another angry white nationalist with a gun

[callmeslick]

......that's all, just another day in NRA-purchased America, right?

[callmeslick]

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafe ... _165520128


but we need to build a wall to keep WHO safe?(seems like it would be a safety measure for Mexicans). And, vetting those refuge kids keeps us safe to allow these nazi wannabes to breed?

[Top Gun]

I am so sick of this country right now. We are completely fucked.

[Nightshade]

I am so sick of this country right now. We are completely ★■◆●.

I hear Venezuela has some extra space now. Wanna go there?

[Top Gun]

You support policies that get children murdered. Their blood is on your hands. Get your own sick ass out of here.

[callmeslick]

note that the usual narrative NS pushes(the shooter was a Dem, was not a white nationalist, etc), which I pre-empted here, was now proveably pushed by RUSSIAN sources. Feeling proud, comrade Nightshade? Your fellows in the Kremlin do the same thing you do here.

[Burlyman]

Problem-reaction-solution

[woodchip]

note that the usual narrative NS pushes(the shooter was a Dem, was not a white nationalist, etc), which I pre-empted here, was now proveably pushed by RUSSIAN sources. Feeling proud, comrade Nightshade? Your fellows in the Kremlin do the same thing you do here.

Feeling proud you are pushing the same tired memes that you libs can only see? NRA approved shooter? Only you can come up with such idiocy. I like how you over look the guy was reported to the FBI not once but twice and the FBI admitted to dropping the ball in stopping him. So yeah lets ban the guns and ignore the kid was a know mental case who bragged how he wanted to kill students. Lets make more gun free zones out of schools to make them hideously vulnerable. Lets arm the teachers with nothing but the clothes on their backs like the coach who died by stepping between the shooter and his students. On but wait....as you famously once said, all you have to do is pull out your cell phone and call for help. Got any real solutions or your intellect too limited by the PC talking points you are fed and the regurgitate?

[Krom]

Perhaps the federal government would be more successful in protecting public order and safety if republicans and conservatives hadn't spent the last 30 years doing everything in their power to tear down and destroy it.

[woodchip]

Perhaps the federal government would be more successful in protecting public order and safety if republicans and conservatives hadn't spent the last 30 years doing everything in their power to tear down and destroy it.

Obviously you are confused. All I saw in the last 8 years was divisive politics played out by Obama and friends. Case in point Obama decided the Boston police dept needed federal oversight as it was so racist. Nice try on the deflection attempt.

[Nightshade]

Perhaps the federal government would be more successful in protecting public order and safety if republicans and conservatives hadn't spent the last 30 years doing everything in their power to tear down and destroy it.

The government will never be able to "protect you" even if it were a tyrannical total police state (like leftist democrats want it to be.)

Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

[Tunnelcat]

How's this for twisted logic? It's easier for an 18 year old to go out and buy a gun than a beer. In fact, it's even easier for that 18 year old to run down to the corner gun store and buy a semiautomatic AR-15 than a lowly handgun of any variety.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -shootings

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/a ... -guns.html

[vision]

Got any real solutions or your intellect too limited by the PC talking points you are fed and the regurgitate?

If I'm not mistaken, Slick has repeatedly advocated for sensible regulations, none of which exist today. Without a legal framework addressing guns and mental illness the FBI can't do anything no matter how many times a potential shooter is reported.

What solutions do you have that aren't right-wing talking points?

[Tunnelcat]

The government will never be able to "protect you" even if it were a tyrannical total police state (like leftist democrats want it to be.)

Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

How quickly you've conveniently forgot that the recent loss of our most precious freedoms and the slow, cancerous formation of a police state, can directly be laid at the feet of that wonderful piece of legislation, The Patriot Act. Yes, some of that was the Dems fault since they went along with the charade, all because they were just as psychotic after 911 as everyone else. But that "Act" was brought to you courtesy of 2 Republican leaders, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. They claimed that all they wanted was to protect us from terrorists, but in reality what they really wanted was more power and the ability to wage war. So like a bunch of scared sheep, we Americans willingly let them take away our freedoms in exchange for security. We've never gotten it back either. Once you give a leader more power without questioning it, it sticks around long after. Other leaders that follow always keep it and abuse it, because power is a favored drug. You'll never ever get it back into the hands of the people without a revolution either.

[Nightshade]

How quickly you've conveniently forgot that the recent loss of our most precious freedoms and the slow, cancerous formation of a police state, can directly be laid at the feet of that wonderful piece of legislation, The Patriot Act. Yes, some of that was the Dems fault since they went along with the charade, all because they were just as psychotic after 911 as everyone else. But that "Act" was brought to you courtesy of 2 Republican leaders, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. They claimed that all they wanted was to protect us from terrorists, but in reality what they really wanted was more power and the ability to wage war. So like a bunch of scared sheep, we Americans willingly let them take away our freedoms in exchange for security. We've never gotten it back either. Once you give a leader more power without questioning it, it sticks around long after. Other leaders that follow always keep it and abuse it, because power is a favored drug. You'll never ever get it back into the hands of the people without a revolution either.

The democrats were in total power for two years...but they did nothing to repeal it, did they?

[woodchip]

Got any real solutions or your intellect too limited by the PC talking points you are fed and the regurgitate?

If I'm not mistaken, Slick has repeatedly advocated for sensible regulations, none of which exist today. Without a legal framework addressing guns and mental illness the FBI can't do anything no matter how many times a potential shooter is reported.

What solutions do you have that aren't right-wing talking points?

Since you asked in a non abusive manner how about:

Expanding police powers to go in a take firearms from obviously disturbed individuals like Cruz who made well known his proclivities. How much more warning did they need to prevent this from happening? Do you know if your doctor deems you a mental case and he knows you have fire arms, he (the doctor) can send the police over to confiscate all your firearms? As well they should. Does this sound to right wing or is it sensible?

Protect the schools better by removing the fallacy that by labeling them "gun free" zones. Stop having teachers use their bodies as shields and give them the tools and training to actually protect their charges. Hire trained security personnel if you must but stop regarding our students as bullet bags that are only good for promoting political ideology. Is this too right wing?

How about all the graphic violence in movies and video games. Does this have a effect and should it be censored? I grew up in the 50's and 60's yet we never had such mass murder as you see in schools today. But then TV and movies had a censor board controlling them. Back then we had shooting teams at school and when I first started college at Ferris State we kept our .22's, shotguns and bows in our dorm room. No one ever brought up shooting their fellow students. How did we migrate mentally from then to now? Censoring movies and video games should not be a right wing idea, just a sensible one.

As to the AR style rifles, this is just a distraction. Make it harder to own if you must but just remember if you do, a enterprising student will get some fertilizer and diesel fuel, pack it in a car and park it in front of the school when the parents are picking up their kids. The Boston Marathon will pale in comparison. What will you ban then?

[Top Gun]

...you're seriously blaming movies and games. This is ridiculous.

And no, blaming a ★■◆●ing MILITARY-GRADE TOOL OF MASS MURDER is not a distraction. No one should own those things. Period.

Oh, and as a teacher, you are not turning our schools into goddamn armed fortresses. That is hideously fucked-up.

[Vander]

So in order to secure the second amendment we need to erode the first?

[LightWolf]

So you're going to focus on one point out of four?

These games and TV (including the reporting of a shooting every other week) have completely desensitized America. While we may have crossed the point of no return, we can attempt to do some damage control.

And no, blaming a...MILITARY-GRADE TOOL OF MASS MURDER is not a distraction. No one should own those things. Period.

Take away a murderer's toy, and he'll strive for another one. Period.

Oh, and as a teacher, you are not turning our schools into goddamn armed fortresses.

Maybe it takes an armed fortress to dissuade these potential shooters.



The thing to keep in mind is simple: If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
If someone were about to commit one of the largest crimes you can, why would you care about a smaller one as well, such as dodging gun control?

Where people can carry guns, crime goes down. Period. If you were going to rob someone, would you pick the defenseless grandmother or the armed guy? What if everyone was defenseless? What if everyone could shoot you the moment you broke in?

Take Chicago, the center of gang violence. How are the strictest gun laws in the nation helping them?

[Krom]

So in the previous post he basically said we need to privatize the police force, which could only result in making the country that much more militant, and now he is saying it is more important to be able to shoot people than it is being able to speak freely. And somehow that is supposed to preserve liberty and freedom from oppression?

[Vander]

Take Chicago, the center of gang violence. How are the strictest gun laws in the nation helping them?

I tend toward thinking gun laws are a bit like trying to put the toothpaste back into the tube at this point, but Chicago can be an example that helps show the opposite of your point. Local gun laws are too narrow to have much effect on availability. The market for which guns are produced still exists, it's just a little further down the road to the next city, county, or state.

I think the whole "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" is just a hooky saying that doesn't stand up to examination. It ignores escalation and accumulation. It's basic premise is that if some "bad guy" has illegal access to a specific level of lethality, it should be legal so that the "good guy" can match them. This snowballs because it drives production.

[Nightshade]

......that's all, just another day in NRA-purchased America, right?

How white nationalists fooled the media about Florida shooter

ABC, AP and others ran with false information on shooter’s ties to extremist groups.

Following misrepresentations by a white nationalist leader and coordinated efforts by internet trolls, numerous researchers and media outlets spread a seemingly false claim that the man charged with killing more than a dozen people at a Florida high school belonged to an extremist group.

Law enforcement agencies say they have no evidence so far to support this claim, and the rumor appears to have been perpetrated by white nationalist trolls themselves.

On Thursday afternoon, the Anti-Defamation League reported that a white supremacist group claimed ties with Nikolas Cruz, who confessed to the shooting spree that killed at least 17 people, including many high-school students, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

“A spokesperson for the white supremacist group Republic of Florida (ROF) told the Anti-Defamation League on Thursday, February 15, that Nikolas Cruz [....] was associated with his group,” the ADL reported. The ADL quoted a man named Jordan Jereb, who runs the small group, which is based in Tallahassee.

“Jereb added that ROF had not ordered or wanted Cruz to do anything like the school shooting,” the ADL wrote in a blog post that was quickly picked up by ABC News and The Associated Press, and later percolated through dozens of other media outlets. Even The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website, picked up the claim.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/ ... sts-415672

[vision]

Expanding police powers to go in a take firearms from obviously disturbed individuals like Cruz who made well known his proclivities. How much more warning did they need to prevent this from happening? Do you know if your doctor deems you a mental case and he knows you have fire arms, he (the doctor) can send the police over to confiscate all your firearms? As well they should. Does this sound to right wing or is it sensible?

Sure, sounds good if it can be done without abuse. How can you convince 2A advocates this isn't a breech of the constitutional liberty of mentally ill people, and would you be in support of all the government funding that goes along with regulating the people deciding who is not fit to own firearms? Will you call your Republican representatives and express this view?

Protect the schools better by removing the fallacy that by labeling them "gun free" zones. Stop having teachers use their bodies as shields and give them the tools and training to actually protect their charges. Hire trained security personnel if you must but stop regarding our students as bullet bags that are only good for promoting political ideology. Is this too right wing?

I never understood the logic behind the gun free zone label, so I'm with you there. When you say give teachers the tools and training they need, you're talking about guns, correct? Schools are often on the chopping block when it comes time to balance the budget and teachers regularly have to buy their own teaching supplies. Would you be in support of the financing involved with training literally hundreds of thousands of teachers and giving them guns? Security personnel trained for a live shooter event would be expensive. How many would it take and wouldn't they just become the first targets a shooter would fire upon?

Censoring movies and video games should not be a right wing idea, just a sensible one.

I don't play violent games and don't like violence in movies, but I have also never seen a study that positively links games and movies with violence. I'm not sure censorship would help. I believe the problem is not fictional or play violence, but an incredible sense of apathy and hopelessness in children. It's no secret that kids today are not like previous generations. They don't rebel, they don't stir up trouble, and with the exception of some of the stupider ones eating laundry detergent, most are happy sit in their rooms and play games with their friends. Rather than censoring what they see, perhaps we should show them we are making progress toward combating things that fill them with dread, like the hopelessness that comes along with extreme income inequality, racial conflict, political division, climate change, and other things that make kids retreat from the world?

As to the AR style rifles, this is just a distraction. Make it harder to own if you must but just remember if you do, a enterprising student will get some fertilizer and diesel fuel, pack it in a car and park it in front of the school when the parents are picking up their kids. The Boston Marathon will pale in comparison. What will you ban then?

Right. This is the way things are heading if we don't get to the root cause. As the only anti-gun member of descentbb.net, I have never thought the solution was entirely about legislation, but more about promoting equality and altruism. If you live in a world where your needs are met, there is no incentive to shoot anyone with a gun.

[Tunnelcat]

How quickly you've conveniently forgot that the recent loss of our most precious freedoms and the slow, cancerous formation of a police state, can directly be laid at the feet of that wonderful piece of legislation, The Patriot Act. Yes, some of that was the Dems fault since they went along with the charade, all because they were just as psychotic after 911 as everyone else. But that "Act" was brought to you courtesy of 2 Republican leaders, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. They claimed that all they wanted was to protect us from terrorists, but in reality what they really wanted was more power and the ability to wage war. So like a bunch of scared sheep, we Americans willingly let them take away our freedoms in exchange for security. We've never gotten it back either. Once you give a leader more power without questioning it, it sticks around long after. Other leaders that follow always keep it and abuse it, because power is a favored drug. You'll never ever get it back into the hands of the people without a revolution either.

The democrats were in total power for two years...but they did nothing to repeal it, did they?

Well, they're obviously either STILL psychotic, or they're kowtowing to the military industrial complex at this point.

So what's the Republican's excuse? They actually created it, passed it with flying colors and President Bush signed it into law, all under their watch. It's their baby. The Republicans haven't even attempted to repeal it either and they're in power now.

Oh, and Trump wants to blame the lack of gun control laws on the Democrats. Hah!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-blames ... 06834.html

Says the guy who did THIS:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tr ... al-n727221

[woodchip]

Oh, and as a teacher, you are not turning our schools into goddamn armed fortresses. That is hideously fucked-up.

Better to leave them defenseless then is your view point? I suspect your attitude would change if your school was involved and you got to see the bloody bodies of some of your students lying on the floor. How many more dead students would convince you taking prudent safety measures are needed? a 100, a 1000?

[woodchip]

Expanding police powers to go in a take firearms from obviously disturbed individuals like Cruz who made well known his proclivities. How much more warning did they need to prevent this from happening? Do you know if your doctor deems you a mental case and he knows you have fire arms, he (the doctor) can send the police over to confiscate all your firearms? As well they should. Does this sound to right wing or is it sensible?

Sure, sounds good if it can be done without abuse. How can you convince 2A advocates this isn't a breech of the constitutional liberty of mentally ill people, and would you be in support of all the government funding that goes along with regulating the people deciding who is not fit to own firearms? Will you call your Republican representatives and express this view?

We already have laws about people not fit to own firearms. Felons for one. I'm not sure there are too many 2A advocates that wouldn't approve taking firearm away from mentally ill people (and in the case of Cruz demonstrably so). At the very least give the local cops the power to take away the firearms and by pass the oh so obviously inept FBI. Abuse? There probably will be but much better that than having a corpse count of students.

Protect the schools better by removing the fallacy that by labeling them "gun free" zones. Stop having teachers use their bodies as shields and give them the tools and training to actually protect their charges. Hire trained security personnel if you must but stop regarding our students as bullet bags that are only good for promoting political ideology. Is this too right wing?

I never understood the logic behind the gun free zone label, so I'm with you there. When you say give teachers the tools and training they need, you're talking about guns, correct? Schools are often on the chopping block when it comes time to balance the budget and teachers regularly have to buy their own teaching supplies. Would you be in support of the financing involved with training literally hundreds of thousands of teachers and giving them guns? Security personnel trained for a live shooter event would be expensive. How many would it take and wouldn't they just become the first targets a shooter would fire upon? [/quote]
It may irk you when I mention this but the NRA is a national leader in training for the use of firearms. They certify range officers to teach and run competitions like the International Defensive Pistol association (IDPA). I suspect they (NRA) would be more than happy to set up a free/low cost program organizing the use of local RO's, police and even military personnel. As to being a target, the correct way is for the students not to know who is trained and is carrying. That is the reason for conceal carry.

Censoring movies and video games should not be a right wing idea, just a sensible one.

I don't play violent games and don't like violence in movies, but I have also never seen a study that positively links games and movies with violence. I'm not sure censorship would help. I believe the problem is not fictional or play violence, but an incredible sense of apathy and hopelessness in children. It's no secret that kids today are not like previous generations. They don't rebel, they don't stir up trouble, and with the exception of some of the stupider ones eating laundry detergent, most are happy sit in their rooms and play games with their friends. Rather than censoring what they see, perhaps we should show them we are making progress toward combating things that fill them with dread, like the hopelessness that comes along with extreme income inequality, racial conflict, political division, climate change, and other things that make kids retreat from the world? [/quote]
I can agree with you as to the information and data available on violent movies/video games leading to desensitizing andattacks. I merely point out how it was when I grew up and the leading weekly shows like Leave it to Beaver were popular And wait....just found this:
WASHINGTON — Violent video game play is linked to increased aggression in players but insufficient evidence exists about whether the link extends to criminal violence or delinquency, according to a new American Psychological Association task force report.
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/ ... games.aspx

As to the AR style rifles, this is just a distraction. Make it harder to own if you must but just remember if you do, a enterprising student will get some fertilizer and diesel fuel, pack it in a car and park it in front of the school when the parents are picking up their kids. The Boston Marathon will pale in comparison. What will you ban then?

Right. This is the way things are heading if we don't get to the root cause. As the only anti-gun member of descentbb.net, I have never thought the solution was entirely about legislation, but more about promoting equality and altruism. If you live in a world where your needs are met, there is no incentive to shoot anyone with a gun.

I would disagree. People with mental orders will still exist no matter how altruistic society may be. Until we get to the root cause I'm afraid some of the above ideas we expressed will have to take affect.

[callmeslick]

Got any real solutions or your intellect too limited by the PC talking points you are fed and the regurgitate?

If I'm not mistaken, Slick has repeatedly advocated for sensible regulations, none of which exist today. Without a legal framework addressing guns and mental illness the FBI can't do anything no matter how many times a potential shooter is reported.

What solutions do you have that aren't right-wing talking points?

let me go make a snack while I wait for that response. Maybe I'll have enough time to brine and then roast a turkey before either Woody or NS veer from fascist talking points.

[callmeslick]

other societies have mental illness, so that isn't the reason. The gun-free zone thing is ludicrous. Mass shooters attack targets they have formulated due to bad experience or other personal ideas. They don't ever look at the status, unless maybe a military style terrorist act. Heck, we have had shootings at military bases and NSA headquarters, where one should presumed the targets/victims were well armed or at least well protected. Yup, as predicted, I go through the list and nothing past the usual deflections from the brain-dead obvious fact that we have FAR too easy access to weapons in our society, and when our society is chock full of angry, scared, stupid people, that is a recipe for the reality you see. Conservatives(using the term loosely) are simply shilling for a nakedly opportunistic lobby designed to SELL GUNS, and then deflecting every time their cheesy arguments get destroyed.

[callmeslick]

At least we've clearly established that in this country, the threat from immigrants and refugees pales compared to the ongoing active shooting threats of white racists.

[Krom]

I also side with vision/etc in generally frowning upon the concept of "gun free zones" in open to the public spaces within the context of a nation where private citizens have freedom of movement and also own millions of guns. Its like trying to declare a "smog free zone" in the middle of Downtown L.A. How would you even enforce it? Dome it off and pipe in all the air/water from the Siberian wilderness?

[Top Gun]

Better to leave them defenseless then is your view point? I suspect your attitude would change if your school was involved and you got to see the bloody bodies of some of your students lying on the floor. How many more dead students would convince you taking prudent safety measures are needed? a 100, a 1000?

The only "prudent safety measures" I want to see are fixing our royally fucked-up society and getting ★■◆●ing MILITARY-GRADE MASS MURDER ENABLERS out of the hands of private citizens. No one should own an AR-15. Period. If you have any desire to, you're a goddamn psycho in my book.

If the only way we can protect our children from being horribly murdered when going to school is to turn schools into prison camps, then we're done. The country should cease to exist. Immediately.

[Top Gun]

These games and TV (including the reporting of a shooting every other week) have completely desensitized America. While we may have crossed the point of no return, we can attempt to do some damage control.

Citations ★■◆●ing needed.

Take away a murderer's toy, and he'll strive for another one. Period.

Don't give me that vapid bull★■◆●. How dense do you have to be to ignore the fact that the only reason any of these people are able to do what they do is because it's pathetically easy to get one's hands on objects solely designed to kill large numbers of people in a short amount of time? Some random disturbed teen isn't going to wander into the ghetto and buy guns from a shady guy in a back alley. It's many times more difficult to DRIVE than it is to obtain a weapon of mass murder. How hideously fucked-up is that?

Maybe it takes an armed fortress to dissuade these potential shooters.

As I said above, if this is what it actually takes, then this country is an absolute third-world shithole and has no business continuing to exist.

The thing to keep in mind is simple: If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

Serious question: how old are you? Because you sound for all the world like a dumbass teenager parroting shitty Fox News talking points you heard from your parents. Grow up, develop a sense of how the world actually functions, and then get back to me.

[vision]

As the only anti-gun member of descentbb.net, I have never thought the solution was entirely about legislation, but more about promoting equality and altruism. If you live in a world where your needs are met, there is no incentive to shoot anyone with a gun.

I would disagree. People with mental orders will still exist no matter how altruistic society may be. Until we get to the root cause I'm afraid some of the above ideas we expressed will have to take affect.

Point taken. My comment was off target regarding mental illness.


So, on this divisive issue are we all close to agreeing:

• Mentally ill people should no own firearms
• The State should have some authority to deny and/or confiscate firearms from those deemed mentally unfit
• Determining who is unfit is challenging and opens a path for abuse
• A comprehensive program aimed at removing guns from the hands of the unfit is legally complicated, financially expensive, and difficult to oversee
• This program will not be 100% effective, but we should expect a reasonable reduction in this type of crime, and enacting such a program would help heal our culture

[Top Gun]

Probably worth posting: the whole mass-shooting thing has far less to do with defined mental illnesses than it does flat-out rage. Of particular note:

Paolo del Vecchio of the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration has said, “Violence by those with mental illness is so small that even if you could somehow cure it all, 95 percent of violent crime would still exist.”

[woodchip]

No one should own an AR-15. Period. If you have any desire to, you're a goddamn psycho in my book.

Well I own one and for a reason you are obviously unaware. There is something called "Service Rifle" competition along with a whole raft of other rifle /pistol competitions culminating once a year at Camp Perry for the national finals. lotsa people compete and use the Ar-15 as it is a very accurate rifle (some use the M-14 but it has fallen out of favor) and the recoil is quite light compared to the M-14. As a varmint rifle, the AR-15 also excels. So are people who bought one for these reasons psycho's? And I would have to agree that for home defense the AR-15 is not appropriate. A pistol or shotgun being the better choice.

[Vander]

Take up archery instead.

[Krom]

If it is just a varmint rifle, my Marlin model 60 is likely superior in pretty much every meaningful metric. Even the old bb/pellet rifle that had to be pumped up 10 times for every shot makes more sense than an AR-15 for controlling smaller rodents.

[Top Gun]

No one should own an AR-15. Period. If you have any desire to, you're a goddamn psycho in my book.

Well I own one and for a reason you are obviously unaware. There is something called "Service Rifle" competition along with a whole raft of other rifle /pistol competitions culminating once a year at Camp Perry for the national finals. lotsa people compete and use the Ar-15 as it is a very accurate rifle (some use the M-14 but it has fallen out of favor) and the recoil is quite light compared to the M-14. As a varmint rifle, the AR-15 also excels. So are people who bought one for these reasons psycho's? And I would have to agree that for home defense the AR-15 is not appropriate. A pistol or shotgun being the better choice.

Yes, if you have one sitting around your house, I question your mental state. If you want to engage in shooting competitions, keep them under lock and key at the range and use them there. Or better yet, get a hobby that doesn't involve objects intended to blow holes in people's brains.

[vision]

Or better yet, get a hobby that doesn't involve objects intended to blow holes in people's brains.

I second this.

[Tunnelcat]

These games and TV (including the reporting of a shooting every other week) have completely desensitized America. While we may have crossed the point of no return, we can attempt to do some damage control.

Citations ★■◆●ing needed.

Actually, the opposite seems to be true. A few recent studies have shown that playing video games, even violent ones, keeps people busy and out of trouble. The games are a diversion and a release.

https://www.polygon.com/2014/9/12/61415 ... orld-crime

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/v ... crime.html

But then, there are other studies that show playing violent video games makes players more aggressive. Whether that increased aggression leads to someone committing actual violence against another person is something more difficult to measure. Then there's the issue of whether kids who play violent video games are predisposed to having a violent personality in the first place. So did the game make the kid violent, or was the kid predisposed to violent behavior in the first place? Either way, a couple of studies have demonstrated no tangible link between playing violent video games and someone acting out violent tendencies in real life.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/25/health/v ... index.html