed (and arguably did pose, although the pin was removed), and his parents fucked up by leaving the gun somewhere there impressionable child would have access to it, even if they thought it was safe. And it also seems like the reaction here would have been the same if he were emulating a movie, song lyrics, a parent, or a friend. Nobody in this is vilifying the games, not that I've seen. Maybe pundits on the outskirts, but that's probably going to be about it.
So, the only person I feel is embellishing the story here is the misleading title, which is trying to get us to believe that there is some sort of anti-game conspiracy going on here, when in reality it's all very level headed (of the judge, and of the reporter).
Just my .02$
Edit - looked up the Kotaku article. It's just linkbait. They're creating a controversy where none existed for pageviews. They should be fairly ashamed of themselves by the way they pander to the reactionary children that are their reader base.
As for the home confinement, seems like he got off easy for bringing a gun to school, considering the way it goes for many children. Also lucky that it didn't turn into a tragic accident.
Father: Boy who brought weapons to school was acting out zombie-slaying game Minecraft
Never heard it being described as a zombie slaying game before. Did Lego ever have to deal with this shit?
The dad should be slapped in the face just like parents that let their 12 year old play GTA
ZIIIIIING!
Seems reasonable to me.....yep, nothing wrong there....
Passing the blame, like oh hell naww wasn't my fault it was the vidya games fault.
No guns in the 360minecraft trololol. But seriously tho how are all these children getting hold of guns! gees lol.
Seriously i'm surprised he has kids because he certainly does not have the balls to admit to his mistake. Albeit the firing pin was taken out, thats live ammo in a cartridge shouldn't the father be prosecuted for not securing firearms & endangering his child's life?
Love the way you blame parenting when its quite clear that no one needs a gun, its quite simple make them illegal and give anyone a prison sentence if they have one in there possession.
In the UK the penalty for possession of a prohibited firearm without a certificate is a maximum of ten years in prison and an unlimited fine, job done!
Fully automatic (submachine-guns, etc.) are totally prohibited from private ownership. Semi-Auto rifles over .22 and pistols are currently prohibited.
Basically you are not allowed a gun, this means I can go to the cinema and not worry about nut jobs like James Eagan Holmes or walk my dog late at night through a city and not have to worry about being shot.
thats taking a very personal and political view on gun ownership something this is not really even about, but ill bite, the most dangerous thing this kid took into the school was the knife.
The fact of the matter is people will kill with whatever they can find, rocks, bombs, knives, hammers, I can give you countless examples especially in china of mass stabbings, and when you say people shouldn't have firearms, you are saying in your idea of society Firearms shouldn't be banned as you clearly believe only certain people should own firearms, Police, Military, private security agencies who are all generally under the thumb of the government of which you consider will only ever look out for the best interests of you the citizen.
this coming a citizen of a government which seeks to ban esoteric content filter the internet while creating a cyber warfare division, is complicit on citizen spying and detained the boyfriend of a journalist under terrorism laws, and this only begins to scratch the surface of the Oligarchical nepotistic orwellian society the UK has quite clearly become though I suppose it always did have an air of nepotism and entitlement to it back to 1066...
Though I quite easily concede there can be more done for background checks and licensing, its about striking a balance, there are countries where every household has a assault rifle yet remarkably low gun violence so the object itself is less a problem than the society of violence.
Yes, we must trust only the government and their poorly paid and educated hired gunmen, afterall they are looking out for you.
*ahem*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-25671/Violent-crime-worse-Britain-US.html
The things you should really worry about are car accidents and cancer. The synthetic snacks at the movie theater are probably the most dangerous thing you will encounter in your lifetime.
car vs cancer vs gun
logic as usual
[ame="
This only can happen in usa
BTW, it's easier to kill a person with a gun than with a knife. "Give them wings... and they will fly". I'm totally agree with littleclaude, but i think it's because i'm not a gun freak from usa, but another humble european citizen without fear of other people (and i'm not calling you freak). I also like guns, but plastic ones with alien look like the ones of district 9 (not real).
Everyday i get surprised with something
This was never about gun control or whatever else you wish to make it into, to suit a personal agenda.
The parent is to blame. End of.
If i never taught my child that sitting on the stove was bad and he did it. I would be to blame. If i left a lock knife out on my desk, and my child picked it up and hurt himself with it. I'm to blame. If i left a gun out with a loaded cartridge and the child takes it to school. I'm to blame.
Gun control means about as much as hammer control in this situation.
The child was left unsupervised to gain control of three possible weapons and the parents did not know until it was too late. The parents never taught their child the obvious dangers of even touching them, never mind the impact of concealing them and bringing them to school.
If it was just a knife and the kid was using it to pretend to kill zombies, the parents would still be to blame.
So yes, the parents are to blame.
Sure you could blame parents for not supervising their children but it's quite clear no one needs a swimming pool. It's quite simple to make them illegal and give anyone a prison sentence if they have a swimming pool in their backyard.
Do it for the children.
swimmingpool.jpg
So this really isn't about pro or against guns....
(still, as a side note, people like to compare guns with swimming pool and all sorts of other stuff, but they forget that unlike swimming pool, gun was created with only one reason - to kill. This means it's easy and very effective. I doubt swimming pool was created for that purpose. But, this really isn't related to this article at all.....)
How do you feel about lead paint and asbestos? They killed a lot of people sure, but I mean that wasn't their intention so really we don't need laws to control them right?
I would curse myself for posting this thread but...
I think that is one very important factor that shouldn't be overlooked. Yes, sure, lead paint and asbestos are very dangerous, but again, they simply are nowhere near as effective as gun. Again, gun was made with one specific goal in mind; to kill as easy and as effective as possible.
This means every little kid, if they manage to get a hold on it, can kill someone in a second. He can do it so fast there's no way anyone can really react.
None of the things you mention, as far as i know, can kill someone so fast and so effective.
That's why i say, it's very important factor. Not the only one, but i would say one of , if not THE most important one, so you can't just compared guns with those.
But, again, I'm not trying to turn this into pro and against gun debate. Just saying why i don't think you can compare swimming pool and guns or asbestos, wetter you are for guns or not, doesn't really even matter.
this is absolutely about bad parenting.
i'm not saying i'm the perfect parent, or that nothing ever goes wrong in my house or with my kids. but they ALL know not to fuck around with knives, sledgehammers, and guns. they even (quite responsibly i'll add) decided they didn't like nerf guns anymore after one of them got a nerf dart to the eye.
now imagine that was a real gun and it took the back of someones head off instead. 9 year old kids are a tricky things, sometimes they act incredibly mature and other times they don't. i'm 99% sure that even the best 9 year old wouldn't even understand the concept of taking a life, even if they actually did it... it's an almost alien thing to people that age. in fact i doubt they would even show remorse as to them "i was just trying to have fun!" you know?
as a parent, it's my job to help steer my kids away from situations they aren't emotionally developed enough to handle, and try to introduce them to the world in manageable stages. having guns around... live or not, is one of those judgement calls for a parent. this kids parents failed.
Because I don't think it's any consolation to the loved ones of people that have died from lead poisoning and asbestos that they died from something that "doesn't kill as effectively" as a firearm.
You could just as easily apply your logic the opposite way and say that other objects are more dangerous than guns because the dangers they posess are not inherently obvious or evident to the user in a way a firearm is so people are less careful about avoiding them.
Furthermore regardless of their intent the only thing the overwhelming majority of guns in the U.S. will ever kill is beer bottles, small game, and silhouettes on a target sheet at a shooting range.
:icon15:
I pay higher insurance because I have a pool, it is definitely a dangerous thing and most parents don't want young ones unsupervised in the pool. I almost killed myself diving into a shallow pool when I was a youngster.
MY point was that many people (specifically littleclaude in this case) irrationally dismiss the responsibility of the parent whenever there is a gun involved. This is a logic impairment that doesn't affect people when thinking about the dangers of other things such as swimming pools which is why I used it to illustrate my point.
I was just saying because guns are so effective, things can go wrong in a split of a second, and for that reason, it's even more important for parents to be sure not to let the kids get control over them, even if it's just a mistake.
That's why my first comment was like that; I hear many times, people complaining about how the guy played some game, watched some movie, etc., but not many people actually asks,how did the kid even get the gun, and who's fault is it that he has it. And in many cases, it seems to be just parents not really doing good job hiding gun from kids.
And instead of thinking about that, those kind of news quickly turn into pro and against guns, when the real issue many times isn't even about that at all.
Sorry, my english still isn't exactly perfect, so sorry if i gave you wrong impression.,....