Sen. Feinstein: "Maybe we have to (have gun control in video games)"

[RicardJulianti]

Adam Lanza was probably an avid gamer because he was fixated on guns.

People with Asperger's often have limited social skills and have trouble empathizing with others (seeing their point of view). Like with Autism, they become highly interested and focused on one subject, depending on the severity and where exactly they fall in the spectrum. Lanza had an NRA certificate, would get birthday checks with memo's suggesting the purchase of [such and such] rifle. He was proficient with weapons and his mother kept them around the house. lots of them. Video games likely provided a safe alternative to actually firing a weapon, but with his inability to see the perspectives of others, its likely it felt like one of his games to him. It is entirely possible that he was unable to tell if others could even feel pain, but this was due to his own mental faculties rather than any sort of "negative role" provided by games.

Video games are used to help war vets with PTSD, actually providing a safe release for their fears and flashbacks. His mental state, coupled with his proficiency of weapons, lack of the ability to feel empathy and who knows what else in his life (paranoia, abuse etc) is what led to the shooting. Not anything to do with games, and not any one of the factors listed above. Why must Congress spout vitriol of something they know nothing about?

I have been playing games for as long as I can remember. The NES came out 2 years before I was born and they have been with me literally my whole life. I played Turok when I was 9 and Turok 2 when it came out, Duke Nukem 64, Doom 64....and many more that I don't even recall because it has been so long. I am not a violence crazed maniac, or take joy in the pain of others. I have only shot a gun twice in my life, and while I feel it could be enjoyable to practice my accuracy...it is only out of curiosity in relation to my gaming style (tend to be a sniper ) I know that game skills don't translate, but that is beside the point. I tend to take pride in my accuracy in all things, whether it's darts, pool, gaming, basketball, tennis (placing the shot), general spatial reasoning and so on.

I also have a degree in Psychology with an emphasis on behavior...so it's not like I'm just blowing hot air like Congress. The study that they are getting funding for will (likely) come up with the same conclusion as every other study has. Violent video games do not lead to violent behavior, especially in relation to using firearms to harm others. A study like this should be completed over many years to see the long term effects, but there is no doubt in my mind that Congress will just want the study to be as quick and dirty as possible.

I did a study like this in my undergrad, they placed an EEG on my head and had me play Hitman. Then they had me rate images as violent or non violent, and then there was a test of hearing. A "second subject" had performed the study at the same time and I was "competing" with him/her in the last exercise. Whoever pressed the button first after a signal got to send a tone to the other of differing volumes. It was to see if the game, the imagery and the tone had any correlation. Would I send a loud tone simply because they did? Or did I base my input on simply how I was feeling (give me a quiet one, I go loud anyway or vice versa). Of course there wasn't another subject....but yeah.

I apologize for the insanely long post that should probably be made a blog post somewhere. Congrats if you read it though. This issue really gets to me and Congress needs to wake up and realize the world is changing. Before games it was radio shows,movies, music, comic books, novels and so on. Violent crimes have actually DROPPED since things like Doom were released. Food for thought...

Stats. Kind of old, but still relevant: http://videogames.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=003627