Stupid Loser on Twitter Tries to HIJACK #NoBillNoBreak to attack violent games

Ok... Today the Senators decided to "hold Republicans Hostage" for a 21 hour Filibuster to try to get Gun Control Legislation Passed.. They set up a Hashtag on twitter for this : #NoBillNoBreak

Now why am I mentioning this?

Some idiots are using these stupid hashtags to feed FALSE INFO to the senators now. FALSE INFO that bashes violent games.  Like this tweet:

The tweet in question links to the following extremely flawed study...

The Study Attempts to use Heart Rate and GSR to "prove" violent games make people "desensitized" to "Real Life" Violence.  That's complete Bunk. Number 1, video games can make people "desensitized" to video game violence, but since fake violence in a video game is not the same as "real" violence there is no way a game can desensitize a person to "real life" violence because they are different.

But the real problem with this study is it's trying to use measurements from areas OUTSIDE the brain to prove "desensitization" to real life violence. Your reaction to a real life violence can't be measured that way at all. It's complete nonsense. Since "desensitization" is a brain thing, measuring those two things makes no sense... Seeing Real life violence doesn't shock people enough to raise their heart rate or GSR.  And even if that was true, there are other factors that can cause those two things to happen, so seeing those two results doesn't really prove violent games "desensitize" people to real life violence. It's a hack, a completely crazy one too.

But what really pisses me off is idiots like "My Atlanta Tweeps" trying to HIJACK a gun control debate to legislate their version of morality where violent games get banned or censored. It's sick. Violent games don't cause real life violence, that's BS I have debunked tons of times before. There are even studies proving this now. I am not making this up. There is even a study that disproves the whole idea that video games desensitize people to real life violence as well. You can read it here.

People like this idiot shouldn't be allowed internet access. They try to HIJACK a gun control debate to go after entertainment. They are brainwashed idiots who blindly believe "video games cause real life violence" because they don't know how to question all the fake BS people like the Hack Psychologists on talk shows have spread since Columbine.


EDIT: And we have another loser doing the same thing on twitter, this time wanting all gun violence to be removed from all entertainment that has it (TV, Movies, Video Games)

Republican Senators are trying to Legislate Video Games after Orlando in their Gun Proposal.

This allows them to study whether "Alleged" and "otherwise" mass murderers played or discussed violent games and whether they trained on them. Since training on games is impossible (see below), this will attack violent games for a BS claim which isn't true (The Military trains on them - brought up by the hack psychologists in the 90's on talk shows)

It also targets NON Mass Murderers. They will be studying "Alleged" and "otherwise" mass murderers. Anyone can say someone "allegedly" killed people. Hell Adam Lanza's Brother and Youtube Comedian Samuel Hyde count for that because people blamed mass killings on them. The study will study people like this. Since these people never killed, the "alleged" mass murderer clause can be used to study anyone, because they can allegedly say someone killed people based on a rumor and claim they killed... I don't want the senate or the attorney general studying video game violence, especially committed by people who never killed anyone! That's stupid... So I suggest you write to your senators to stop this BS. I need you to. No one else is trying to stop it. Gamepolitics is gone. ESA doesn't care. #Gamergate doesn't give a shit (all they care about is sexism, not video game legislation!). I need you to fight this if you value your damn video games.

IT'S IMPORTANT..

EDIT : It seems the bill has died in congress.. Thanks Gamers. Nice Work! 

 "Hello.

I am writing you with a concern about Chuck Grassley's Senate Ammendmant 

(SA 4751)

I looked at the text of it and it includes a clause to make the Attorney 

General  Study Video Game Violence, including whether a "alleged" mass 

killer (or deceased  one, or convicted one) discussed, played, or "trained" 

on  violent video games.

I feel that doing this underhanded action in a gun control centered

 piece of legislation unfairly blames the gaming industry for mass killings. 

We've been through this time and time again over the years.

In the 1990's we were blamed for columbine. Since then, every mass 

shooting was  blamed on violent games. Studies were done that were 

very flawed and seemed to prove violent games cause aggression. Anti

 Video game activists claimed that this  proved they caused violence, 

not aggression. Later on better studies were done  that proved violent 

games do not cause real life violence. 

By Studying video game violence, Grassley hopes to deflect the 

blame away from  guns and terrorism in general and onto violent 

video games.  The "Discussion of  Violent Games" by "alleged" mass 

killers allows him to target non-violent people  and worse. He also 

wants to find out if games can be used as training tools. The 

short answer is NO.

Many people have gone on TV shows saying that they can, 

but they are all  charletons interested in making money 

(by suing Video Game Companies or Selling  a book that says the 

military uses games to train soldiers) The Following Site however is 

written by someone in the military and completely  debunks the claim. 

I trust it because it's from the military and not from someone 

trying to sell a book....

http://designsynthesis.blogspot.com/2005/03/training-our-kids-to-kill.html

Games are not realistic enough to train to kill with. 

The Ones Adam Lanza and  Klebold/Harris played with certainly 

aren't. Call of Duty and Doom are as far  away from a realistic 

game (defined as one that mimics real life at least close 

to perfectly) as you can get. The guns aren't realistic. They 

don't fire like  real guns, you can't even learn how to properly 

load them with a game like this. 

Doom Especially. Call of duty is a little better but 

it's far from a Realistic 

combat simulator.  And all the other games that the other 

mass killers played 

that are violent are sword fighting games, and since they killed with 

guns, they  don't count. Please do note vote for SA 4751. The Gaming 

Industry  does not need to be  punished in a witch hunt over mass 

shootings (especially Orlando) Caused by  Terrorism."

If you don't fight this, who knows how many senators 

will even see these issues, 

nevermind fight them. 

If it passes they're could be Gaming Legislation next. 

That's disgusting, after a

shooting caused by terrorism... Shit like this needs 

to be stopped. FIGHT IT.

Brainwashed and Retarded MSNBC Morning Talk show host bashes Call of Duty

After reading gamepolitics again, I found this lovely article. Basically MSNBC's morning talk show started talking about a former Panamanian Dictator, and then started talking about someone who was suing the makers of Call of duty for putting in their likeness into the game, or something like that.  Then they start complaining and stated "we don't know what is worse, this Panamanian dictator or the makers of call of duty".  They then go on to bash the game, say it "damages brains" of kids, and worse.

What kind of retarded assholes are these?

Number 1, Call of Duty is a war themed FPS, far from the kind of games that get attacked on retarded talk shows like this.  It's makers are FAR from the kind of people the said Panamanian Dictator are, those kinds of people who kill their own people, help to move millions of drugs throigh the border, ran a country with an iron fist where banks helped to launder money of drug dealers, etc. This idiot is comparing Infinity ward to this?

It's just mind bogglingly stupid.

As for the claim that "games like this damage brains of kids" brought up on the talk show, this is Bullshit used to attack games. There has never been one study that proves that games "damage brains" like this, it's a stupid claim brought up on a talk show, and now that bullshit like this has been spewed, millions of people who believe all they hear will believe this nonsense. It's retarded.

There have been studies claiming that games cause brains to be effected, but they are all funded by the same group who claims they want to prevent entertainment from being violent to save the kids, what does that tell you? Major bias, and engineering involved to the results of such studies.


You have to be brainwashed to say and believe "violent games damage brains". It's a stupid claim. These claims are the kinds of claims brought up by hack researchers and the hack psychologists constantly. There is no evidence what soever to prove them, they just say them, can't prove them, and people believe them because news stations and talk shows like this one keep hosting these poeple and claim they are "media violence experts" when they are really media violence attacking quacks.

What is up with video games being attacked on talk shows?

It's happened since 1997, and it still happens. Talk shows keep on attacking violent games, half the scaremongering and scapegoating is brought up on talk shows, and I wish people would STOP watching crap like this so they would not get the money they are. It's stupid. It's crap like this that keeps reminding me that we need restrictions on what the media can say. If you agree, sign my petition to the Obama Admin to make it punishable by jail time for media to use lies and false truths when attacking games here. You can help stop madness like this before it starts again!

This is the first time in a while nonsense like this has been brought up, and hopefully it's the last in a while, because it's retarded.

Debunking 5 Violent game myths the anti-gamers spread around (old blog repost)

So, on my old blog I spent 2-3 hours researching for an upcoming article debunking 10 violent game myths. I posted this article on a social bookmarking site (digg), and tons of trolls came out saying crap like "badly written article, Downvote!" and one even visited a link to the pro-family group I called nutjobs for making up a claim that violent games allow kids to 'sodomize victims with broomsticks'.  Something that I was pretty sure no game had in it.... The trolls then visited the groups site and I had to take the post down and the whole blog, to prevent libel.

But... the actual post that I linked on the site was debunking violent game myths. I am going back to recreate the post and debunk 5 violent game myths... With links to debunk them if possible... Here goes....

I will try to say why I think the lie is being spread, and then disprove it.... Below the paragraph about each lie I will write a section called "Data on Lie", which will give rough estimates (in %) of how severe the lie is (how drastic the claim is compared to the truth), Popularity (how much it's being said in the media since it's conception), recent popularity (how popular it is in the media now), and respread (how much people have spread the lie in comments, etc, intentionally or not)
5: Violent games have controllable Rape scenes in them (really going strong now)

So the following article linked in this debunking of mine is spreading this lie that has been used dozens of times on anti-gaming articles bashing the SCOTUS EMA vs Brown decision. The lie is that there are violent games that have virtual rape in them where the player rapes a defenseless woman character in the game.... You have the Bulletstorm controversy saying that the game could cause real life sexual violence, then a biased claim by the psychologist in the article that violent games have caused real life rapes to occur, without any citing of any real cases... And many, many other articles calling violent games 'rape simulators'.... Where did this come from?

You get the morons complaining about violent games going to the next level by saying violent games have rape in them to increase the moral panic, that's what.... And the truth is, is that there hasn't been a controllable rape scene in a violent game since "Custer's Revenge" in 1989!, an adult game not even sold in normal game stores, then!

I hear the claim constantly from various people... Including this Connecticut anti-gaming AG  complaining about the Cal law being held unconstitutional by the courts before it got to SCOTUS.. I have heard it at least twice in articles bashing SCOTUS, and in many comments of articles I have surveyed in my study looking for anti-gaming comments to see what their severity is.

Data on lie:
Severity 100%
Popularity 55%
Recent Popularity 75%
Respread 30%

4: Violent games are marketed to kids
This myth is less drastic than the first one, but is still constantly spread around. The truth is this one has been used in many different ways, all claiming violent games are marketed to kids for different reasons. There isn't one common reason why this is true... But My article on this (here) basically says that the ESRB ratings are often misconstrued as GOVT enforced by people who do the same thing with MPAA ratings.. They are both voluntary ratings and if a store doesn't enforce them they don't get in Legal trouble, unlike what the common belief is.  So when you get a biased study like the PTC 'secret shopper survey' that says stores sell M rated games to kids 80% of the time, you get people thinking that the industry is marketing games to kids.

The truth is that a recent FTC study says ESRB ratings are even better than MPAA ratings and enforcement in stores... but that doesn't really disprove the myth.... What does, however is the target demographic of the industry is 18-35 year olds, according to this page. I have heard this on many articles in gaming sites, so I trust it....  If it were 5-9 year olds like all the anti-gamers keep saying then I wouldn't even try to debunk this... But I have never heard any kind of evidence to support the biased claim that violent games are marketed to kids that isn't something ridiculous like "violent game ads in our subway", or "kids in a game store that sells violent  games that could be seen by a kid", or recently someone on a forum said this great claim "Look at all the Lego games, proof violent games are marketed to kids" after saying that since there were violent game ads 'everywhere' the claim must be true. Basically it's a lie.

Data on lie:
Severity 80%
Popularity 65%
Recent Popularity 45%
Respread 80%

3: violent games make kids violent
There are many studies that seem to prove violent game make kids 'aggressive' but the fact is that this lie is based on right wing journalists and violent game 'experts' misquoting these already biased studies by saying they prove the kids become violent after playing violent games. The studies themselves are flawed (as my debunking shows). Basically the studies use brainwave scanning on both groups of kids, kids who play violent games , and kids who don't.  The aggression levels are proven through that, and through a competitive task that pits 2 people (1 from each group) against each other and allows the winner to blast loud static noise into the loser's ears. The study says that the kids who play violent games hold down the 'blast' button longer. They don't say how much, but from a comment on an article on a recent study, it was only milliseconds. Yeah. Nice proof.  But if that wasn't the only thing making these studies flawed, we have the fact that many of these studies fail to even measure tendencies that could cause aggression in the kids before the study starts, so basically the more 'aggressive' kids aren't even checked to see that another thing is making them 'aggressive', and the checks are right after they play the games, no checks done next day, next month. These are short term studies... Not good on seeing if a kid will 'go violent' after playing Doom.  To make things worse, there is no eliminating gamers from these studies... Using a 18 year old GTA fan as proof  of 'aggression', by playing GTA is a bit biased. Don't you think... Now all of this proves the studies have holes. But where did the violence claim come from, the one that says violence is proven by these studies...

From the 'violent game experts on the news', the hack psychologists purposely misquoting studies after columbine, on morning talk shows. This lie was spread like wildfire back in 1999 and many people outright believe it without questioning. It's sad.

Data on lie:
Severity 100%
Popularity 45%
Recent Popularity 25%
Respread 70%

2:  Violent games make school shooters  better shooters in real life.
This one is really alarming, not very popular in lies being spread by the media, but really alarming, none the less. It basically says that Doom, allows players to be better shooters in real life, and uses the evidence in a school shooting predating Columbine as proof. The shooter was very accurate shooter in the shooting, and an avid Doom fan. They said "he had never picked up a gun before!" and then said that Doom made him the better shooter..... Without debunking  possibility of him not going to a gun range, and actually practicing for real... Ok... Now the think is that the Columbine Shooters also were Doom obsessed.... But the FBI report  mentioned that they missed most of their shots! Why?

Recoil, the force that pushes the gun angle up after every shot.
99% of Violent games don't have realistic recoil of weapons, Doom had none, Quake had none, Half-life : none, only games that have good recoil are tactical shooters. And they are so unfairly realistic that no one could 'train' on them without becoming frustrated.  The shots kill not hurt in those games, and the guns are very realistic with realistic recoil and kickback... But they didn't really get popular till AFTER Columbine.. And since there hasn't been a school shooting with a real link to Violent games since...

Recoil prevents someone from hitting their shots if they hold down the trigger like they do in the movies and in most violent games. It causes a real life gun to spin out of control, especially an Assault Weapon like a MP5, or any Assault Rifle.  The tactic taught in older violent games available in 1999 basically was (run into room, hold down fire button, kill all enemies, let go, rinse and repeat). This doesn't work in real life. The person would be shooting the ceiling if they tried this for more than 2 seconds. The military teaches real soldiers to fire in short bursts to minimize the recoil... A debunking of this in Doom was done by me recently on this blog... Here it is. There is no way a violent game will make you a better shot. The tactics are incompatible with real life... At least they were before realism was added to FPS games in 2003+. Realistic tactical shooters weren't really popular till Far Cry (2003). Before that it was all no recoil in weapons...
So no way in hell did the school shooters get better at firing a real gun by playing FPS games of that time.

Data on lie:
Severity 100%
Popularity 45%
Recent Popularity 25%
Respread 10%

1: violent games break down the inhibition to kill

Ok...  I've debunked this in my attack on the amicus brief with tons of lies submitted on CA's side of the SCOTUS debate (go here for the debunking) but I will debunk it again...  The claim is that violent games are used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill. This blog completely debunks the claim, which is another claim spread by the "hack psychologists" after columbine...
Violent games are used in the military to train group tactics, it's no secret. The Marines licensed doom for this purpose... But there is no branch of the military that uses them to break down the inhibition to kill. The above blog says that the inhibition to kill is part of what Boot camp is for, to make recruits automatically follow orders. This, is really the only way to make recruits fire when they are commanded to... Seriously... A video game won't do this... You need to break down the recruit by Intimidation, exhaustion, and other factors to make them act automatically. This needs an environment where you cannot leave the environment, and have limited freedoms, and are being constantly screamed at for making any mistakes, and are being worked out so bad that your constantly exhausted. No video game does this. Period.

Data on lie:
Severity 100%
Popularity 75%
Recent Popularity 15%
Respread 90%