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>"
Showing posts with label Video game Sites. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Video game Sites. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
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....
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....
Friday, February 1, 2013
Another Pro-Censorship Moron spews Nonsense About Violent Games.... UGH....
So I thought this Moral Panic on violent entertainment causing Sandy Hook was done. Apparently not... Lo and Behold, Senator Grassley, a Repooplican from Iowa starts ranting on how the Gaming Industry's Voluntary Rating system isn't good enough, how it "lets these violent games get to kids". What violent games are these, "ones that glorify killing of innocent people". Sure... I quote:
"There are too many video games that celebrate the mass killing of innocent people — games that despite attempts at industry self-regulation find their way into the hands of children,"
Talk about a moronic claim.... Number 1, the "attempts at industry self-regulation" (like they are a complete failure, despite the FTC study that says that the ESRB ratings are better than the MPAA ones, enforcement wise), have nothing to do with why these "violent games that glorify the mass killing of innocents" fall into the hands of children. Number 1, the Industry itself isn't to blame if the Stores refuse to card the people buying the games, or the 2/3's of parents who refuse to read the ESRB ratings in the first place, right? Apparently to this moron, the parents aren't to blame and somehow the industry made the parents not read the ratings or the stores are being all run by the industry and purposely start selling GTA games to kids.... This whole claim is bunk, and he knows NOTHING about violent games, the industry or the "attempts at industry self-regulation". He just blindly believes all the nonsense being spread that violent games are marketed to kids because "oh noes, the kids can buy games..." BLAH BLAH BLAH
To make things worse his claim of how their are too many games that "celebrate the mass killing of innocent people" is a bogus claim too. I regularly debunk crap like this. It's just a blanket statement, used to demean the industry based on shitty games, ones that do allow the "mass killing of innocent people", which are few and far between. Using a list of all released FPS games on wikipedia, I calculated that the sheer lack of "uber violent games" is astounding, despite what scaremongering is being said by people like Grassley.
This list spans all the way back to the 1970's with Sega titles such as "Jet Rocket", long before the dawn of PC gaming, so it does count everything.... No picking and choosing, no editing of the total data to show a point, pure unadulterated Facts.... Something anti-gamers almost never provide, it's almost always rhetoric, false data, or misinterpretation.
When You look at the spreadsheet, look at the column "gms kill inno". This is how many games out of 650 allow you to kill "innocent civilians", where innocent civilians are defined as characters who can't fight back. I have 2 rows, one with all 650 games in the FPS category, and another with all FPS games + Postal + all GTA games. That one is the second row, the lower one with 658 total games. The top row with 650 games is just FPS games. "gms rwd inno" is how many games that reward killing of innocent people. "gms nrwd ino" are games that punish killing innocent civilian characters. Look at the % with and without GTA and Postal applied, tiny %, less than 10 in each case... There have only been 19 FPS games EVER released that allow the killing of innocent characters. Only 4 of these reward it. Tiny numbers when you factor in the 650 total FPS games ever made. 8 Punish the killing of innocents. IF you count in GTA games and Postal 1 you get 27 total games in this list that allow the player to kill innocent characters, and only 8 reward it. 15 Punish the killing of innocents!!! You see a pattern, equal amount of FPS games punish the killing of innocents, and in the case when you add in GTA, more punish than reward. Apparently Grassley can't stand the fact that there are 8 games since 1970(!) (when the list started) that reward killing innocents. But he mentioned mass slaughter of innocents!!!
Grassley's complaint about "too many games that celebrate the mass killing of the innocent" is a nonsense claim. Because this suggests that there are games where you are rewarded for mowing down big rooms of innocent civilians in such a game. Here's the thing. No ESRB Game like this Exists! In any game with civilians, that reward it, it's never been huge numbers killed at once. People might say "GTA!" but GTA, despite the nonsense claim about it, does NOT reward the killing of innocent civilians. It punishes it. You get the police after you for doing stuff like this, get arrested, etc... That's punishment, not rewarding. The last game to reward mass killing of innocents, the only one was before the ESRB, so the esrb has nothing to do with it, that was Carmageddon! In 1997! The only game I know where it :"rewards" the mass killing of innocents..... Under the ESRB, the "voluntary rating system" there have been 0 games that "glorify the mass killing of innocents!!!". NONE! Zip! Zero!! Zilch!!! Grassley is a liar... Surprise!!
So Grassley is making up crap, just like a lot of morons who attack games do. It's stupid. It has to stop. He is also hinting at regulation of the industry by the government and using biased claims and utter lies to support it??? I thought this country was beyond it. IF they do decide to regulate the games like this, what's to stop them from setting up a system where they purposely rate any game that is only slightly violent or above, to their equivalent of Adult Only, so the stores won't sell them.. Hmmm... Because thats what I think people like this want, just to get rid of all the violent games so no one can buy them, no adults can too, no gaming companies can sell them so the industry just goes out of business. These people shouldn't be in office if they use nonsense like this to fuel censorship, and make no difference it is. The gaming industry does not need to be regulated!! Just the Congress!!! Seriously...
"There are too many video games that celebrate the mass killing of innocent people — games that despite attempts at industry self-regulation find their way into the hands of children,"
Talk about a moronic claim.... Number 1, the "attempts at industry self-regulation" (like they are a complete failure, despite the FTC study that says that the ESRB ratings are better than the MPAA ones, enforcement wise), have nothing to do with why these "violent games that glorify the mass killing of innocents" fall into the hands of children. Number 1, the Industry itself isn't to blame if the Stores refuse to card the people buying the games, or the 2/3's of parents who refuse to read the ESRB ratings in the first place, right? Apparently to this moron, the parents aren't to blame and somehow the industry made the parents not read the ratings or the stores are being all run by the industry and purposely start selling GTA games to kids.... This whole claim is bunk, and he knows NOTHING about violent games, the industry or the "attempts at industry self-regulation". He just blindly believes all the nonsense being spread that violent games are marketed to kids because "oh noes, the kids can buy games..." BLAH BLAH BLAH
To make things worse his claim of how their are too many games that "celebrate the mass killing of innocent people" is a bogus claim too. I regularly debunk crap like this. It's just a blanket statement, used to demean the industry based on shitty games, ones that do allow the "mass killing of innocent people", which are few and far between. Using a list of all released FPS games on wikipedia, I calculated that the sheer lack of "uber violent games" is astounding, despite what scaremongering is being said by people like Grassley.
This list spans all the way back to the 1970's with Sega titles such as "Jet Rocket", long before the dawn of PC gaming, so it does count everything.... No picking and choosing, no editing of the total data to show a point, pure unadulterated Facts.... Something anti-gamers almost never provide, it's almost always rhetoric, false data, or misinterpretation.
When You look at the spreadsheet, look at the column "gms kill inno". This is how many games out of 650 allow you to kill "innocent civilians", where innocent civilians are defined as characters who can't fight back. I have 2 rows, one with all 650 games in the FPS category, and another with all FPS games + Postal + all GTA games. That one is the second row, the lower one with 658 total games. The top row with 650 games is just FPS games. "gms rwd inno" is how many games that reward killing of innocent people. "gms nrwd ino" are games that punish killing innocent civilian characters. Look at the % with and without GTA and Postal applied, tiny %, less than 10 in each case... There have only been 19 FPS games EVER released that allow the killing of innocent characters. Only 4 of these reward it. Tiny numbers when you factor in the 650 total FPS games ever made. 8 Punish the killing of innocents. IF you count in GTA games and Postal 1 you get 27 total games in this list that allow the player to kill innocent characters, and only 8 reward it. 15 Punish the killing of innocents!!! You see a pattern, equal amount of FPS games punish the killing of innocents, and in the case when you add in GTA, more punish than reward. Apparently Grassley can't stand the fact that there are 8 games since 1970(!) (when the list started) that reward killing innocents. But he mentioned mass slaughter of innocents!!!
Grassley's complaint about "too many games that celebrate the mass killing of the innocent" is a nonsense claim. Because this suggests that there are games where you are rewarded for mowing down big rooms of innocent civilians in such a game. Here's the thing. No ESRB Game like this Exists! In any game with civilians, that reward it, it's never been huge numbers killed at once. People might say "GTA!" but GTA, despite the nonsense claim about it, does NOT reward the killing of innocent civilians. It punishes it. You get the police after you for doing stuff like this, get arrested, etc... That's punishment, not rewarding. The last game to reward mass killing of innocents, the only one was before the ESRB, so the esrb has nothing to do with it, that was Carmageddon! In 1997! The only game I know where it :"rewards" the mass killing of innocents..... Under the ESRB, the "voluntary rating system" there have been 0 games that "glorify the mass killing of innocents!!!". NONE! Zip! Zero!! Zilch!!! Grassley is a liar... Surprise!!
So Grassley is making up crap, just like a lot of morons who attack games do. It's stupid. It has to stop. He is also hinting at regulation of the industry by the government and using biased claims and utter lies to support it??? I thought this country was beyond it. IF they do decide to regulate the games like this, what's to stop them from setting up a system where they purposely rate any game that is only slightly violent or above, to their equivalent of Adult Only, so the stores won't sell them.. Hmmm... Because thats what I think people like this want, just to get rid of all the violent games so no one can buy them, no adults can too, no gaming companies can sell them so the industry just goes out of business. These people shouldn't be in office if they use nonsense like this to fuel censorship, and make no difference it is. The gaming industry does not need to be regulated!! Just the Congress!!! Seriously...
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Gamers! Mail your Rep's about the video game nonsense. They are trying to regulate them again...
Checking Gamepolitics today I learned the truth about Obama's Violent game's conference between the ECA and the Senators, hosted by Joe Biden. According to the ECA, the whole thing didn't go down well and the senators still blindly believe "Video games cause violence". I quote:
"Senators are convinced that there’s a connection between video games and violence. One has even said that a proposed study is simply “laying the groundwork for new regulations on video games.” We know that’s not true - so write to them today.
Yes, even when presented with the facts that violent crimes have decreased since 1980, while video game sales have increased, and that other nations that consume more video games than the United States don’t see the same level of violence, those we talked to pressed forward with the need to legislate video games and waste money to find a connection between games and violence we know doesn’t exist. These Senators believe that playing games leads to real world violence. They have even gone so far to say in private discussions they disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision that video games are free speech.
We’re not going to take these insults and lies. Video games don’t lead to violence and are protected free speech. That’s reality. We need gamers to speak up and tell Congress this.Write to your elected officials and then spread this action everywhere you can.
This year is going to be a rough one. No matter how many facts we present, folks seem to want to stick to their fantasy that we gamers are time bombs waiting to go off. It’s insulting to me, it’s insulting to you, it’s insulting to us and just not true. Take action now.
Keep on gaming,"
This is, Frankly Disgusting... Number 1) None of these senators even care that people don't want video games regulated, As gamers we have to stop this mess NOW. We can do it. We need to mail our Rep's and Our Senators, but their message refuses to show the real issues, the media fabrications, the nonsense, the real reason behind school shootings. The Representatives will assume the default message is just Industry Rhetoric. Why would they listen to it? You must send them a much more detailed message like the one I have put below. One that shows the scapegoating by the media and how violent games have nothing to do with real crime. This is really important. My message is a lot longer than theirs but covers a lot of stuff that very few people know about but is all true and people simply are not talking about it. If people want to use this message, go ahead. Edit it and choose the parts you agree or disagree with if you want, but make sure to tell them that A) Violent media studies never have proven violent crime is a result, and that B) Special interest groups in the CDC Study will try to hijack it with hoaxes, for extremist groups did that before at the Supreme Court, quoting the "Doom will Become Reality Hoax", which was actually not on Harris's real site but a fake site made after Columbine.
This is really important. This could be like the columbine moral panic on "Doom" times 5 if you don't act... Seriously.
Title : "Regulating Violent games solves nothing!"
"As your Constituent, I would like you to know that I am not happy about all the scapegoating happening surrounding violent games by the Government, and if you don't know this already, the scapegoating has been going on for over 10 years (since Paducah!), and it continues without anything to legally stop it.
Most comes from the media who are fueled by right wing extremist groups who are pro censorship such as the The Eagle Forum, the Parents Television Councel and others. For years they have been sending people on to talk shows especially right after school shootings, to make up utter lies about violent games such as the "fact" violent games make kids violent, the "fact" violent games break down the inhibition to kill, and the "fact" that violent games are military training tools. None of these are true.
The truth is that, video games don't make anyone violent, no study has ever been done even linking video games to violence, the aggression studies have been misquoted by people with anti-video game agendas on talk shows as proof they cause violence, without proving which studies they are talking about. One was a guy who was trying to sell a book. The other guy is a Defense Attorney for Murderers who gets them all to say "Video games made me do it" and is trying to get people to believe it, so he can win as much cases as possible. In fact no study has ever linked video games to Violence at all. Why do we need a study to link them now?
The Link between Adam Lanza and the Video game "Call of Duty" was based on 1 UK Tabloid basically saying "This kid lived in the basement (a video gamer stereotype), and had a computer. He had posters of lots of tanks and old fashioned Military Weapons. Since Call of Duty Players can name a lot of old fashioned weapons, he must be a Call of Duty Fan!". This all came from a "plumber" who visited the house. This article doesn't prove he played call of duty, but then 25 newspapers all Quoted this plumbers words as proof he was obsessed with Call of Duty and some even said Call of Duty made him commit the Massacre. See the nonsense the Media Spreads? Millions of people now believe, that Call of Duty caused Sandy Hook. But it's not true.
The same thing Happened after Columbine. Some unknown party made a fake Eric Harris Aol Site with a page that said "The fires will go off in the 21'st, Eric harris Hates you all, Doom will become reality!". This spread around to people and then the media quoted the "Doom will Become Reality" part and immediately everyone thought Doom Triggered the Massacre. Only Problem is that Harris never wrote these words, the site was made on April 21'st. It was proven by he FBI. But no one listened. One News article verifying that it was a fake Aol Site was taken down to cover it up by someone.... The media makes up bogus claims right and left about violent games. FOX News hired a fake hack psychologist to say "Bulletstorm causes rape because Rape is a violent crime, and since Bulletstorm is a violent game, it has caused rape!". Millions Believed this. A preacher recently said at a public function of some sort, that "Pornography releases Endorphins, it's like a cocaine High, the more you view pornography the more you need that high, till Heterosexual Porn doesn't satisfy you anymore, you then jump to Homosexual Porn, then to Bestiality or then to Pedophilia. Look at all the Rapists and Child Molesters who said they were addicted to Porn. These Violent Video games are the same way". He basically said it in a way to make some people think Violent games lead to child molestation. In the Columbine case, the Hoaxed page was used as evidence in the Supreme court case EMA Vs Brown. It was submitted by a Right wing pro-family Group who is anti-violent games. I fear some similar group will use this or other bogus claims (imagine if they use the Child Molestation one.....), in the upcoming CDC study as evidence... This must not happen. It's not true and things like this could lead to Regulation when no evidence of a problem exists...
Legislating violent games will not cause Tragic School Shootings to stop. Doom didn't have anything to even do with Columbine. The CHS Massacre was a revenge crime against the police in Colorado, and according to a freedom of information act request for documents the FBI was keeping secret,
Eric Harris was Raped by the Police in an arrest in 1998. This triggered the revenge crime, Not Doom.
We still don't know why Adam Lanza killed 26 people. Why jump to conclusions till a real investigation gets done?
Thank you for your time and consideration."
"Senators are convinced that there’s a connection between video games and violence. One has even said that a proposed study is simply “laying the groundwork for new regulations on video games.” We know that’s not true - so write to them today.
Yes, even when presented with the facts that violent crimes have decreased since 1980, while video game sales have increased, and that other nations that consume more video games than the United States don’t see the same level of violence, those we talked to pressed forward with the need to legislate video games and waste money to find a connection between games and violence we know doesn’t exist. These Senators believe that playing games leads to real world violence. They have even gone so far to say in private discussions they disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision that video games are free speech.
We’re not going to take these insults and lies. Video games don’t lead to violence and are protected free speech. That’s reality. We need gamers to speak up and tell Congress this.Write to your elected officials and then spread this action everywhere you can.
This year is going to be a rough one. No matter how many facts we present, folks seem to want to stick to their fantasy that we gamers are time bombs waiting to go off. It’s insulting to me, it’s insulting to you, it’s insulting to us and just not true. Take action now.
Keep on gaming,"
This is, Frankly Disgusting... Number 1) None of these senators even care that people don't want video games regulated, As gamers we have to stop this mess NOW. We can do it. We need to mail our Rep's and Our Senators, but their message refuses to show the real issues, the media fabrications, the nonsense, the real reason behind school shootings. The Representatives will assume the default message is just Industry Rhetoric. Why would they listen to it? You must send them a much more detailed message like the one I have put below. One that shows the scapegoating by the media and how violent games have nothing to do with real crime. This is really important. My message is a lot longer than theirs but covers a lot of stuff that very few people know about but is all true and people simply are not talking about it. If people want to use this message, go ahead. Edit it and choose the parts you agree or disagree with if you want, but make sure to tell them that A) Violent media studies never have proven violent crime is a result, and that B) Special interest groups in the CDC Study will try to hijack it with hoaxes, for extremist groups did that before at the Supreme Court, quoting the "Doom will Become Reality Hoax", which was actually not on Harris's real site but a fake site made after Columbine.
This is really important. This could be like the columbine moral panic on "Doom" times 5 if you don't act... Seriously.
Title : "Regulating Violent games solves nothing!"
"As your Constituent, I would like you to know that I am not happy about all the scapegoating happening surrounding violent games by the Government, and if you don't know this already, the scapegoating has been going on for over 10 years (since Paducah!), and it continues without anything to legally stop it.
Most comes from the media who are fueled by right wing extremist groups who are pro censorship such as the The Eagle Forum, the Parents Television Councel and others. For years they have been sending people on to talk shows especially right after school shootings, to make up utter lies about violent games such as the "fact" violent games make kids violent, the "fact" violent games break down the inhibition to kill, and the "fact" that violent games are military training tools. None of these are true.
The truth is that, video games don't make anyone violent, no study has ever been done even linking video games to violence, the aggression studies have been misquoted by people with anti-video game agendas on talk shows as proof they cause violence, without proving which studies they are talking about. One was a guy who was trying to sell a book. The other guy is a Defense Attorney for Murderers who gets them all to say "Video games made me do it" and is trying to get people to believe it, so he can win as much cases as possible. In fact no study has ever linked video games to Violence at all. Why do we need a study to link them now?
The Link between Adam Lanza and the Video game "Call of Duty" was based on 1 UK Tabloid basically saying "This kid lived in the basement (a video gamer stereotype), and had a computer. He had posters of lots of tanks and old fashioned Military Weapons. Since Call of Duty Players can name a lot of old fashioned weapons, he must be a Call of Duty Fan!". This all came from a "plumber" who visited the house. This article doesn't prove he played call of duty, but then 25 newspapers all Quoted this plumbers words as proof he was obsessed with Call of Duty and some even said Call of Duty made him commit the Massacre. See the nonsense the Media Spreads? Millions of people now believe, that Call of Duty caused Sandy Hook. But it's not true.
The same thing Happened after Columbine. Some unknown party made a fake Eric Harris Aol Site with a page that said "The fires will go off in the 21'st, Eric harris Hates you all, Doom will become reality!". This spread around to people and then the media quoted the "Doom will Become Reality" part and immediately everyone thought Doom Triggered the Massacre. Only Problem is that Harris never wrote these words, the site was made on April 21'st. It was proven by he FBI. But no one listened. One News article verifying that it was a fake Aol Site was taken down to cover it up by someone.... The media makes up bogus claims right and left about violent games. FOX News hired a fake hack psychologist to say "Bulletstorm causes rape because Rape is a violent crime, and since Bulletstorm is a violent game, it has caused rape!". Millions Believed this. A preacher recently said at a public function of some sort, that "Pornography releases Endorphins, it's like a cocaine High, the more you view pornography the more you need that high, till Heterosexual Porn doesn't satisfy you anymore, you then jump to Homosexual Porn, then to Bestiality or then to Pedophilia. Look at all the Rapists and Child Molesters who said they were addicted to Porn. These Violent Video games are the same way". He basically said it in a way to make some people think Violent games lead to child molestation. In the Columbine case, the Hoaxed page was used as evidence in the Supreme court case EMA Vs Brown. It was submitted by a Right wing pro-family Group who is anti-violent games. I fear some similar group will use this or other bogus claims (imagine if they use the Child Molestation one.....), in the upcoming CDC study as evidence... This must not happen. It's not true and things like this could lead to Regulation when no evidence of a problem exists...
Legislating violent games will not cause Tragic School Shootings to stop. Doom didn't have anything to even do with Columbine. The CHS Massacre was a revenge crime against the police in Colorado, and according to a freedom of information act request for documents the FBI was keeping secret,
Eric Harris was Raped by the Police in an arrest in 1998. This triggered the revenge crime, Not Doom.
We still don't know why Adam Lanza killed 26 people. Why jump to conclusions till a real investigation gets done?
Thank you for your time and consideration."
Friday, January 18, 2013
Whitehouse.gov petition on media violence... Make sure to sign!!!
There has been a whitehouse.gov "we the people" petition petitioning the Obama Admin to admit Violent games do not cause violent crimes. It's really important that people who are against this media violence scapegoating bs (gamers,etc) sign this... The petition against SOPA caused the government to get involved to block it. We also need to be vigilant here.... I would suggest all gamers and people who are against bans of violent games and the endless nonsense BS scapegoating, media lies and crappy legislation against video games like the above mentioned video game tax, to sign this.... I can't state the importance of this any more... The petition is linked here...
Monday, September 17, 2012
Surveys about violent games not to be trusted (old post)
(this is an old post from my wordpress blog that got deleted there by accident a long time ago, after it was published in 2011 or 2010. I thought it was important that I republish it here)
So the anti-gamers are at it again.... A new 'phone survey' says that 67% of adults surveyed want violent games restricted to adults. No suprise there... But the real issue, is that the survey also says that 39% of adults surveyed think that violent game makers should be held liable when "it can be proven that a violent game causes a real life crime to happen".
You might think this is some honest survey, but trust me it is not .Here is the wording of the study, according to the gamepolitics article I got it from (look in the comments):
"For those wondering, here is the wording and order of the questions in their survey:
1* How concerned are you about the level of violence in many video games today?
2* Do violent video games lead to more violence in our society?
3* Should states be allowed to prohibit the sale or rental of violent video games to minors?
4*
Who is more responsible for limiting the amount of sex and violence
children are exposed to in video games – video game makers, the
government or parents?
5*
Should the makers of violent video games be held liable in court if it
can be shown that their games led to someone committing a violent
act?"Question 1, makes the viewers think about the violent games link to violence, and question 2, makes them think about their opinions on whether violent games cause real-life violence, biasing their answers after that. Question 4 then uses that bias to incite a yes response! This is especially troubling, because what it does is that it makes certain people want to sue, or advocate lawsuits against, violent game makers. If question 1 and 2 were never asked, the chance is greater that question 4 would have had less people who say "yes, sue the assholes marketing violent trash to my 2 year old!"
This is another sly tactic to win viewers over, to make them believe the nonsense that violent games make kids violent, when the only people who said that were biased talk show guests misrepresenting studies that were biased in themselves, that seemed to prove violent games make kids more aggressive. It's mind control, plain and simple... In a sense...
Take the amount of people who thought violent games should be outright banned or sued (11% of 44 comments, 38% of all comments wanting legal action performed (banning, suing, restricting to adults) to all age groups on my study of comments (here), and you see more people want game makers sued than ever before. It seems it's a new fad, "sue ID software,etc" after a school shooting. More people are believing these lies spread around, even in an Amicus Brief for SCOTUS (whose lies were debunked here), and it's scary..
Another issue I would like to bring up, is that the sample size of the survey is a mere 1000 people (probably 1000 people who are in right wing conservative communities that believe the nonsense about violent games that the above amicus brief used to try to sway the SCOTUS decision), out of 300 million. That is 3% of the population of america surveyed, less than a population of one state! In fact that 1000 people surveyed, although it seems big to people who don't look at this stuff, is a mere 1/200000 of the population of one state of the US on average... It's tiny. According to true knowledge, the population of Boston, MA was found to be 618,231 in 2011. That's 618 times as much as the survey sample size. So basically the sample size they used skipped 97% of the population! It's just to small! I'm not saying the survey would have to encompass an entire state or the entire US, but 1000 people, is way to small. I think they chose 1000 poeple who were anti violent games being sold..... Just my opinion. They never asked "Do you think violent games should be banned to all age groups?", to anyone, but since so many people wanted violent game makers sued out of the sample size, it makes me think that they wanted them banned too. Usually people who want lawsuits would also not want games they think cause violence, sold to anyone... No matter how old. Just My opinion...
So basically they are saying the 390 or so people want violent game makers sued out of 1000. That 390 is 39% of 1000, but on the scale of all the people living in an area the same population as Boston in 2011, that's only 0.6% of the population of that area! In contrast, the 67% of the 1000 who wanted violent games restricted to adults (roughly 670 out of 1000) is 1% of that area with the same population of Boston in 2011. That's bigger than the 0.6% but is still tiny..... These survey's don't mean much when 1% of the population of a boston populated area want violent games restricted to adults. There are probably more people in that area who think President Obama should be Impeached.
Speaking of surveys.... I am planning an experiment to see how far the anti-gamers will go. Stay tuned...
Friday, September 7, 2012
Why Mandatory Web Filtering is stupid....
There are people out there who praise web filtering, and say how It's the greatest thing to protect children online. There are others who say "these non-child friendly sites, why do we even allow them?" and mandate mandatory filtering for all, such as Australia and it's mandatory filtering program called the "great Aussie firewall" which was stopped a few years ago due to complaints that it would block video game sites...
You read it right... Gaming sites.. Censorship is never right, even if kids are the reason for it. Already many states have mandatory regulation in public libraries to block sites found "harmful to minors", as vague as that seems. The statues are vague and have no specific content that must be blocked, so they basically allow the libraries to chose what sites are harmful to minors to block them. This extends into schools, including colleges as well in many cases. I tried 2 filters, and both gave me complete control over what sites to block...
Talk about scary ways they could be abused to block out something the person running the school/library doesn't like. So what's the whole thing about gaming sites being harmful to minors, anyway?
One of the internet filters I tried is a free one called OpenDNS. I also looked at another site called "free internet", which also blocks gaming sites by default... OpenDNS is not just web filtering, it is a free DNS service to reroute traffic from dangerous (virus) sites that happens to offer a free internet filtering program. I tried it out.... And was shocked how much dubious, not so harmful to minors type stuff was included with full filtering. The following categories of stuff were filtered:
Gaming sites
Sexuality oriented sites
Porn sites
File sharing sites
Web mail
Forums (!)
Gambling
and some others I can't remember now..
Most of these could be considered stuff you don't want kids to see, but gaming sites, forums, webmail, why are they even on the list? So I got curious. I decided to sign up with OpenDNS's free filtering service to test 50 or so sites to see what ones are blocked, assuming I was browsing the internet where OpenDNS was forced down my throat due to mandatory filtering laws (hypothetical ones). The results were, well stupid... Number 1, a ton of gaming sites got blocked, including doomworld, planetquake,planethalflife, rockstar.com, planetduke, blood.com, and the site for my favorite video game, Deus Ex. But even worse the following gaming sites which report on gaming news were also blocked, Rock Paper shotgun, Gamepolitics.com, g4tv.com, kotaku.com. Then you get the downright retarded entries which were blocked for no good reason whatsoever: Fpscreator.com, TesNexus.com, 3dgamers archive, filefront,com, bioware.com (!), planetdescent.com (!) , and the site of a free descent 2 source port, d2x-xl. But almost ALL sites for video games that are quite controversial were allowed by this filter, including duke4.net, fear3.co.uk, callofduty.com, seriouszone.com, and others, yet Planetdescent and d2x-xl's sites get blocked? Descent is pretty much the coolest and least violent series of FPS games, you fly around destroying robots, yet the big site for duke nukem 3d, which approaches x-rated terms in violence, is allowed? Then sites like rock paper shotgun, and kotaku get blocked for being gaming news sites, what good reason is there for that? Then comes the ones that "really" piss me off, Bioware.com, TesNexus.com, and Gamepolitics.com. Gamepolitics is a game related politics site, not a violent games site, bioware makes RPG games that are mildly violent with one or 2 with same sex relationships that got ripped on Fox News (Mass Effect), besides that their games are less about gore and more about strategy, yet their entire site gets blocked for 1 controversial game? (that shouldn't be, none the less!). Then you get tesnexus.com, a modding site for a tame yet really good RPG games in the elder scrolls series. Why block that? None of those games are really that violent at all. Fallout3Nexus, for Fallout 3 wasn't blocked and it's the most violent rpg ever made? Add in 2 file hosting sites for games, Filefront.com, and gamers.org, both blocked. Why? Are they afraid that some kid will download some mods for a game he probably doesn't own... Why filter out files. You need the game and a PC to even play them. Librarians would probably catch the kid trying to burn a cd with the game demo or attempting to play it in the library. For mods, you need the damn game the mod is for to play it, and a demo won't do. Patches, same thing. Why block file sites whatsoever. There is no reason why, unless the people thought game file hosting would lead to school shootings, or something utterly stupid like that. It makes no sense whatsoever to block this way, PERIOD.
Other types of sites blocked are web mail sites like gmail and yahoo mail, which have absolutely no reason to block. I had yahoo mail since I was 20 for gods sake. Why filter that out? You then get all the file hosting sites online like 4shared, mediafire, rapidshare, dropbox, etc. All of these have a reputation for hosting pirate files, and they do. But they also host plenty of completely legal files, including mods for video games. There have been plenty of links to video game files on sites like this, posted on forums. Sometimes the only way to be able to host a file is to use a service like this, and simply blanketing them as "pirate" sites is stupid, but unfortunately, it makes no sense to block the host, when you could block the actual warez sites with the links to the 200 files you need to download the pirated stuff, because without that you will never find all 200 files with a simple internet search due to the fact that each link to one of these sites has a completely different account character list and file name, and the character list is a random string of characters, 30 long, that makes it almost impossible to find one file after you found the previous file through a web search.
Then you get the complete ban on social networking, which is well... Stupid. Almost every single big social networking site, such as myspace, youtube, facebook, etc, are all blocked and made it look like someone was trying to redirect me to a fraudulent site, to boot. This will scare people who try to go to these sites to make it look like their infected with redirection malware which normally does this kind of thing, with an Error box in chrome that fooled even me, thinking that some malware had infected my PC when I tried to visit youtube, until I read it closer. I simply cannot understand the reasoning behind the panic on social networking. Sure, a kid could become obssessed with them, and they give out personal info, but as long as you know what you are doing, you're fine. But the youtube thing pisses me off. Youtube's primary focus is video streaming, NOT social networking, unlike myspace and facebook. By demanding these things get blocked, the mandatory filtering groups will be cutting off all lets plays, all walkthroughs, and tons of other stuff that simply are not even close to harmful to minors. Now, none of this was meant as an attack on OpenDNS, I just think if they mandate filtering in the US, and use something similar to OpenDNS, in terms of site types to block, they will end up blocking TONS of sites that aren't even remotely harmful to minors, and let a lot in too. Filtering is not the answer, really.
You read it right... Gaming sites.. Censorship is never right, even if kids are the reason for it. Already many states have mandatory regulation in public libraries to block sites found "harmful to minors", as vague as that seems. The statues are vague and have no specific content that must be blocked, so they basically allow the libraries to chose what sites are harmful to minors to block them. This extends into schools, including colleges as well in many cases. I tried 2 filters, and both gave me complete control over what sites to block...
Talk about scary ways they could be abused to block out something the person running the school/library doesn't like. So what's the whole thing about gaming sites being harmful to minors, anyway?
One of the internet filters I tried is a free one called OpenDNS. I also looked at another site called "free internet", which also blocks gaming sites by default... OpenDNS is not just web filtering, it is a free DNS service to reroute traffic from dangerous (virus) sites that happens to offer a free internet filtering program. I tried it out.... And was shocked how much dubious, not so harmful to minors type stuff was included with full filtering. The following categories of stuff were filtered:
Gaming sites
Sexuality oriented sites
Porn sites
File sharing sites
Web mail
Forums (!)
Gambling
and some others I can't remember now..
Most of these could be considered stuff you don't want kids to see, but gaming sites, forums, webmail, why are they even on the list? So I got curious. I decided to sign up with OpenDNS's free filtering service to test 50 or so sites to see what ones are blocked, assuming I was browsing the internet where OpenDNS was forced down my throat due to mandatory filtering laws (hypothetical ones). The results were, well stupid... Number 1, a ton of gaming sites got blocked, including doomworld, planetquake,planethalflife, rockstar.com, planetduke, blood.com, and the site for my favorite video game, Deus Ex. But even worse the following gaming sites which report on gaming news were also blocked, Rock Paper shotgun, Gamepolitics.com, g4tv.com, kotaku.com. Then you get the downright retarded entries which were blocked for no good reason whatsoever: Fpscreator.com, TesNexus.com, 3dgamers archive, filefront,com, bioware.com (!), planetdescent.com (!) , and the site of a free descent 2 source port, d2x-xl. But almost ALL sites for video games that are quite controversial were allowed by this filter, including duke4.net, fear3.co.uk, callofduty.com, seriouszone.com, and others, yet Planetdescent and d2x-xl's sites get blocked? Descent is pretty much the coolest and least violent series of FPS games, you fly around destroying robots, yet the big site for duke nukem 3d, which approaches x-rated terms in violence, is allowed? Then sites like rock paper shotgun, and kotaku get blocked for being gaming news sites, what good reason is there for that? Then comes the ones that "really" piss me off, Bioware.com, TesNexus.com, and Gamepolitics.com. Gamepolitics is a game related politics site, not a violent games site, bioware makes RPG games that are mildly violent with one or 2 with same sex relationships that got ripped on Fox News (Mass Effect), besides that their games are less about gore and more about strategy, yet their entire site gets blocked for 1 controversial game? (that shouldn't be, none the less!). Then you get tesnexus.com, a modding site for a tame yet really good RPG games in the elder scrolls series. Why block that? None of those games are really that violent at all. Fallout3Nexus, for Fallout 3 wasn't blocked and it's the most violent rpg ever made? Add in 2 file hosting sites for games, Filefront.com, and gamers.org, both blocked. Why? Are they afraid that some kid will download some mods for a game he probably doesn't own... Why filter out files. You need the game and a PC to even play them. Librarians would probably catch the kid trying to burn a cd with the game demo or attempting to play it in the library. For mods, you need the damn game the mod is for to play it, and a demo won't do. Patches, same thing. Why block file sites whatsoever. There is no reason why, unless the people thought game file hosting would lead to school shootings, or something utterly stupid like that. It makes no sense whatsoever to block this way, PERIOD.
Other types of sites blocked are web mail sites like gmail and yahoo mail, which have absolutely no reason to block. I had yahoo mail since I was 20 for gods sake. Why filter that out? You then get all the file hosting sites online like 4shared, mediafire, rapidshare, dropbox, etc. All of these have a reputation for hosting pirate files, and they do. But they also host plenty of completely legal files, including mods for video games. There have been plenty of links to video game files on sites like this, posted on forums. Sometimes the only way to be able to host a file is to use a service like this, and simply blanketing them as "pirate" sites is stupid, but unfortunately, it makes no sense to block the host, when you could block the actual warez sites with the links to the 200 files you need to download the pirated stuff, because without that you will never find all 200 files with a simple internet search due to the fact that each link to one of these sites has a completely different account character list and file name, and the character list is a random string of characters, 30 long, that makes it almost impossible to find one file after you found the previous file through a web search.
Then you get the complete ban on social networking, which is well... Stupid. Almost every single big social networking site, such as myspace, youtube, facebook, etc, are all blocked and made it look like someone was trying to redirect me to a fraudulent site, to boot. This will scare people who try to go to these sites to make it look like their infected with redirection malware which normally does this kind of thing, with an Error box in chrome that fooled even me, thinking that some malware had infected my PC when I tried to visit youtube, until I read it closer. I simply cannot understand the reasoning behind the panic on social networking. Sure, a kid could become obssessed with them, and they give out personal info, but as long as you know what you are doing, you're fine. But the youtube thing pisses me off. Youtube's primary focus is video streaming, NOT social networking, unlike myspace and facebook. By demanding these things get blocked, the mandatory filtering groups will be cutting off all lets plays, all walkthroughs, and tons of other stuff that simply are not even close to harmful to minors. Now, none of this was meant as an attack on OpenDNS, I just think if they mandate filtering in the US, and use something similar to OpenDNS, in terms of site types to block, they will end up blocking TONS of sites that aren't even remotely harmful to minors, and let a lot in too. Filtering is not the answer, really.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)