Roleplayers Seek Removal of Nerf Gun Ban 547
An anonymous reader writes "LARP fans at Bowling Green State University may have to contend with a crippled game of Humans vs. Zombies after the University banned Nerf guns on campus. In the live-action game, players are either humans or zombies. The goal of the game is to change all the humans into zombies, or for the humans to evade capture by zombies for a certain amount of time. To defend themselves against zombies, humans may use Nerf guns. Players (most likely the human ones) are petitioning the University to lift the ban. The game had troubles back in 2006, when participating students were arrested. That issue has since been cleared up."
Stupid ban (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:3, Insightful)
The wussification of a people is complete.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:parents complaining? (Score:1, Insightful)
I'd personally say middle school was MORE mature.
Re:Better than Uzi Water Guns (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
also LEDs are weapons of mass destruction... (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nerf Guns??? What's Next??? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Better than Uzi Water Guns (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:1, Insightful)
I mean seriously
People ask why america is being pussified - its simple. The right for any emotionally unstable dude to own guns is so sacrosanct that if its an institution that can't be attacked, the only politically viable action is to ban the silly string or the nerf gun. Ban the gun or the knife or the sword
Re:Better than Uzi Water Guns (Score:5, Insightful)
That's just a sign that cops are trigger happy. He should have been about two seconds away from a cop yelling "This is the Police! Drop Your Weapon!". Seriously, when the biggest danger of using a toy isn't the toy itself but the possibility of being shot by the cops, is it the toy that is a danger or the cops?
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
What's a weapon? You can splatter someone's brains everywhere in seconds with almost anything.
Re:Title revision suggestion: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:parents complaining? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:4, Insightful)
Help me out here (Score:5, Insightful)
So is my thinking wrong?? Either way it sounds like a damn fun game and I sometimes feel cheated by not going to Uni (Traineeship, experience and courses make up my resume, uni would have been a waste as far as employability goes, but it sounds like a shit load of fun!)
There is NO justification for banning nerf guns. (Score:2, Insightful)
You can't possibly mistake a nerf gun for a real gun. Real guns don't have giant nerf darts sticking out of them! Nerf guns look RIDICULOUS, they're brightly colored and shoot big pieces of foam! You'd have to be an idiot to not see the difference! LOOK OUT, THAT PIECE OF FOAM MIGHT HIT YOU IN THE EYE IF THE WIND IS JUST RIGHT AND IF YOU STAND REALLY STILL!
I could see an especially lame campus banning water pistols or toy pistols (on the assumption that they look too real perhaps). Yes, it is pretty crazy, but I could see a bunch of soccer moms getting together and complaining about it. Sure, keep the water pistols out of the elementary schools, whatever. But there can't possibly be ANY justification for banning nerf guns. NONE
I recall a student at the U of Arizona was expelled for sharpening some chop sticks and sticking them to his wall in the honors dorm. THEY'RE CHOP STICKS, and he got EXPELLED. Who the hell arbitrated that case?! "Well you're an honors student spending your first year of college in the dorm. You sharpened some chop sticks and used fun tak to stick them to the wall. Seems like a pretty open and shut case to me, EXPLUSION!" Later that night, that administrator went home and told his wife about it, and that's when she realized that she's married to a completely moron and got a divorce. Okay, so I made that last part up, but it's still stupid.
The people who need or enforce a nerf gun ban are insane. What they need is a mental institution. You bring that case before any shrink and they'll recommend a long stay at a mental health clinic. Even a 10 year-old could correctly diagnosis these people as NUTS.
Re:Stupid ban (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh come on.... (Score:2, Insightful)
They're running from ZOMBIES! The slowest of the undead by far. And they're even downing the zombies with guns! If this was REALLY fitness-oriented, they'd instead be taking on something a little faster, like vampires. Or they at least could be felling the zombies with traditional anti-zombie weapons like chain saws instead of projectile weapons.
This is clearly set up to minimize physical effort, not promote it.
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok.... now give me an example of any government in the history of the world that wasn't corrupt.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll admit my knowledge of US history is sparse, but I suspect the idea wasn't that all government's are corrupt, rather all governments are corruptible.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Preventing a child from doing harm by blocking his access to something dangerous surely works. But it's just addressing the symptoms, not the actual problem. What is it? Simply put, the lack of "responsibility development" in the child. Some 150 years ago a 13 years old managed to be more mature than the typical 20 years old of today. The reason for that is that modern day parents have the strongly misplaced desire of shielding their children from maturity, i.e., of shielding them from the "nasty things" in the world, rather than allowing and providing for their growth at their actual potential.
Stop holding them back, start pushing them towards what they can achieve, and these accidents simply won't happen. Or, rather, if they do, they'll be actual accidents, and not the necessary outcome of keeping children clueless just for the sake of it.
Re:Help me out here (Score:3, Insightful)
So, yes, as screwed up as it is, parents call teachers and administrators (even deans) to voice their concerns. And it's not just for safety issues. My department chair routinely gets calls from parents whose children did poorly in a class, or were not accepted into their major of choice, etc.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent hides gun in the house and tells 6 year old child nothing about it. 6 year old shoots somebody. Parent is not charged.
There is something very wrong here. Maybe we shouldn't teach our children anything, just put them in a padded room for 18 years. Then nothing can be blamed on us.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
How about people with swords? This is a geek site, there's probably a bunch of us. Those are dangerous weapons too. Luckily, your kid is probably only going to kill himself mishandling those.
A gun does not have to be a danger to people around it, it just needs to be respected as much as we teach kids to respect cars by looking both ways. If you have guns, teach your kids about them, show them how to use them safely, and store them securely (trigger locks, gun safes, ammo and gun kept in separate locations). Just remember that education is an important part of that, because it's entirely possible for the kid to run into guns somewhere else, and you don't want that to be the first time.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Note: I am not advocating for gun control. But trying to say that knives or bats can cause the same level of mayhem is silly.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember vividly when I was 5 years old and my parents took me out and taught me to shoot a pistol. It scared the crap out of me! But, I learned to do it and for my whole life (and of my siblings) there have been loaded guns in nightstand drawers and other places. We all knew where they were. We also knew WHAT they were.
Ok, so what. Well, when I was about 8 years old, playing (unsupervised) at a friend's house, he snuck into his parent's room and brought out a handgun for us to play with. I could tell he didn't even know how to hold it. I forget the exact details of what happened next, but I convinced him to put it away and we left the house until a grown-up came home. I'm pretty sure I averted a probable catastrophe that day - all because my parents had taught me how to shoot.
Put away your gut reactions and look at the statistics. Boats are more likely to kill your kids than handguns are. Swimming pools are MUCH more likely to kill a neighborhood kid than a loaded, unlocked handgun in the same house. You wouldn't have a pool in the backyard and not teach your kids how to swim, would you?
I forget the quote- something about freedom and limiting the freedoms of all of us based on the failings of the least of us. It's a good quote if someone can find it.
And, just in case you're wondering, I do not own any handguns or other guns. My kids DO play with toy guns (as do I, with the kids).
Why don't I own a (real) gun? Because I don't like cleaning them mostly. I'd have one if I had a friend who enjoyed target shooting, but I don't (at least not in this state).
But I do LIKE it that some of my neighbors have handguns in their houses, for the same reason that lo-jack works to reduce all the car thefts in a city. If thieves don't know which house has it, they have to assume there's a risk that any house could have it, and that's a significant deterrent. Again with the statistics, look at the violent crime rates in states with tight gun controls, vs. those with liberal gun ownership. No significant difference.
Buy a toy gun for your kids at http://www.backyardartillery.com/ [backyardartillery.com]
Or get a catapult at http://www.catapultkits.com/ [catapultkits.com]
And teach them the science of ballistic motion while you're at it.
We need more people with an understanding of basic physics.
Re:The wussification of a people is complete.... (Score:2, Insightful)
If a ban of NERF guns can be rationalized by rationalized by some kid putting toothpicks in foam arrows, then a ban on real guns can be rationalized by criminals using them to kill people.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
There will always be stupid people. We need to put a stop to letting them run everything.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
imagine how far that kid at Virgina Tech would have gone if they had the same portion of the population carrying a gun as Texas.
Re:What??? You talking about??? (Score:1, Insightful)
Why in USA so many people own guns?
They're not toys and they're totally UNNEEDED!!!
And even worse, parents letting their kids play with guns,
surveilled or not, there's no safe gun, beside MAYBE toy ones.
A gun should be considered always as loaded even when it's not.
Have you ever thought about the reason why USA is the country with
more killings compared to ALL the other countries in the world?
Easy answer...guns are so common and so easy to retrieve!
Guns should be owned only by police and military forces and
in very special cases by people who really need em, that have
a very well certified ability to use em, with certified mental stability tests
and that are risking their life everyday (to justify the owning of a gun).
In all the other cases (90% IMHO) guns and any other kind of firearm should
not be owned by the common people: MORE GUNS = MORE DEATHS, it's a matter of a fact.
Now just think of it.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
No the safest thing is to not carry a gun. Gun owners are far more likely to die from a gun shot than none gun owners. That is a statistical fact. Of course that may or may not apply to the individual.
If you must own a gun then yes I think teaching your child gun safety is a positive thing. But even if you do teach your child gun safety locking the guns in a gun safe is STILL a very very very good idea. Even if your child is the most responsible person in the world that doesn't mean his friends will be.
As for shielding your children? I am actually all for it. I think too many parents spend to much time pushing children into the adult world and or not enough time protecting their childhood. I think it would be great if every child thought that they lived in a safe comfortable world where they would be protected and nurtured.
Now when we are talking about adolecnets and teens... Yea all too often they are being given all the "rights" of adults with out the responsibilities.
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:3, Insightful)
Patently false. All humans are corruptible, if you don't believe that then you are a naive fool. All governments are run by humans. If you don't design your government around the fundamental idea that governments are corrupt then it will become corrupt and you'll have nothing you can do about it. Want some non-US examples? Just look at any modern European government (or at least most of them). Why do you think Monarchy no longer rules? (I know it still exists, but there's always a parliament with more power, at least to the best of my knowledge). The Magna Carta was designed as an answer to the corruption of a government which had been created with the idea that a non-corrupt government could work. The world is very lucky that it worked, because there was no built in recourse that could be used.
Power corrupts. If you don't believe that then you haven't experienced it. Any group with power needs to have built in checks on that power to prevent corruption from having an impact. This isn't a US only thing, most modern governments are designed in such a way. In fact the US took part of it from Britain's government and another part from a statement by a British historian. There are many reasons why the US is strange, holding that government may become corrupt and that checks on its power are needed is not one of them.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Truly educated people would realize that the problem isn't guns, it is crime. The two are not co-related, as the UK is learning the hard way.
UK bans guns, crime goes up.
The problem in the US is gang violence. Eliminate that (ending drug prohibition would help), and you'll see a drastic drop in crime, not just "gun violence."
http://rebirthoffreedom.org/freedom/guns/uk-gun-ban/ [rebirthoffreedom.org]
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Facsimile of a weapon? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Think of the following conditions:
1. You're in a university classroom
2. Somebody walks in brandishing what looks like a small firearm
3. You have milliseconds to react
4. ???
5. VTEC JUST KICKED IN, YO
For people not directly involved in the game, this scenario will, at best, be an unpleasant distraction from academics.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Try the UK for how things should work. (Score:3, Insightful)
The ban is a good thing, the ban is not creating a violent situation, the general state of Latinamerican societies makes impossible to enforce anything effectively.
In places like the UK (or Australia) where the rule of law applies, the ban is effective and the places are immensely safer than either the US, Brazil or parts of Mexico.
Re:Why would anyone ban nerf guns? (Score:3, Insightful)
It works only when Gandhian non-violence works - which is to say it works only when your opponent gives a damn about the body count.
There are "Killing Fields" throughout history.
When the Romans decided they wanted to be done with Carthage they made quite a through job of it.
Re:Not really (Score:3, Insightful)
It is NOT intended so that We the People can defend ourselves against an invader (tho that could be a useful side consequence).
It is intended so that if necessary, we can defend ourselves against OUR OWN GOVERNMENT, if necessary by staging an armed revolt.
Remember that these people had just come out of a war for independence from an abusive gov't, and the whole concept was still fresh in their minds.
Apparently Americans today have entirely forgotten it... yet look at all the whining about gov't abuses (which objectively, are at presently rather worse than the British Crown's abuses on the Colonies).
Re:What??? You talking about??? (Score:3, Insightful)
- We believe in Equality. A gun gives a 4'5" petite woman an even chance against a 6'4" 285lb male armed with a knife.
- Because calling 911 often does not receive a timely enough response to keep you safe.
- Because America was born out of revolution. Without our guns we'd have continued being oppressed by the British, as would much of the world.
***
"A gun should be considered always as loaded even when it's not."
Yes it should...
***
"Have you ever thought about the reason why USA is the country with
more killings compared to ALL the other countries in the world?"
Yes, I have...and it has nothing to do with guns. In fact, the states in the USA with the most stringent gun laws have the highest murder rates. Those with the most relaxed gun laws have the lowest.
The reason is culture and a lack of responsibility. As well as oppression in some cases.
***
"Guns should be owned only by police and military forces"
So Americans can be victimized by their government as happens in China, Sudan, Soviet Union, Tibet and numerous other countries where police and military are the only ones armed.
***
"In all the other cases (90% IMHO) guns and any other kind of firearm should
not be owned by the common people: "
You can try to take my gun away....you'll end up wishing you had one if you try. Oh, and look at Australia and Great Britain. Two nations with stringent gun laws and confiscation. G.B. has major increase in stabbing deaths. Australia has increased crime in the rural areas.
***
"MORE GUNS = MORE DEATHS, it's a matter of a fact."
Actually, it's not. In fact, you can compare two Virginia college shootings. One ended with dozens dead the other did not. Why? Because two students had weapons and subdued the perpetrators.
***
"All countries with strict gun controls are safer than the US (at least when it comes to diying of a gun related injury)."
Really, Mexico = strict gun laws. Also equals far more violence with or without guns than the U.S.
***
"In the US the gun lobby has managed to convince a majority that having a gun is a right."
Any right is a duty. Sadly, we've grown into a society that wants "priveledges" without the prerequisite responsibility. And that is where the true problem lies - and not in a handgun.
However, the U.S. is founded upon a document that expresses certain rights. Not as granted by the document, but merely recognized as inherent.
Why "duties" are not expressed in said document? Because government is quite adept at passing laws and declaring the duties and limitations of it's citizens.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:1, Insightful)
I really hate the intellectual dishonesty on both sides of this issue.
Here in Australia guns were effectivly banned a decade ago...we have the harshest gun laws in the western world.
Homicide rates are declining at exactly the same rate as they were before laws were enacted...
http://www.aic.gov.au/research/homicide/homicideRate2.png [aic.gov.au] [aic.gov.au]
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/12/13/gr_guns_narrowweb__300x362,0.jpg [smh.com.au] [smh.com.au]
Pro and anti gun groups estimated between 2-7 million guns in the country before the ban.
~700,000 guns were handed in.
If you dont respect the law, why would you follow that particular one?
The vast vast majority of guncrime here is, and always was, suicide.
Last year alone...
# Accident 40
# Suicide 193
# Homicide 54
# Legal etc. 3
The Australian Bureau of statistics says that suicide by firearm has halved! Rejoice!
Oops suicide by hanging has now doubled...
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/95553f4ed9b60a374a2568030012e707/161eb35db8be9152ca256f6a00733990/Body/0.75F0!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif [abs.gov.au] [abs.gov.au]
Oh Well, No matter! As long as a gun wasn't involved then that's not our problem.
On the other hand mass shootings have become non-existant.
One side says gun deaths have gone down, yay! Except those people are still dying...they're just hanging themselves or being bludgeoned or stabbed to death.
The other side says that it makes no difference, that gun crime will continue as criminals keep their guns. Yes, this is true. On the other hand your average mass shooter doesn't have a criminal mindset or connections, and wouldn't know where to get a gun if they wanted one.
So from our real world data...gun bans reduce mass shootings, no doubt. They have no effect on *general* homicide or suicide rates.
Then again in this country guns have never been anywhere near the top of the list of ways to kill someone. Knives and hands and feet hold that priviledge. 33% for knives, 18% for hands and 14% for guns (down a whopping 1% since the new gun laws a decade ago).
You've got more chance of being stabbed or bashed to death outside the bar than being shot, it's always been this way.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/77/rpp77.pdf [aic.gov.au] [aic.gov.au]
So...
Half a billion dollars to reduce the homicide by firearm rate by 1%
BUT
No mass shootings for a decade.
BUT
Private citizens are now left merciless.
BUT
There is still probably over a million guns in the country.
Don't be fooled...by either side.
Re:Try the UK for how things should work. (Score:3, Insightful)