Wayne Lapoopiere needs to STFU!

Well lo and behold, this new moral panic on the nonexistent link between violent games, and the Navy Yard shooting hasn't fucking ended. It got 500 times worst, folks. Wayne Lapoopiere has reared his ugly fuckin' head again!!!! This time blaming the shooting on the yet to be released GTA V.




“The evidence against Grand Theft Auto is not to be disputed. Clearly, excitement over the imminent release of this game led Mr. Alexis to commit celebratory murders… Either that, or [Alexis] was going on a ‘practice run’ in anticipation of playing this degraded piece of garbage.”




Obviously, Lapoopiere has had his head up his ass all of  his life because it's plain to see that Mental illness caused this shooting. I quote

"Alexis had been suffering a host of serious mental problems, including paranoia and a sleep disorder, and had been hearing voices in his head, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the criminal investigation was still going on."


How could anyone call games "degraded pieces of garbage?" I have no clue. It disgust me. Games =/= Garbage! It's fucking assholic! Wayne Lapoopiere is no better than the rest of the anti-gamer fucktards out  there. 

“at anything other than Grand Theft Auto V for this tragedy is morally irresponsible,”










You mean, that blaming GTA 5, a game that couldn't have caused the massacre is NOT morally irresponsible? Stop smoking Crack Lapoopiere! It's just an agenda by these deranged gun nuts who helped to create the Sandy Hook Shooter to cover up  their role in the shooting. Lapoopiere should be held accountable, not the NOT YET RELEASED GTA 5! The next quote is the worst of the bunch...





“It’s high time Congress and our president backed sensible video game regulation. Anybody that wants to purchase a copy of Grand Theft Auto V must undergo a background check, a psychological evaluation, and a five-day waiting period. Most importantly, all copies of the game must be kept under lock and key when not in use.”

What the Fuck?! We need background checks, psychological examinations for people buying violent games now! Since when has anyone actually found ACTUAL proof that Alexis even played them? If you take all the BS the media spreads that says ALL the shooters in mass shootings were violent game addicts as the truth (it's not), you still get a mere 0.00% of all gamers have had any violent crimes associated with  them. There are 211,000,000 gamers world wide this year alone, and only 2 has killed people according to the media.  So all copies need to be kept in lock and key? Even OUR OWN BOUGHT COPIES? WTF! Someone needs to throw Lapoopiere in the fucking insane asylum for talking through his ass.... Do we really have idiots like this who would do what he wants in our administration? I say we do!! It's fucking idiotic!!! NONE of those 211,000,000 need to get background checks and psych evaluations!! NONE!!! JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP WAYNE LAPOOPIERE!


In other news, the site that posted this garbage article kept on giving me this crap every time I tried to copy quotes from it, showing up in  the bottom of the pasted text every single time!!!. Unwanted advertiser assholes they are!! sigh...

"Read more: <article URL>"

Faux News is at it again! (More Anti-Gaming Trash!!)

It seems this country has to keep spewing nonsense over and over again about a non-existent link between video games and real life violence...  They wait till everyone is not thinking about it and use crap like this to attempt to start another video games moral panic. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.... But it's fucking stupid and it must stop...

A murder in Australia,  has been associated with violent games.. The police have supposedly searched the killers twitter posts to find out he played call of duty...  Like call of duty may have impacted the killers decision to shoot 3 people for the sheer fun factor of it...  Well.. When you go to the shoutbox on gamepolitics.com (where I found the article), you get an article linked in it which links to another article by an Australian News site mentioning gangs... Gangs aren't even mentioned in the fox article linked in the shoutbox. It seems Faux news has no problem with leaving out information that proves games had nothing to do with the killings when they want to pin games as the SOLE REASON... For moral panic reasons!!!!

To make things worse, there is a video in the article which part of the Faux news "medical team" rambles on about his completely bogus theory that every big mass killer since 1999 is addicted to violent games... That's mentioned in the first article I linked... This idea is preposterous, there is no proof to back it up, whatsoever. Sure Klebold and Harris among others played violent games. But the proof for V-TECH, and others is a media Fabrication coming from newspapers like this. Lanza's call of duty articles all cited one article by an english tabloid which failed to even prove he played call of duty and used that as proof that he did!  The one person linking V-TECH to Counterstrike said an article which used HIS evidence was the proof. He basically cited himself saying that there was a link when there wasn't.  In fact there is NO evidence to suggest the following people besides Harris and Klebold and Lanza were addicted to violent games...


(Eric Harris, Dylan Khebold, Seung Hui Cho, Jared Loughner, Anders Brevik, James Holmes, the eight-year-old who accidently shot his grandmother recently and the three teens who murdered an Australian tourist too)

Anders brejik was a TERRORIST who mentioned video games make great training tools. There has been no evidence to suggest he was addicted, same for James Holmes, or the rest of the list as well. None but Harris and Klebold have ANY link to video game addiction, it's bullshit.Anders played World of Warcraft, far from your average Violent Game.  James Holmes played Guitar Hero. Is that their latest "Violent" game to attack now? Really... This is stupid....

To make things worse, the medical "Expert" claims that the medical industry has found "proof" that there is a link between real life violence and video games, and has gone out to say that link exists, even though NO study has found a causation link between violent video game exposure and real life violence. The ones that attempt to find a link between violent games and aggression are extremely flawed and biased... My YouTube censoring life radio show goes into the studies a lot more... This "trusted source" then went on claiming that violent games were drugs and we need warning labels put on them, like that's gonna do anything...


This pisses me off. The last thing we need is a "trusted source" (who isn't) starting a moral panic on video game violence after it has cooled off!!! This kind of stuff is what was rampant on news stations after columbine and  the moral panic skyrocketed after that... It's frankly, disgusting....

I am doing a weekly youtube radio show every week, on topics of video game controversy...

For today and the next 2 days, I am alone in my house, which is not something that usually happens. So I decided to write some new music, and do a lot of videos in a format of a youtube video radio show, talking about debunking nonsense about violent games, talking about any and all video game legislation, media spread nonsense, and any similar topics. It will air on youtube every weekend, on Sunday or the Next Monday (after being recorded the previous night).  I will occasionally go into off topic topics here and there, but for the most part, it will be video game controversy related...

Enjoy

How to purposely engineer an Anti-gaming "Aggression" Study. (old blog repost)

Kids are aggressive. They get into fights all the time. The reasons are so varied that it's really not fair to label one thing the media keeps leeching itself on to : Violent games.  How do you know it wasn't bullying? Child Abuse? Drug Abuse? Mental Illnesses?  Bad Parenting? Stupidity? the list goes on. The studies themselves, that seem to show that violent games lead to aggressive behavior, however are a complete farce... They just are.

The methods used are designed to incite the result the anti-gamers want. That result is that violent games always increase aggression. You can't take several kids, measure their aggression in any way and determine it's result without careful study of all the factors involved. These hack psychologists don't do that..  They engineer fake results in many of the studies, (not all, but many).
This is the process used to get that result...

A) Take Half of your study group and make them play 'non-violent games' like sports games and puzzle games.
B) take the other half, subject them to electroshock therapy (I'm not kidding you there, I read it off a PDF of a study I cannot find the link to, because the article I linked was on my old blog, which I shut down to avoid libel.), And make them play 'uber violent games, GTA, Killzone 2,etc...
(From this article)
C) They now select the kids and make them all look at violent imagery or 'normal imagery'. Then they measure the brainwaves while this is happening.  Problem 1, lack of a reaction  to an image doesn't mean the game caused the lack of a reaction! It doesn't prove Aggression at all! All it proves, is Apathy! The lack of caring for a subject... People are offended by different things. Person 1 could find violent image 1 disturbing but person 2 will not. If person 2 played violent games, how the hell do you know it isn't some other issue causing the 'lack of brainwaves', which to me is quite the hack method in determining reaction. It sounds like a very flawed science to measure brainwaves, to determine a response. How do you know the result of the brainwave drop? Out of all the possible results? They don't test for these results do they? No they don't. Now the other  problem, is that the kids are going to be aggressive for a time being after being pumped up. They test for  the 'aggression' immediately, they don't wait till later when the levels drop... Now the other, less obvious problem, is that they don't know what causes the brainwave drop, they don't know the source. They want to make the games look like the source.. So

(Also From this article)

D) They subject the kids who played violent games to compete against eachother in a game where one kid gets to blast loud noise in the losers ears for a certain amount of seconds. But the time values involved are so small, that it's not much of a result. The time lapse is literally less than a second in some cases. So the more 'aggressive' kid holds down the button a millisecond longer. Yeah... Nice proof there. The point is, is It doesn't prove aggression... Which is always mixed up with VIOLENCE, by the anti-gamers. Like these kids are at risk of being the next Eric Harris. BS.

E) Fail to even do basic research to eliminate other causes of aggression!  No investigation is done on the kids to see if they might have problems that could lead to aggression, from factors such as bullying/drug abuse/child abuse/etc. It's not even brought up.

To bring up another point, "desensitization" to violent games doesn't prove much. All it proves is that your brain has become more accustomed to the violence in the portrayal. It doesn't mean you will act it out. Watching CSI does the same thing. But another thing bothers me about these studies. What games are the 'violent' ones chosen by psychologists. Are they games with violent combat but not disgustingly violent or are they the ones where you gun down people and chop their heads off like GTA. The choice will determine the result. Likewise do they choose sports games or kiddie games. I think they purposely chose ones that will set up the biggest difference between brain scan results and blast test results. Why not? Fudging the study for results isn't a new thing. I think they should make the kids play 10 violent games OF DIFFERENT violence quantities, not the same one per kid! Same thing with the non-violent ones. How do you trust a study that purposely chooses the least violent game for group 1 and the most violent game for the other group. You don't.

Another issue is the background of the 'subjects'. You make a kid who plays violent games (do they check that first?), and make him play Killzone 2, or Modern warfare. He will like it more and become more 'aggressive'. Then you take someone who plays a lot of puzzle games and he won't. Do they choose these kinds of people on purpose as well. It's really flawed if they put in the GTA loving kid to prove aggression when he plays GTA.... Isn't that biased or what?

All of this will make it so that the aggressive result favors the kids who played the violent games... It's biased... It's dirty. It's a fraud. And it's being used to create fear mongering among anti-gamer circles that eventually will lead to full Bans on violent games... It has to stop. Prove tendency of violence by other more obvious factors such as mental illness, drugs, etc, not violent games. Millions of kids and adults play violent games. Some of them, the less mature ones, will be more aggressive, but that doesn't prove they will go on school shooting rampages at all, it just proves they can't control themselves well enough to stop the aggression. (Aggression =/= Violence!). According to a poster on the article linked above there is not ONE study that proves a casual link between gaming and violence. NOT ONE!