Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Games Science

School Shooting Prompts Legislation To Study Violent Video Games 1168

Posted by Soulskill
from the blame-game-will-commence dept.
New submitter seepho writes "Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) has introduced a bill directing the National Academy of Sciences to lead an investigation to determine what impact violent video games have on children. Senator Rockefeller commented, 'Recent court decisions demonstrate that some people still do not get it. They believe that violent video games are no more dangerous to young minds than classic literature or Saturday morning cartoons. Parents, pediatricians, and psychologists know better. These court decisions show we need to do more and explore ways Congress can lay additional groundwork on this issue. This report will be a critical resource in this process.'" This legislation was prompted by reports that Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza was a gamer. A draft of the bill is available online.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

School Shooting Prompts Legislation To Study Violent Video Games

Comments Filter:
  • by adversus (1451933) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @02:35PM (#42339015)
    And watches the same movies, and listens to the same music. Yet we're the only ones with a mass murder fetish, and the shittiest mental healthcare. Media isn't the problem.
  • by ChodaBoyUSA (2532764) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @02:37PM (#42339053)
    ...of why these mass murders are not being caught by the mental health system? Before we jump to conclusions and condemn the tools used by these insane criminals, we need to find out WHY someone would want to commit mass murder and WHY the mental health system is not catching these people long before they commit these acts of murder.
  • by VickiM (920888) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @02:40PM (#42339101)
    It's not cool to be anti-Semitic anymore. When will it finally be socially and morally reprehensible to treat atheists like this?
  • by Damastus the WizLiz (935648) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:11PM (#42339655)

    His parents should be in prison. They are directly responsible because they didn't get their son the help that he needed.

    Do you have any idea how hard it is for people to get serious and effective mental health treatment? Half the medical insurance companies don't pay it or charge rediculous copays. For the government to do anything he would have to have been arrested and that usually leads to prison, not quality mental health care. His access to guns and games can be debated until everyone is blue in the face. It is still likely he would have performed some kind of violent act. I dont blame his parents alone, I blame the country. If we spent half the time we waste raging against god, guns, games, and godlessness on developing a social concience. We might actually solve a few problems in this country, if not the world. I weep for all the souls lost in this tragedy, even the shooters.

  • by Bengie (1121981) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:25PM (#42339891)
    Exactly. This is why we need a decent safety net for health services. People who don't get helped can affect others, so it is in everyone's best interest to have a certain bare-minimum.
  • by fallen1 (230220) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:33PM (#42340011) Homepage

    I think that is your first line of defense, and your first line of inquiry, to start with. How about Mom and Dad stop chasing what the Joneses down the street have? How about Mom and Dad stop worrying about working all the time so they can have a $650,000 McMansion like Sue and Bill do? How about Mom and Dad teaching their kid(s) to be happy with what they have and not lusting for what Bill junior has? How about Mom and Dad get over the stigma of having a conversation with their children and, you know, FUCKING TALK TO THEM - NOT _AT_ THEM? And for the love of whatever you hold dear, do not do this once they are 12. Start the conversations at age 2 - they won't understand it all then, but the topics are there and they will absorb that information. That concern. Those values. Instill in your children respect for adults, respect for others, and respect for themselves. Teach them right from wrong and how to tell fantasy from reality. Do NOT try and teach this to them when they are too old to give a shit what Mom and Dad think or believe - teach it to them from the beginning.

    Tell the government to get the hell out of deciding how we discipline our children. Until and unless one is drawing blood and/or leaving bruises in places they should not conceivably be such as around the shoulders, ankles, chest, head, upper arms and so forth - basically, if it is within a few inches of the ass of that child AND this is not a persistent pattern, then fuck off and let them discipline their children. I'm not saying every child needs a spanking, but I know that my generation (late 30 year old and into 40 year old group) grew up respecting adults, authority, and without the vast sense of entitlement pervading our society today AND most - I would say 90% - of my friends and acquaintances had their ass spanked when needed. Or we were grounded and sent to a room NOT filled with every electronic marvel of the age so it was an actual punishment. We were not bribed to be quiet with a toy. We were told to be quiet or you'd get a real reason to cry... and we believed them.

    I could go on but I think most people get my point. How about we start with getting Mom and Dad to be Mom and Dad and not "that authority figure I can ignore because they are never home and always working"? How about we start taking personal responsibility for ourselves and our children and stop blaming the TV, video games, and everything else BUT ourselves?

  • by geekoid (135745) <`moc.oohay' `ta' `dnaltropnidad'> on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:40PM (#42340107) Homepage Journal

    But what was the result?
    Parents do NOT have some special all seeing talent. at best they might get a cut feelinh that perhaps somethign is wrong.

    She did the wrong thing. From Adams point of view she was pushing him away and out. She became the source of blame for what he was feeling
    Clearly, she wanted him to move on, have a meat space social life, but to people undergoing these depression and mood issues, they onloy see it as negative.

    THIS is the price of not have mental health services readily available. If I was to blame someone, it would be the jackasses that shut down the mental health facilities in that town in order to save some pennies.

    All this goes back to the perception of mental illness in the us. that people just need to be 'tough', and the people with mental health issues are 'crazy'. And that it's something that doesn't happen to people if the 'live right'.
    She should have been able to have someone come over and talk to him.
    Find good ways to get him well instead of just pushing him away.
    And yes, medication is needed.

    I don't blame the mom. I blame a society in where a mom is expected to know everything and if she asks for help she is frowned upon. I blame a society where mental health isn't treated like any other illness of injury.
    I blame every person who would rather people walk around homeless, gets get killed in schools, plagues return, and malls get shot up rather then spend a few bucks on a social health system.

    No, no, lets blame video games. That's the ticket.

  • by rtb61 (674572) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:43PM (#42340155) Homepage

    Looking at all the reported behaviour of Adam Lanza and the incident itself, he was more than just mentally ill, he was in fact a psychopath hiding behind a false diagnosis of Aspergers. Why the false diagnosis, in the event of any criminal prosecutions, a false diagnosis of Aspergers will produce a reduced sentence or even just compulsory treatment and a true diagnosis of psychopathy will produce a maximum sentence as there is no treatment and repeat offence and even worse offences is highly likely. Psychopaths as consummate liars are not stupid and readily scam the most skilled psychotherapists.

    The incident itself, with Adam Lanza having no past hostility against the school or children in general indicates, that he was indifferent to them being children, for the psychopath they could have been rabbits, foxes or cardboard targets. The reason they were targets was for maximum impact upon society and they way normal people value children. The intent was to kill as many children as possible in order to have the greatest impact upon society he could possibly achieve. This was an act of psychopathic control, reinforced by his committing suicide at the slightest threat of capture, an unwillingness to surrender control and further indicated by his destruction of his hard disk drive, he was ensuring that he retained control of his digital existence.

    The most likely trigger, he was frustrated by not achieving the superiority his psychopathy demanded. That superiority the previously blocked him from normal interactions with those lesser insignificant people that surrounded him. That failure lead to growing frustration and the psychopathically insane desire to demonstrate his superiority by forcing his control over society by killing it's children, as many as possible.

    If he had been more successful it wouldn't have occurred as least not in this manner, a result more like Darth Cheney could be expected, with the deaths of hundreds of thousands and tens of millions of profits, fed a psychopathically driven ego.

    Want to solve the problem, start testing for psychopathy when ever juvenile criminal offences occur, there are infallible tests based upon cerebral responses and reactions to emotional triggers and control efforts, they can not be faked out. Psychopathy is a genetic illness with no cure.

  • by squiggleslash (241428) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:44PM (#42340185) Homepage Journal

    While you're waiting, interesting fact about the infamous "Assault Weapons Ban" that cost the Democrats the 1994 election: it was passed with almost unanimous support in the Senate. Republicans and Democrats alike supporting it in overwhelming numbers.

    Because it was a good bill? Hell no, it's a terrible piece of legislation, but that's not the point: back when it was passed, there wasn't this "Left = gun control, Right = guns for all" crap. Even before the AWB, Saint Reagan himself, as governor of California, had signed into law some of the worst gun control legislation ever seen.

    From what I can discern, the NRA decided that the best way to protect its members was to (relatively arbitrarily) pick a party, and throw its weight behind it knowing that if that party knew that was going on, it would avoid crossing the NRA to avoid losing its support. This policy started in the late seventies, but really took hold in 1994 when they went all out to elect a party that was equally to blame for the hated AWB as their opponents. As long as the supported party stayed in power, and was sufficiently scared of losing support to not waver from pro-NRA positions, the NRA's policies would be bolstered.

    And that action drove the usually civil-liberty-loving liberals into the hands of the NRA's opponents. Take a step back a moment: does it really make much sense that liberals, who detest restrictions on speech, on what you can do with your own bodies, on people being jailed, would actually, normally, be in favor - in principle - of someone owning a device as long as they used it responsibly?

    And that leads to an obvious conclusion: we can safely assume that it's highly improbable that gun control will pass in the next two years, even token gun control. But let's fast forward to 2014. Congress finally is switched to blue in both houses, as the trends suggest (there was a popular vote victory for the Democrats in the House this year and it was only because of the way district boundaries are drawn that Republicans won the House.) The Democrats celebrate by passing sweeping laws outlawing most semi-automatic weapons with a gun buyback program to get the weapons finally out of circulation.

    Who has created the political climate where the Democrats would be so anti-gun it would do such a thing? Where the party of the ACLU would delight in stepping on the rights of millions of peaceful, non-threatening, gun owners?

    Maybe, just maybe, the NRA should change its strategy.

  • by cdrudge (68377) on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @03:51PM (#42340309) Homepage

    I'll be very interested to see if that report turns out to be true - if so, there probably was more going on with him than a high-functioning Autism Spectrum disorder. I'd say that the simple evidence of what he did is proof that there was a HELL of a lot more wrong with him than Asperger's.

    ASDs don't cause people to go on planned, intentional violent rampages. Those who have ASD can have reactive violence when they become overloaded or overstimulated, lashing out on their perceived stimulus with impulsive outbursts, hitting, or screaming. However with most people with ASD, even the sight of blood is enough to freak them out and shut them down. I can't imagine my son who has Aspergers or any of the kids my wife work with that have ASD shooting their mother multiple times, then driving and shooting additional people.

    It wasn't an ASD that caused the shooting last Friday. That might have triggered an emotional break down at some point in time, but something else triggered the violence that resulted.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth.

Working...