By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin said:
hsrob said:

It would only be a strawman if I was genuinely claiming that is the position put forth which of course I wasn't ;) 

It troubles me though that games are being looked at as a cause by the police when logic dictates that even if they are 'proven' to be part of the problem here they are clearly not the main issue.  Games are ubiquitous in the developed world, mass shootings and school shootings are not.

Trying to finger games seems at best to be oversimplifying an issue that simply isn't simply, and at worst, blatent scapegoating.

Neither approach can possibly lead to a solution that will decrease the number of innocent people being killed by gun (or any other kind of) violence.  I have no prejudice in how that solution is arrived at, if it takes more guns, so be it. However, trying to prove a link, after-the-fact, if that is one's intention, will inevitably lead to proof in the positive but not necessarily the correct conclusion.

You know, the problem with violence as a diet for society is that, even if guns were removed from the equation, the more unstable would have more inspiration on other means to wreak havoc by using knives, household bombs, and any other tool they could devise for their mischeavous desires.

The problem with violence as a diet is that it feeds the madman, whereas guns could be eliminated as a tool, violence is the root.

I've not really stated anywhere that I thought guns should be removed, in fact, the opposite. 

While it may be logical that there is a connection between watching violence and partaking of violence, it does not necessarily follow that the two are causally related. Look to other countries that imbibe of the same (violent) media but don't have the same level of violence.

Bottom line, any connection they can make between videogame violence and the Sandy Hook shootings will be extremely tenuous, at the very best.